HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil June 27 20001
2 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
3 Regular County Council
4
5 June 27, 2000
6
7
8 The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Council Chair Marlene
9 Dawson in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
10
11 Also Present: Absent:
12 Dan McShane None
13 L. Ward Nelson
14 Connie Hoag
15 Barbara Brenner
16 Sam Crawford
17 Robert Imhof
18
19
20
21 ANNOUNCEMENTS
22
23 Dawson moved to go into executive session to discuss litigation regarding the
24 I -99 issue.
25
26 Motion carried 5 -0 with McShane and Hoag out of the room.
27
28 The Council came back into regular session at 7:12 p.m.
29
30 Hoag moved to approve $35,000 to address the I -99 issue.
31
32 Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated the total authority would be
33 $85,000. They have been billed for the amount budgeted thus far.
34
35 Motion carried unanimously.
36
37 Dawson announced there was Discussion with Chief Civil Deputy
38 Prosecutor Randy Watts regarding pending litigation (AB2000 -018) in
39 executive session during the Committee of the Whole meeting.
40
41 Dawson also announced there was Discussion regarding the Council's
42 reimbursement policy (AB2000 -017) during the Committee of the Whole
43 meeting.
44
45
46 APPROVAL OF MINUTES
47
48 APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR THE JUNE 6, 2000 BOARD OF
49 HEALTH MEETING
50
51 Nelson moved approval of the minutes.
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/27/2000, Page 1
1
2 Motion carried unanimously.
3
4
5 OPEN SESSION
6
7 The following people spoke:
8
9 Dave Pros, 1466 Roy Road, submitted a letter (on file) regarding public
10 access television. Make sure important committee meetings, such as Planning
11 Commission meetings, are taped live and shown on channel 10. This would allow
12 the Councilmembers to watch the public testimony, relay questions to the Planning
13 Commission for further clarification, and alert the councilmembers in case they
14 want to attend the meetings. Viewers would be able to see what is going on. It
15 would eliminate testimony from people that didn't have enough time to respond or
16 that didn't know about the meeting. It would also allow working people to see what
17 is going on and have a better opportunity for input.
18
19 Richard Gilda, Jensen Road, Bellingham, stated the councilmembers said they
20 would provide money so Planning Commission meetings could be televised. He
21 could not find that item in the budget, but was told it is included in the budget for
22 the Council Office. He questioned what happened to that money.
23
24 Brenner stated they may have done that, but didn't recall that they
25 concluded what would and would not be videotaped. She recalled that the Council
26 discussed whether or not they should videotape more of what goes on in
27 government.
28
29 Hoag stated she supported videotaping Planning Commission meetings. She
30 didn't recall ever taking any official action. The Council budget includes money to
31 tape the Council meetings. When they went to Point Roberts, it was a Council
32 meeting.
33
34 Gilda stated the Planning Commission went to Point Roberts, and Ms. Barton
35 was there to videotape that meeting. He did not know whether or not Ms. Barton
36 was paid for that. He questioned whether there was money appropriated for
37 videotaping.
38
39 Hoag stated Ms. Barton volunteered for that meeting. She questioned
40 whether the funds allocated to tape the Council meetings can be used to videotape
41 other meetings.
42
43 Dana Brown - Davis, Clerk of the Council, stated that Lynn Barton's contract
44 was amended to allow her to be able to videotape other meetings. However, that
45 money would not come out of the Council's budget. It would come out of the
46 administration's budget.
47
48 Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated that is correct. He has not
49 heard there is an appropriation from the administration's budget to do another
50 taping.
51
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/27/2000, Page 2
1 Brown -Davis stated the contract with Ms. Barton allows for that if needed.
2 The County has not appropriated any money for that.
3
4 Gilda stated the costs of tapes are so expensive. He suggested that the
5 Council come up with an audiotape and videotape library.
6
7 Lynn Barton, videotape contractor, stated the videotapes are available at the
8 Bellingham Public Library by the Friday following a meeting. They are available for
9 checkout. They have been available there for five years.
