Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning October 22 20021 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL Planning and Development Committee October 22, 2002 The meeting was called to order at 3:02 p.m. by Committee Chair Dan McShane in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington, Present: Absent: Seth Fleetwood None Laurie Caskey- Schreiber Also Present: L. Ward Nelson COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL 1. PROPOSED WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO ADD 12 ACRES TO THE FERNDALE URBAN GROWTH AREA (OLSON /NELLE SITE) (AB2002 -084D) Sylvia Goodwin, Planning Division Manager, stated the City of Ferndale Planning Commission recommended approval. City of Ferndale Council will look at it in November. She suggested that the Council hold this until after the Ferndale City Council makes a decision. McShane stated this would be held in committee to November 26. 2. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING MAP FROM RR2, 112A AND RSA TO R2A, R4A, RF AND CF WITHIN PORTIONS OF THE LAKE SAMISH WATERSHED AND AMENDING THE WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION FROM SUBURBAN ENCLAVE TO RURAL FOR AREAS WITHIN THE LAKE SAMISH WATERSHED (AB2002 -084F) McShane stated the Council received an alternate Lake Samish zoning map. Amy Pederson, Planner I, stated the map shows parcel owners who have asked for different zoning. She explained the changed map. Staff recommends the original proposal, but this is a workable solution. Caskey- Schreiber asked why staff initially recommended the rural, one unit per five acres (R5A) zone. Pederson stated that based on the criteria in the Comprehensive Plan, the rural, one unit per two acres (R2A) is listed as existing or infill development. Many of those parcels at the south end of Lake Samish are Planning and Development Committee, 10/22/2002, 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. predominantly two -acre parcels. The remainder of the area between West Lake Samish Road and Summerland Road are predominantly five -acre parcels. Caskey- Schreiber stated the citizens brought forward the argument that this area should not have been designated as a suburban enclave. She asked if staff agreed. Pederson stated she agreed with the assessment that it should be rural. Staff looked at the rural legislation amendments made after the Comprehensive Plan was adopted. Based on the criteria, they can delineate those existing areas of development, which are predominantly on the shoreline. Anything outside of that is designated as rural. The Council would choose the appropriate rural zoning. R2A generally does not fit Goodwin stated rural designation is two -acre, five -acre, or ten -acre zones, with the preference being the ten -acre zones. If they want to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, they still could zone it at two acres. However, if they look strictly at the Comprehensive Plan, an average parcel size of five acres should be zoned R5A. The Executive recommended R2A as a compromise for those areas that were previously zoned rural residential, two units per acre (RR2). Then they are not taking away so much of the owners' property values. Jean Freestone, 3200 Vallette Street, Bellingham, stated she opposed the downzone. It would set a bad precedent that the Comprehensive Plan could be changed at the whim of any organized group. The Comprehensive Plan was to provide a stable plan for development for 20 years. This area faces the prospect of future growth because it has many positive characteristics for development. Downzoning the area would violate property rights, impact the tax base for the county, and impact businesses. She questioned what the changed circumstances of the area are since the Comprehensive Plan was approved. The regulations that exist currently are adequate to protect the natural environment. Using transfers of development rights (TDR) as a method of compensation is a sham. Steven Harper, 121 Bear Creek Lane, stated he supports the Planning Department proposal to change the zoning. He read a letter into the record (on file). McShane asked if the Planning staff had heard from Skagit County on this issue. Pederson stated she requested input from Skagit County, but has not heard anything. A joint plan between Skagit and Whatcom counties on non -point source pollution was considered as a part of this rezone consideration. Ruth Holbrook, 244 Appaloosa Road, Lake Samish, submitted the original proposed map from the Planning Department that shows the undeveloped and developed parcels. Compromise with a mid -range zone, but the Comprehensive Plan says that they can't use the R2A zone for the large undeveloped parcels. What is already there is a thin sliver of development around the lake. Anything beyond that can't be considered infill. Go with the original proposal to zone at R5A. Planning and Development Committee, 10/22/2002, 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. Richard Emerson, Building Industry Association of Whatcom County, stated the Planning Commission meeting was chaotic. A number of commissioners indicated that they did not understand the information. He explained the Planning Commission's decision process. He asked what caused the Planning Commission to deadlock, and then approve it later. There is reference to a transfer of development rights (TDR) program that will be presented six months after the downzone is adopted. There is also reference that there will be a receiving area. He asked whether this receiving area has been approved by the Planning Commission and whether it offers a unit - for -unit exchange. He asked how the Planning Commission can approve a rezone along with a TDR program that does not exist. Kim Herrenkohl, 321 Summerland Road, submitted a letter from her husband (on file). Water quality studies have been done over the years by different agencies. Increases and fecal coliform and turbidity have been found in the streams draining from Lake Samish. The