HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources December 9 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
Natural Resources Committee
December 9, 2003
The meeting was called to order at 9:00 a.m. by Committee Chair Sharon
Roy in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
Present: Absent:
Seth Fleetwood None
Laurie Caskey- Schreiber
Also Present:
L. Ward Nelson
Barbara Brenner
Sam Crawford
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL
2. RESOLUTION APPROVING A MINERAL RESOURCE STUDY FOR
WHATCOM COUNTY, RECENTLY COMPLETED BY GEO- ENGINEERS
(AB2003 -391)
Roy stated this item was withdrawn from the agenda.
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL —
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
1. ORDINANCE ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE ENVIRONMENT
CHAPTER OF THE WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
(CHAPTER 11) (AB2003 -075D)
Roy referenced policy 11K -1 on chapter page 11 -30. She would like to
move the second bulleted item to the bottom of the list. The establishment of a
regional system of Marine Protected Areas (MPA's) has not been a focus of the
Marine Resources Committee (MRC). It probably isn't going to be. These bulleted
items aren't prioritized, but this item is close to the top of the list, but it is really
close to the bottom of the priorities. She moved to move the second bulleted item
to the bottom of the list. The MRC believes that they should have a lot of tribal
support for marine protected areas, but there hasn't been. They've decided not to
pursue that item.
Motion carried unanimously.
Roy noted a typo in the first paragraph in the Shellfish Habitat section on
chapter page 11 -31, "Birch Bays."
Natural Resources Committee, 12/9/2003, 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.
Roy referenced policy 11L -2 on chapter page 11 -31. The word restore' was
replaced with the word improve.' She preferred the original language. She asked
the reason for the change.
Hal Hart, Planning and Development Director, stated some of the controversy
was about defining the function and value to which they are restoring the waters.
Roy stated the language says they have to improve the water to a level that
allows and support shellfish harvesting. That's clear. It won't do them any good to
improve the water below that level. She moved to amend policy 11L -2 on chapter
page 11 -31, "In9preve Restore degraded waters...."
Motion carried unanimously.
Roy referenced chapter page 11 -35, Section B, item seven. Include Birch
Bay in areas where they are talking about shellfish, since the State Department of
Health has declared it to be at -risk for shellfish closure. She moved to amend item
seven, "...areas such as Lake Whatcom, Lake Samish, an-d Drayton Harbor, and
Birch Bay watersheds.... They have an opportunity do something before they have
a closure, rather than having to set up a protection district after closure. Keep in
mind that they have another threatened area.
Caskey- Schreiber asked if they are currently harvesting at Birch Bay.
Roy stated they are, for recreation.
Motion carried unanimously.
Caskey- Schreiber asked if the language about using the Technical Advisory
Committee or a citizens panel to hear critical areas ordinance appeals is only in
action item 68.
Jeff Chalfant, Senior Planner, stated it is.
Caskey- Schreiber stated the minutes talked about adding an appeals
committee for wetlands. She doesn't see that language anywhere. Chalfant stated
the amendments may have shifted the page numbers. He would check to find out.
Roy stated Councilmember McShane suggested in writing amendments to
several action items. The first amendment is to action item 12.
Caskey- Schreiber moved to amend action item 12, "Develop a working
relationship with the GhangbeF ef GemmeFee,
Ecenengie Development Ceuncil, Building indUStFy Association (BIA), and ether
development organizations, as well as environmental protection and property rights
organizations."
Natural Resources Committee, 12/9/2003, 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.
Motion carried unanimously.
Roy stated the next of Councilmember McShane's proposed amendments is
to action item 14. She moved to amend action item 14, "...The established level of
risk may be expressed as the laFgest knewn even potential hazard posed as
determined by scientific and historical methods applicable to each specific natural
hazard."
Motion carried unanimously.
Nelson asked Councilmember McShane's reasoning for the suggested
amendment.
Roy read from Councilmember McShane's memo to the Natural Resources
Committee dated December 7, 2003 (on file).
Nelson asked how one evaluates potential. Chalfant stated potential would
be based on a risk assessment with a number of parameters, including soil type,
slope, groundwater seepage, and other external environmental or development
parameters that might cause a hazard.
Nelson stated the reverse could also be true. For example, risk could be less
if a large event already occurred.
Roy stated that's correct. That would be evaluated.
Chalfant stated that if the hazard was alleviated by the occurrence of a large
event, they could determine there is little risk.
Roy asked if the intent is for evaluation. They could do an evaluation that
results in a determination of little or no risk.
Nelson stated he didn't know if there are measurement tools to do that. He
asked the historical methods used. Chalfant stated they would use aerial photos to
determine whether landslides have occurred. They would look for visible signs of
large events. There are lots of methodologies to use.