10
11 Brenner stated audiotapes are always available if people want them.
12
13 Gilda stated a person has to pay $8.
14
15 Brenner asked if the cost is less if someone brings in his or her own
16 audiotape. Brown -Davis stated she would look up the reduced cost to copy an
17 audiotape.
18
19 Leonard Lindstrom, 2858 W. Maplewood Road, questioned why a preacher
20 can't speak to a normal person so that person understands the preacher. There
21 must be a problem when one can't get a civil greeting.
22
23 Marian Beddill, 3600 Seeley Street, Bellingham, asked people to petition for a
24 new pipe for Kulshan Middle School, for the kids' sake. She submitted a petition
25 form (on file). The petition is not a legal initiative. It is a request to the owners of
26 the pipeline to do something that is right.
27
28
29 PUBLIC HEARING
30
31 1. ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 2.125,
32 FORMING THE WHATCOM COUNTY UTILITIES PLANNING AND
33 ADVISORY COMMITTEE (AB2000 -177)
34
35 Sylvia Goodwin, Planning Division Manager, gave a staff report and stated
36 she has a proposed change. There was no regional pipeline transmission
37 representative included on the draft ordinance. Since the regional transmission
38 pipelines have been controversial lately, they may want to include a company
39 representative. Cascade Natural Gas is a local carrier and has different issues.
40
41 Brenner stated Cascade Natural Gas and Puget Sound Energy are working
42 with West Coast Energy. They all want to put in a regional pipeline. She assumed
43 including Cascade Natural Gas and Puget Sound Energy (PSE) covers it. Goodwin
44 stated it may. If the councilmembers were interested, she has language.
45
46 Imhof questioned the recommendation to add one representative from the
47 product. Goodwin stated section 2.125.040 includes representatives from Cascade
48 Natural Gas, Puget Sound Energy, Public Utility District #1, and Bonneville Power
49 Administration. There is no regional pipeline transmission company representative.
50
51 Imhof questioned Ms. Goodwin's recommendation. Goodwin stated her
52 recommendation would be to add one more representative that would be a regional
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/27/2000, Page 3
1 transmission pipeline company. They noted other grammatical items that could be
2 improved. She submitted all recommendations (on file).
3
4 Hoag asked if they could include a disclaimer that the citizen representatives
5 not be employees of PSE or Cascade Natural Gas.
6
7 Imhof stated the Council makes the appointments to that committee.
8
9 Goodwin stated the recommendation is to adopt the ordinance.
10
11 Dawson opened the public hearing and the following people spoke:
12
13 Doug Thorneycroft, West Coast Energy and Orca Pipeline Project
14 representative, stated the committee would have the responsibility for setting
15 pipeline location guidelines. As a proponent of a new pipeline that will be located,
16 in part, in Whatcom County, West Coast Energy would like to have the opportunity
17 to participate in the process used to develop guidelines. The substance and
18 implementation timing of the proposed pipeline location guidelines have a
19 significant material affect on the development of their proposed pipeline. They
20 would like to be actively involved in the guideline development process. He offered
21 his assistance to the County as it develops its criteria for locating future pipelines.
22 The draft ordinance will include industry representatives from the local gas
23 distribution companies, but there is no representative proposed for the regional
24 transmission pipeline sector. The routing requirements and location criteria of a
25 regional pipeline may be different than those of a local distribution company. Those
26 requirements cannot be adequately defined. It is important that the regional
27 companies have their own voice on the committee. He respectfully requested that
28 the regional transmission pipelines be permitted to have a representative on the
29 committee. West Coast Energy is prepared to take on that role and is interested in
30 participating as a member of the committee.
31
32 Goodwin clarified that the idea for adding a regional pipeline representative
33 came from a Planning Department staff person, not Puget Sound Energy.