reasons for the increases are due to development in the watershed. There has been a significant decrease in salmon nesting areas in all three streams from Lake Samish, due to the increased turbidity and additional sediments in the streams. Spawning beds were destroyed by stormwater erosion. (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.) Herronkohl continued to state that the water quality impacts are due to increased development and clear cutting. She urged the County to support the downzone as originally proposed by the Planning Department. Bob Wiesen, 3314 Douglas Road, stated the Planning Commission meeting was a good meeting, but unbalanced. The question is why they went through the battle of the Comprehensive Plan in the first place. A Comprehensive Plan isn't very good if they can make drastic changes every year. The price of lots keeps going up, which indicates that there are not enough lots to go around. They are looking at specific areas of the county, rather than the whole county. Steve LeCocq, 673 N. Lake Samish Drive, stated that the concept of a rezone is to look at the most appropriate use for the properties in the designated area. McShane stated they are looking at a Comprehensive Plan amendment that was brought forward by a group of citizens. The amendment will require a change of zoning as well. The zone Mr. LeCocq suggests is interesting, but he's not sure that the Council is allowed to consider it as part of this amendment. LeCocq asked if this is the appropriate time that it be addressed. McShane stated he didn't think so. Planning and Development Committee, 10/22/2002, 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. Goodwin stated staff would ask legal counsel before the hearing. The Council can't change any of it without a public hearing. The ability of the Council to address Mr. LeCocq's suggestion depends on whether it is consistent with the wording in the original public notice for the hearing. Cal Leenstra, 720 - 11th Street, stated this is a taking of his property rights. It is in conflict with the Growth Management Act (GMA), which encourages infill where infrastructure is available. The Lake Samish area has or will have the services required. The existing density is five or ten units per acre. There is a required economic evaluation to the Comprehensive Plan. They need to develop affordable lots. The current zone was a result of a lot of meetings and public input. This area will never be zoned to the density of Lake Stevens or Lake Sammamish. The lake is polluted, but he didn't pollute it. Don't downzone this property. Dave Pros, 1466 Roy Road, stated the Planning Commission meeting was not chaotic. Al Schreiber was the one who recommended that a vote be retaken, which passed seven to one. Quite often, the Planning Commission will vote on an issue, vote on it, discuss it more, and take a revote. Commissioners were given an opportunity to reconsider their decisions. There are areas where upzoning is wanted. If the recommended rezone goes through, it still amounts to a 50 percent increase in the size of that community. Vehicles come very close to the lake. It's unrealistic for houses around the lake to be in the price range of $170,000 to $200,000. James Wilson, 921 W. Lake Samish Drive, stated the road around the lake is quite narrow. During the Planning Commission meeting, a motion was made to bring other considerations forward to the Council. That motion died for lack of a second to the motion. Gary Simon, Concerned Neighbors of Lake Samish President, stated there has never been any plan to bring a water system to Lake Samish. The water district developed a Comprehensive Water Plan. A feasibility study was done. There was a vote on whether they should bring in a water system. The vote failed. If it was feasible with less density to bring in a water system, it will clearly be feasible in the future. The issue of not having clean potable water at the lake because of the downzone is inaccurate. Many of the property owners who have concerns about the downzone have a history of commercial development and are not residents of the area. They are not lake residents who want to pass on a legacy from family to family. They are real estate investors who are looking for a return on their investment. Market risk is defined by external factors that affect the value of an investment, such as economy and competition. He asked why someone who has something that has been deemed as an investment, this real estate, should be compensated for those changes in values. There has not been any loss in principal values. There is an Planning and Development Committee, 10/22/2002, 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. adequate rate of return. He doesn't agree that the market values have been drastically affected. Maybe the potential for return has been affected. The developers are looking for maximum return. If that is the case, it is a fair statement to say that the maximum return has been impacted. Caskey- Schreiber moved to approve the ordinance as it was approved by the Planning Commission, with one amendment to remove the TDR component, which is premature. If the County allows increased density, it is encouraging sprawl in a rural area. The burden to support infrastructure would fall on everyone in the County to support Mr. Leenstra's investment. Mr. Leenstra will still double his investment. The County Council's job is to weigh what is good for every citizen in Whatcom County. This rezone is a correction. It is not right to designate an area that is distinctly removed from denser areas and areas with infrastructure to target that area for development when there is no intent to ever have it be a city or town. This is the same issue as with Sudden Valley. The roads are inadequate. The County would have to provide services such as schools and law enforcement. She would like to have a TDR program for Mr. Leenstra, but the County doesn't have that now. It's premature and irresponsible to have that provision in