Caskey- Schreiber stated they could also see layers of sediment with core
sampling. Chalfant stated that's correct.
Roy stated Councilmember McShane's next suggested change is to add an
action item after the existing action item 15.
Fleetwood asked the difference between the suggested language from
Councilmember McShane and the existing language in action item 16.
Caskey- Schreiber stated the language gets more specific in identifying these
areas up front. Chalfant stated the Comprehensive Flood Hazard Management Plan
Natural Resources Committee, 12/9/2003, 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
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.
may identify alluvial fan hazards. Technically, they're regulated in the critical areas
ordinance. Those areas are identified on the new Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) maps, but FEMA has no authority to regulate those.
Roy stated those areas are not currently identified in the Flood Hazard
Management Plan. Chalfant stated they should be. He would support this
language.
Fleetwood moved to add a new action item following action item 15 as
recommended by Councilmember McShane, with one change, 'Review the findings
and recommendations of alluvial fan hazard evaluations and make appropriate
recommendations for land use and zoning regulations to the Planning Commission
and County Council to assist in reducing the hazards posed on these fans.
" The last sentence of
Councilmember McShane's recommendation should be deleted. The status of the
evaluations are what they are. They don't need to identify the various states of
preparation.
Caskey- Schreiber stated there's no harm in identifying these areas.
Fleetwood stated the first sentence is a straightforward description of what
they want. They could add the state of preparation for many things in every
provision, but it doesn't add anything to the policy.
Caskey- Schreiber stated they do talk about sensitive areas and talk about
Lake Whatcom, Drayton Harbor, Birch Bay, and Lake Samish.
Nelson stated he agreed with Councilmember Fleetwood. This is a
Comprehensive Plan. There are other ordinances that deal specifically with those
areas. As those areas improve, the Council would have to amend the
Comprehensive Plan.
Roy restated the motion to add new action item following action item 15,
"Review the findings and recommendations of alluvial fan hazard evaluations and
make appropriate recommendations for land use and zoning regulations to the
Planning Commission and County Council to assist in reducing the hazards posed on
these fans."
Motion failed 1 -2 with Fleetwood in favor.
Roy moved to add a new action item following action item 15 as
recommended by Councilmember McShane, "Review the findings and
recommendations of alluvial fan hazard evaluations and make appropriate
recommendations for land use and zoning regulations to the Planning Commission
and County Council to assist in reducing the hazards posed on these fans.
Natural Resources Committee, 12/9/2003, 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
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 has completed or nearly completed alluvial fan evaluations an
Canyon Creek, Jones Creek, and Glacier - Gallop Creeks."
Motion carried unanimously.
Roy moved to amend action item 17 as recommended by Councilmember
McShane, "...in areas designated for ineentive dewnzene pFegrarns density
reduction."
Motion carried unanimously.
Nelson asked why the new federal programs for stormwater reduction are
not mentioned. Chalfant stated those are the new National Pollution Discharge and
Elimination System (NPDES) program. They are referenced throughout the
amendments.
Caskey- Schreiber stated it is mentioned in action item 29.
Caskey- Schreiber moved to delete action item 68. They already have
procedures. This item is misleading and dangerous.
Roy stated she agreed.
Fleetwood asked the current appeal process for critical areas. Chalfant
stated that if there is an appeal of a critical areas determination, it is heard first
administratively by the Land Use Division Manager and Planning Department, then
the Hearing Examiner, and then the County Council.
Fleetwood asked if this action item is to add one more layer to the appeals
process. Chalfant stated the action item would be to replace the existing appeals
process.
Roy stated the system is in place with people who understand the issues.
The Hearing Examiner understands the process issues. The Planning Department
understands the scientific and technical issues. They could do this in everything.
She would not want to establish review panels for everything.
Nelson stated the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) has been in place and
used for appeal processes. The reason it was set up in the past was because of
concerns with using alternative management practices. He asked if that's true.
Chalfant stated he's never heard of the TAC being used for critical areas appeals.
Nelson stated one example is with the issue of stormwater procedures and
the correct pipe size to accommodate flow. Chalfant stated that works well for the
Public Works Department that works with stormwater design because the panel
includes professional engineers that are all subject to State licensing standards and
Natural Resources Committee, 12/9/2003, 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.
a code of ethics. They wouldn't find that with respect to wetland science. There
wouldn't be that professional accreditation.
Nelson stated they should not eliminate the possibility of having a group of
qualified engineers being able to evaluate work brought forward that is contrary to
what the Planning Department would allow.
Roy stated Mr. Chalfant just said there is no equivalent expertise on
wetlands. Engineers don't necessarily have wetland or critical areas knowledge.
