HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning November 27 20011
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
48
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Planning and Development Committee
November 27, 2001
The meeting was called to order at 3:05 p.m. by Committee Chair Dan
McShane in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
Also Present:
Connie Hoag
Sam Crawford
Absent:
None
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL
1. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING
ORDINANCE, SECTIONS 20.71.400 — BUILDING SETBACK /BUFFER
AREAS AND 20.80.210 — MINIMUM SETBACKS TO ADDRESS
BUILDING SETBACKS IN THE WATER RESOURCE PROTECTION
OVERLAY DISTRICT (AB2001 -370)
Amy Pederson, Planner I, stated this ordinance makes minor amendments
suggested by the Land Use Division of the Planning and Development Department
for clarification and administrative ease. Council packet page 203 shows the
proposed amendments. They propose to strike language from Whatcom County
Code 20.71.401, referring to the urban residential, mixed use (UR -MX) zone, which
doesn't exist in the watershed. The table in 20.80.210 is where administrators go
to, to determine setbacks. The problem is that the water resource protection
overlay (WRPO) district is in a different chapter. There are reduced zoning
setbacks that weren't reflected in this table. The amendment incorporated those
setbacks into this table.
Hoag asked the rationale for the overhang extending three feet instead of six
feet in the WRPO.
Sylvia Goodwin, Planning Division Manager, stated the intent is to decrease
the amount of impervious surfaces. One could have a front porch overhang, but
the footprint of the house must be smaller.
McShane moved to recommend approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
2. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING
ORDINANCE TO EXCLUDE SUBMERGED AQUATIC LANDS FROM
PARCEL AREA CALCULATIONS FOR IMPERVIOUS SURFACE, GROSS
DENSITY, OPEN SPACE, MINIMUM LOT SIZE AND LOT COVERAGE
(AB200 -371)
Planning and Development Committee, 11/27/2001, 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
Amy Pederson, Planner I, stated sections of the code pertain to open space,
and say that submerged lands and tidelands are not included in open space
calculations. However, they are not addressed in allowable and impervious surface
restrictions for lot coverage or gross density. This amendment makes those
sections consistent with the open space regulations.
Crawford asked if this was the issue that the Planning Commission changed.
Pederson stated the Planning Commission wanted to identify what area they will
use to delineate that water area. One already has to identify the ordinary high
water mark when a shoreline permit comes in. That was a logical piece of language
to add.
Crawford asked the difference between Council packet pages 223 and 227.
Hoag stated the Planning Commission worked on these as two issues, and
the staff combined them into one issue.
Hoag referenced item six on Council packet page 224, exhibit A. This
language change also deleted lands of 20 percent or more, which was referred to
earlier in the document. Pederson stated the Planning Commission discussed it.
The Planning Commission opted to delete it. Item six was reconsidered at a
different Planning Commission meeting, so that discussion is not included in the
Council's packet. The debate was about whether or not they should include steep
slopes that aren't buildable, in addition to the water areas. The rest of the text
amendments pertain only to tidelands and water areas. Lands of 20 percent or
more are not specifically permitted in the zone districts. There aren't any districts
that specifically allow it.
Crawford asked the difference between Council packet pages 223 and 227.
Pederson stated they are the same.
McShane moved to recommend approval.
Crawford questioned what Wiser Lake has to do with it. Pederson stated that
by amending the countywide definitions, it is not specific to Lake Samish and Lake
Whatcom anymore. At this point, this issue is countywide. It originated as a
problem with the WRPO.
Crawford stated he was concerned that isn't clear to the public.
Hoag stated that is why staff divided these into two ordinances. One is
specific to the WRPO and the other is countywide. She didn't know why anyone
would object to this.
Crawford asked what other codes require open space that affect the footprint
of a house.
Planning and Development Committee, 11/27/2001, 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
48
Sylvia Goodwin, Planning Division Manager, stated it wouldn't be about lot
coverage. It would affect someone who might want to do a new subdivision in an
area. The calculation of the amount of allowable land has, in the past, included
land in the water, which would allow more parcels to be developed on a smaller
piece of land. That has been done before. If the minimum lot size is 8.000 square
feet, for example, and there isn't enough land to fit the number of lots without
going into the water, then the owner would have to reduce the number of lots.
There are quite a few areas, especially in Lake Whatcom, where the actual land
area is half of what the parcel says it is.
Crawford asked where properties fall within the jurisdiction of Shoreline
Management Program. Pederson stated the program applies to all marine
shorelines, lakes, and certain sized streams. Not all parcels own submerged land or
tideland. Some parcels actually stop at the waterline.
Crawford asked if properties on the Nooksack River go into the river.
Pederson stated they do.
Goodwin stated most of the residential zones have language regarding lot
coverage, and say that buildings shall not cover 35 percent or 2,500 square feet,
whichever is greater of the total area.
Hoag asked if there is anyplace countywide where the County does not
specifically permit lands that include lands of a 20 percent slope or greater in the
gross density calculation. Pederson stated none of the zone districts specifically say
how lands of 20 percent or more, tidelands, and water areas can be used. When
calculating acreage, a potential subdivision cannot include in the calculation any
steep slopes.