the ordinance now. Fleetwood asked if this is a correction of a mistake or if there are changed circumstances. Pederson stated the staff report addresses the changed conditions based on review of the application by the neighbors. There have been amendments to the GMA that were not taken into consideration when the Comprehensive Plan was adopted. Lake Samish has been designated as a water resource protection overlay district, a stormwater special district, and a water resource special management area. They recognize that this is a watershed of special significance to Whatcom County. Upon review of the subarea plan, the locational criteria for the zoning, and the Comprehensive Plan, they found discrepancies with the existing zoning. If the locational criteria were strictly interpreted, the area would look different. Fleetwood asked if staff concurred to include the TDR proposal. Pederson stated the Planning Commission presented the idea, but staff concurred that it was a viable option. There was discussion on whether the TDR program is viable at this time. Goodwin stated the Council could designate Lake Samish as a sending area in this ordinance. Staff will look at additional receiving areas within six months. Fleetwood stated the County is working on fixing the TDR program. Caskey- Schreiber suggested that the Council instead amend the date of the ordinance. Fleetwood stated he would go along with that. Planning and Development Committee, 10/22/2002, 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. McShane stated he is concerned about the TDR program. It is clearly needed in certain areas. The concern is with a blanket TDR program, without even knowing what it will be. Perhaps the TDR programs would have a sliding scale so it would be workable. He is not optimistic. Nelson stated they are to consider other programs before a downzone, according to the Comprehensive Plan. The County needs to be fair to people, according to Growth Management Act. The County needs to be consistent in its zoning. They will have to increase the density in the future anyway. Motion to recommend to the Council without the TDR provision, and to schedule a public hearing, carried unanimously. 5. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 20.38 TO ADD NEW TEXT TO THE AGRICULTURAL PROTECTION OVERLAY DISTRICT (APO) TO ALLOW AN ADDITIONAL EXEMPTION TO THE APO REQUIREMENTS (AB2002 -361) (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side 8.) Kraig Olason, Senior Planner, stated this is a text amendment that addresses an additional exemption to the application of the agricultural protection overlay (APO). This proposal is to address pre- existing development. The code requires a reserve area for agriculture. The reserve requirement is not triggered until the land is subdivided. One will not meet the intent of the APO if the reserve tract is already developed. The intent is to acknowledge that one will not meet the requirement of the APO if the reserve tract is already developed. The question is whether a golf course is a suitable use for the reserve tract for farming. Before the amendment, the County decided it was not suitable. The pre - development that occurred before the APO was developed couldn't comply with the APO. He read the additional language to the ordinance. If property is not going to be used for agriculture in the foreseeable future because of the existing development, then it will be exempt. Caskey- Schreiber asked if they have to make a blanket change of the code for this one case. Olason stated there is more than one case. The golf courses have to have been in existence before the APO was developed. Donovan Kehrer, Planning Consultant, stated he represents Shukson Golf Course. He is pleased the Planning Commission recommended approval. He worked with Planning Staff to make the language as narrow as possible. McShane moved to recommend approval. Motion carried unanimously. 3. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER OF THE WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (AB2002 -084R) Planning and Development Committee, 10/22/2002, 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. Matt Aamot, Senior Planner, stated this is part of the Comprehensive Plan five -year update. There are proposed changes in four categories: road improvements, bike and pedestrian plans, impact fees, and coordination with State transportation planning. Staff is not recommending any major changes to the 20 -year plan for road improvements. Other agencies are undertaking modeling exercises that will provide important transportation planning. One small change includes widening Hannegan Road to Smith Road. Caskey- Schreiber asked if they reviewed the affect on the rest of the road. Work on the Guide Meridian and Hannegan Road at the same time will create a mess. Aamot stated he doesn't know when they plan to signalize that intersection. One option is turn pockets at various intersections on the Hannegan Road. Mike Donahue, Engineering Manager - Traffic, stated the Engineering Division is definitely looking at the entire picture. He explained the plans for that area. Aamot stated another planned change is to widen Lincoln Road, but not necessarily to four lanes. They also mapped the Grandview /W. Pole Road connector study. Regarding the bike and pedestrian improvements, the GMA and Comprehensive Plan call for planning for multiple modes of transportation to reduce air pollution and traffic congestion. The Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee made suggestions for changes. To accommodate increased growth, this is an important element of the Comprehensive Plan. Regarding impact fees, there is an action item in the Comprehensive Plan to develop an impact fee program for roads. The Planning Commission said the program should be developed by the end of 2003. McShane asked if the Public Works Department is ready for that. Donahue stated the Engineering Division is working on it with other jurisdictions and agencies. Aamot spoke regarding