Nelson asked for an example of what they would deal with under this
evaluation. Chalfant stated that when considering impacts to wetlands and natural
resources issues, they have to look at the geology, biology, and chemical
processes. It's a scientific analysis.
Nelson asked if that is what engineers do. Chalfant stated engineers
typically deal with structural issues, such as how water moves across the landscape
in a mechanical fashion, as opposed to natural systems.
Nelson stated they would evaluate the function of the wetlands. He asked
why someone would go with the TAC.
Roy stated the person would disagree with what the Planning Department
says.
Nelson asked if the Planning Department is better qualified than the TAC to
evaluate the effect of flooding. Chalfant stated frequently flooded areas are dealt
with under Title 17, the flood ordinance, and the purview of the Public Works
Department. Appeals to that would be heard by FEMA in most instances.
Caskey- Schreiber stated she has concerns about creating another layer. The
TAC is appointed by the Executive. There's no guarantee that the TAC will have the
same knowledge, background, and expertise needed.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.)
Caskey- Schreiber stated the Planning Commissioner who proposed this item
said the wetlands regulator is tough to work with. That's not a good reason to
create a whole other layer of bureaucracy in the appeals process.
Roy asked how many appeals they have each year. Hart stated the total
number of reviews they do is in the thousands. He doesn't know how many
challenges there are. They have to do a better job educating people about what
wetland issues are.
Nelson asked the intent of this action item. Chalfant stated the wetland
mitigation process is wide open. There aren't any alternatives that can't be
Natural Resources Committee, 12/9/2003, 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
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.
considered. The intent of this item would be to replace the current process. He
does not recall any appeal of a critical areas determination going to the Hearing
Examiner in the four years he's been with the County. There have been maybe two
items go to the Hearing Examiner regarding forest practices for moratorium
releases, but never a critical areas determination.
Roy stated the fact that few items have gone to the Hearing Examiner
indicates that the system works.
Motion carried unanimously.
Fleetwood moved to recommend that this item be forwarded for a public
hearing as amended.
Motion carried unanimously.
Caskey- Schreiber stated they need to address the language change to the
Introduction, as recommended by Councilmember McShane two weeks ago.
Chalfant stated staff reviewed the proposed language. The County geologist
suggests a marriage of the proposed language with the existing language, which he
submitted (on file).
Roy asked if the County geologist concurred with Councilmember McShane
that the some of the existing language in the Introduction - Environmental Setting
section is not appropriate to Whatcom County. Chalfant stated he is. They
reorganized the existing language to include the good details that Councilmember
McShane suggested. Staff disagreed with certain language regarding lakebed
deposits.
Caskey- Schreiber moved to amend the Introduction - Environmental
Setting section as recommended by staff in the new handout (on file).
Councilmember McShane can propose revisions after the public hearing.
Motion carried unanimously.
Roy stated this item will move forward for a hearing.
(Clerk's Note: The committee took a five - minute break at 9:55 a.m.)
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL
1. DISCUSSION AND FORMULATION OF RECOMMENDATION REGARDING
THE DRAFT GROUNDWATER MODEL ACTION PLAN (AB2003 -390)
Natural Resources Committee, 12/9/2003, 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.
Brenner stated this has gone beyond what the County Council recommended
at the Water Resources work session. The Council only approved the first four
steps in the plan. It didn't want to make commitments to hire staff at this point.
Crawford stated he discussed spending $100,000 to get a multi -layer model
instead of a single -layer model.
Nelson stated this is only the language to seek a consultant that can do a
multi -layer groundwater evaluation. This language is the criteria that group would
have to meet. These are changed recommendations. He likes the additional
language that is included.
Brenner asked if the Council has changed its mind from approving only items
one through four. Item five is something the Council said it wasn't ready to do.
Roy asked if items five through seven logically follow once they decide what
they are going to do. This isn't inconsistent. This says they have to do items one
through four first. At some point, they are going to have to face decisions on
staffing, funding resources, and management. She received another document that
goes into great detail about management options.
Nelson stated the information reflects the previous Planning Unit
recommendation plus additional language to strengthen the request for proposals
(RFP) process.
John Thompson, Resources Planner /Endangered Species Act, stated this item
is scheduled for the evening's Committee of the Whole meeting.
Fleetwood stated he'd prefer to hold discussion until the Committee of the
Whole meeting.
Roy agreed.
OTHER BUSINESS
There was no other business.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at approximately 10:05 a.m.
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
ATTEST:
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Natural Resources Committee, 12/9/2003, Page 8
1
2
3
4
5
6
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, WASHINGTON
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk Sharon Roy, Committee Chair
Natural Resources Committee, 12/9/2003, Page 9