Hoag asked if it applies to an individual owner, or only to a subdivision.
Pederson stated it wouldn't be an issue for one property owner not planning to
subdivide.
Motion carried unanimously.
3. ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 2000 -014 TO EXTEND THE
PROVISIONAL SHORT TERM PLANNING AREA FOR THE DRAYTON
HARBOR AREA OF THE BLAINE URBAN GROWTH AREA FOR AN
ADDITIONAL TWO YEARS AS PROVIDED IN ORDINANCE 99 -071
(AB2001 -373)
Sylvia Goodwin, Planning Division Manager, stated the County Council gave
the property owners two years to look into the feasibility of sewer, and allowed a
two -year extension if there has been progress. There has been progress. The
holdup is with the City of Blaine.
Hoag asked if the County Council could make the area a short -term planning
area again when the City of Blaine is ready. Goodwin stated citizens have
Planning and Development Committee, 11/27/2001, 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
48
expectations about being able to develop their property. They haven't gone
forward in doing their own engineering because they think they can tie in with the
City of Blaine. If it is not feasible, then they won't be able to put sewer in. If it is
feasible, the City will put the line through there and it doesn't hurt having it a
short -term planning area because nothing is going to happen meanwhile.
Hoag stated a number of people were going to be forced to be included.
Goodwin stated most of those people were excluded from the short -term planning
area.
Hoag stated she also heard that the cost is more than anticipated. Goodwin
stated they don't know what the cost is, because they don't know what the City will
do. If the City puts in a regional line to Birch Bay, the cost will be very affordable.
If the City doesn't, the cost will be cost - prohibitive, and a local improvement district
(LID) probably won't go.
Crawford moved to recommend approval.
Motion failed 1 -2 with Crawford in favor.
Goodwin stated staff opted to not send this back to the Planning Commission.
The ordinance said it could be extended if there was progress, and there has been
progress. Staff didn't want to hold it up in the Planning Commission.
4. RESOLUTION ADOPTING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR OPEN
SPACE /OPEN SPACE, OPEN SPACE /FARM AND AGRICULTURE
CONSERVATION AND OPEN SPACE TIMBER APPLICATIONS (AB2001-
389)
Elizabeth Olsen, Planner II, stated she was available for questions.
McShane moved to recommend approval of the Ben Nydam Open
Space /Farm and Agriculture Conservation application on Council packet page 271.
Motion carried unanimously.
Olsen stated Forster put in for his own parcel of land that has no
qualifications. It is not formally designated as agriculture, it is not being used for
agriculture, and there are no prime soils. The land around it is being sold for rural,
one dwelling unit per five acres (R5A) lots. The recommendation is for denial.
Hoag questioned whether this is really a transfer from Open
Space /Agriculture. Olsen stated that when properties were put into the Open
Space /Agriculture designation in the early 1970's, those properties did not have to
have prime agricultural soils. Generally speaking, the owner was getting some sort
of income from the land that could cover the basic costs. This proposal is to go
from the Open Space /Agriculture to Open Space /Farm and Agriculture
Conservation.
Planning and Development Committee, 11/27/2001, 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
Hoag questioned whether 35 percent of the lot has prime agricultural soils.
Olsen stated it does, however it is not the best prime quality soil. There is still a
high water level and seasonal ponds.
Crawford moved to recommend accepting the Planning Commission
recommendation to deny the Roy and Helen Forster Open Space /Farm and
Agriculture Conservation application on Council packet page 273.
Motion carried unanimously.
Olsen stated each of the three parcels on the next application are for sale as
a residential lot. They are totally wooded, and there is nothing in the way of
benefits that can be received from them. The public benefit rating system was not
enough to give sufficient points for approval. The recommendation is for denial.
Hoag moved to recommend accepting the Planning Commission
recommendation for denial of the Helen and Roy Forster Open Space /Open Space
applications for three parcels on Council packet page 275.
Motion carried unanimously.
Crawford moved to recommend accepting the Planning Commission
recommendation for approval of the Whatcom Land Trust Open Space /Open Space
application on Council packet page 278, for 71 acres on the Rutsatz Road.
Motion carried unanimously.
Olsen stated the second application from the Whatcom Land Trust is on the
North Fork Road. It is 394.96 acres. The recommendation is for approval.
Hoag questioned whether properties designated Open Space /Open Space
have to provide a public benefit, and how the Whatcom Land Trust is providing that
benefit. Olsen stated this property includes the Racehorse Creek delta fan, and the
entire frontage on the north fork of the Nooksack River is salmon habitat and eagle
habitat. The access to the actual north fork of the river is difficult. People can go
into the area.
Hoag questioned whether the point of changing the designation from
Classified Forest to Open Space /Open Space is that the Land Trust will not log the
property, so they want a lower tax classification. Olsen stated that is correct. They
also want to monitor the buffers along the banks of the Nooksack River for salmon
habitat and for eagle nesting trees and perch trees. The Land Trust hopes to
provide access to the property on their other application on Council packet page
278. There is a herd of elk that winter in that area. The Land Trust hopes to
provide reasonable access without disturbing the wildlife.