State transportation planning. The State Transportation Commission updated the State Transportation Plan for State highways. This amendment reflects the changes to the State Transportation Plan. He submitted a list of the State highways that would be improved over the next twenty years, which includes most of the highways in the county. McShane stated he's pleased with how the Engineering Division has been working with the Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee. His only concern is with the route from Birch Bay to Blaine, and from Birch Bay south to heavy impact industrial Planning and Development Committee, 10/22/2002, 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. lands, where there are a fair number of jobs. He asked if those routes were discussed. Aamot stated the route to Blaine was discussed. There was concern about the narrowness of some of the bridges. Donahue stated the Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee discussed extending the Lincoln Road and the Drayton Harbor Road, with the lower traffic volumes, without having to widen the bridge over California Creek. Blaine might come up with another access inside the city limits. Nelson asked what the funding will be for the bicycle projects. Aamot stated the road fund has a dedicated portion to bike lanes along roads. There are also Conservation Futures funds. Nelson asked who would put them in and maintain them. Aamot stated it may be necessary to partner with other groups. This is the 20 -year vision for the county, not the six -year capital improvement plan. Nelson stated he is concerned about the trails being in forested areas and the associated security and other problems that go along with that. Aamot stated it ties in with the recreation chapter. The Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee came forward with these projects. Donahue stated that they put in $250,000 per year into the road program for bicycle transportation within the County right -of -way. Nelson asked for a report of bicycle usage on the trails. Donahue stated they could do that. Fleetwood stated there doesn't seem to be any deference in this proposal to alternatives, more progressive systems of getting around, and personal responsibility. He suspects that the vast majority of people who drive around do so in a single- occupant vehicle. He doesn't support that status quo. Aamot stated these are planning strategies, and the project scope will be refined during program and design phases. The level of funding for these projects is questionable. Caskey- Schreiber stated she moved to recommend to the full Council that this go forward to the concurrency hearing, with no changes. Ellen Barton, Council of Governments (COG), stated the Transportation Chapter represents good work on the part of the Planning Department and Engineering Division. There are some other innovative things they could do. They are not loudly declaimed in the existing chapter, but COG is aware that it corresponds with the regional transportation plan. There is a proposed process that will work with the public, Regional Transportation Planning Board, and Transportation Technical Advisory Committee. Bus and other public transportation can make the dollars go further than lane widening. Planning and Development Committee, 10/22/2002, 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. The Transportation Chapter as approved by the Planning Commission does not agree with the Recreation Chapter. The Transportation Chapter accepted a number of committee recommendations that create corridors for bike lanes and trails. The Planning Commission reviewed the Recreation Chapter the day after New Year's. The Planning Commission did not approve the recommendations from the Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee. They removed reference to support for the Coast Millennium Trail and Chain of Trails projects. The Recreation Chapter does not have references to those trail projects, but the Transportation Chapter does. Regarding the widening to Highway 9, the State legislature is seriously considering improving the rail corridor through the South Fork Valley parallel to Highway 9. If that corridor can be improved appropriately, it can take some of the pressure off of Highway 9. It would include a trail along the rail corridor. It would take six to ten years to approve a plan, according to Representative Erickson. Caskey- Schreiber stated Burlington Northern does not like trails next to their train tracks. She would not count on that idea. Fleetwood asked if the Transportation Chapter as a whole is worthwhile. Barton stated that as a representative of the Council of Governments, she supports the work of County staff. As a member of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee, the plan doesn't go as far as she would like, but it is very realistic. The plan is realistic in terms of the admirable work that has been done by the Engineering Division. The County is mandated to plan for and provide certain things. With that constraint, and the fact that there are limited amounts of money, the bike issue has been given a decent amount of attention. With time, they hope to increase the general public understanding of bicycle and pedestrian trails. McShane stated there are still questions about this issue. They should hold it in committee for two weeks. 4. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE RECREATION AND DESIGN CHAPTERS OF THE WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (AB2002 -084U) This item was held in committee. OTHER BUSINESS There was no other business ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 5:20 p.m. Planning and Development Committee, 10/22/2002, Page 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 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. Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription ATTEST: Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Dan McShane, Committee Chair Planning and Development Committee, 10/22/2002, Page 10