Planning and Development Committee, 11/27/2001, 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
48
McShane to recommend accepting the Planning Commission recommendation
for approval of the Whatcom Land Trust Open Space /Open Space application on
Council packet page 280.
Motion carried unanimously.
Olsen stated the Carter application is on Council packet page 282. It is in the
North Ferndale area. It is a wide, private road. The owners are enthusiastic about
providing public access to the property. They have already submitted their public
access statement.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.)
McShane moved to recommend approving the Planning Commission
recommendation for approval of the William and Teri Carter Open Space /Open
Space application on Council packet page 282.
Motion carried unanimously.
Olsen stated the MaryAnn Burk Carver application is on Council packet page
286. She and her forebears had much acreage. A portion of the area designated
Open Space /Timber is mainly a pond and a building site to the east of the pond.
Because of that, the staff has put a no access necessary requirement on the area.
It provides prime habitat for species on the pond, with a 100 -foot buffer. The
recommendation is for approval.
Hoag asked what kind of species are there so that it should be closed to
public access. Olsen stated it is a natural pond in its natural setting. Nothing has
been done artificially. The Revised Code of Washington (RCW) says there is no
need to have public access to it. In this case, she strongly recommends that there
be no public access. The property is at the end of a long private lane.
Crawford asked if there is a management plan. Olsen stated there is no
timber to manage. In this case, public access would be more of a hindrance than a
benefit to the public.
McShane moved to recommend approving the Planning Commission
recommendation for approval of the MaryAnn Burk Carver Open Space /Open Space
application on Council packet page 286. It still meets the score, even if the no
public access provision is removed.
Crawford questioned why no points were given for enhanced scenic
resources. Olsen stated the parcel is buried in the woods. One of the reasons that
the owner is taking the property out of the Open Space /Timber classification is
because there is no commercial timber. To save the life of the pond, there is a
buffer, but it is not merchantable timber.
Motion carried unanimously.
Planning and Development Committee, 11/27/2001, 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
48
Olsen stated the Kim and Diane Scott applications for Open Space /Timber
are on Council packet page 288 through 299. Until the owner segregates the lots,
the designation cannot be recorded. It is up to the owner to segregate the lots. If
he doesn't segregate the land and record each individual lot, then the owner will
not be able to continue on with the Open Space /Timber application for each lot.
Once segregated, each parcel will be recorded with it's own acreage and points for
the Open Space /Timber qualifications.
McShane stated there will be six Open Space /Timber lots that are five acres.
Olsen stated that is correct.
Crawford questioned whether the owner has thirty acres in one parcel. Olsen
stated the owner has forty acres.
Crawford stated this is a forty acre tract with no subdivision. The owner is
saying that he wants to subdivide the parcel. Olsen stated he is transferring the
designation from Designated Forestry to Open Space /Timber for each of the lots.
Hoag stated the six lots have separate parcel numbers. Olsen stated the
parcel is in the process of being subdivided. People are often coming forward to do
an application for Open Space while also segregating the parcel. A parcel
designated Classified Forestry has to be at least twenty acres. When the parcel is
subdivided, it could be classified as Open Space /Timber. This is the only way to
change the classification. The owner wants to give each family member a parcel.
Crawford asked the zoning. Olsen stated the zoning is R5A.
Crawford asked the purpose of a subdivision of forestry land, other than
giving equal parts to the heirs. He assumed that the intent of subdividing is to
ultimately develop it. Olsen stated the heirs don't have to develop the property.
However, they can build a house. They would need to remove a nominal one acre
for the building site. More than five acres would remain in Open Space /Timber.
The minimum lot size for Open Space /Timber is five acres. The owner wants to
keep up with a management and stewardship program for the trees in that area.
Hoag moved to recommend approving the Planning Commission
recommendation for approval of the six Kim and Diane Scott Open Space /Timber
applications on Council packet pages 288 through 299. She doesn't like the forest
plan to clear cut, given those slopes and that elevation in the Lake Whatcom
watershed. Olsen stated the owner must replant.
McShane stated parcels one, two, and three are pretty flat. The owner might
have a little trouble with parcels four, five, and six.
Crawford stated it is weird that there is a harvest plan for a clear cut, yet the
owner testified that he has no interest in logging his property.
Planning and Development Committee, 11/27/2001, 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
McShane stated they can't force people to cut their trees. The owner can still
have a harvest plan and wait for the right time to cut, which may be many years
away.
Olsen stated the owner will have to replant trees.
Hoag stated that doesn't do anything for the erosion the first few years.
McShane stated Councilmember Hoag presupposes erosion from a timber
harvest. That is not always the case.
Hoag stated it is on a clear cut.
McShane stated it is not.
Motion carried unanimously.
Olsen stated the Planning Commission tabled the Victoria Luhrs Open
Space /Open Space application. It might be tabled again.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 4:08 p.m.
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
ATTEST:
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Dan McShane, Committee Chair
Planning and Development Committee, 11/27/2001, Page 8