34
35 Andy Swayne, Puget Sound Energy Land Use Planner, stated PSE supports
36 the ordinance that is presented. It is a very good idea. They like to see any
37 improvements they can make in the planning and coordination of local and regional
38 utility needs for the County. During the preparation of the Comprehensive Plan, a
39 lot of good work was done. Now that they've seen how the policies in the
40 Comprehensive Plan have been running for a few years, there is some more work
41 to be done. PSE offers its assistance in being a member of that committee to make
42 the Comprehensive Plan policies as good as they can be.
43
44 Hearing no one else, Dawson closed the public hearing.
45
46 Imhof moved to adopt the substitute ordinance.
47
48 Brenner stated she has had nothing but good experiences with West Coast
49 Energy. Their assistance would be invaluable. It is very important that this be a
50 local effort. That is one of the reasons she wanted only local company
51 representatives on the committee. Another reason is that Cascade Natural Gas and
52 PSE are doing the Orca Pipeline with West Coast Energy. When West Coast Energy
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/27/2000, Page 4
1 made its presentation, it was very clear that this was a joint effort. The committee
2 becomes top heavy in one direction when there are three members representing
3 the exact same interest. She requested that West Coast Energy be a consultant or
4 an ex- officio member of the committee. They would have a lot of information.
5 When they do all their geological studies, they would be able to provide information
6 on good areas and bad areas for locating utility corridors. She was concerned that
7 this stay a local endeavor.
8
9 Crawford questioned whether Councilmember Brenner is suggesting that
10 Bonneville Power not be allowed to participate.
11
12 Brenner stated Bonneville Power is here in Whatcom County.
13
14 Crawford questioned whether Councilmember Brenner is suggesting that a
15 gas pipeline company that is already located in the County be included.
16
17 Brenner stated she was suggesting that Cascade Natural Gas and PSE are
18 already here and are working on a pipeline project. That will include pipeline
19 representation in the committee membership. She didn't want the committee to be
20 weighted too much one way or another.
21
22 McShane agreed with Imhof's motion but offered a friendly amendment to
23 drop the regional pipeline representative. His main concern would be which
24 regional pipeline company representative they would select. If they are going to
25 select all those who are here, they would select West Coast, Williams, Olympic, and
26 TransMountain pipelines. That would be a mixed bag. He has a lot of confidence in
27 West Coast Pipeline. They will be very involved in working with this committee in
28 providing expertise. So far, he has been pleased at how the company has
29 approached Whatcom County, however the Council should not include a position for
30 them on the committee.
31
32 Imhof declined the friendly amendment.
33
34 Hoag stated PSE is involved in both gas and electricity. The Public Utility
35 District (PUD) #1 is involved in electric and water. Bonneville Power Administration
36 (BPA) is involved in electricity. Cascade Natural Gas is involved in natural gas. She
37 didn't see a petroleum pipeline company represented, such as Arco. She didn't
38 know if it would be more appropriate to include them as an ex officio or full
39 member. If they are added, she wanted to add another citizen representative to
40 ensure there is a balanced committee. She didn't want it to be an industry
41 committee. It is important that it be a committee that looks at all of the aspects of
42 what is going on. She offered a friendly amendment to section 2.125.040(3),
43 "...citizens of Whatcom County. The citizens of Whatcom County shall not be
44 employees of the aforementioned entities."
45
46 Imhof accepted the friendly amendment.
47
48 Brenner stated she agreed that there should possibly be a petroleum
49 representative. The difference is that all of the companies that are included are
50 utility companies. Arco is a private company.
51
52 Imhof stated Arco doesn't run a pipeline in this area now.
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/27/2000, Page 5
1
2 Hoag stated they do. There are five companies that run pipelines here. They
3 are the ones who take the best care of their lines.
4
5 Brenner stated this is a utility planning committee.
6
7 Hoag stated she was talking about corridors for pipelines.
8
9 Dawson questioned whether other committee representatives will have a
10 vested interest when there is one particular issue related to one particular
11 company.
12
13 Hoag stated it doesn't make much difference if they don't take an interest in
14 it and they don't want to be at the table.
15
16 Dawson stated that is why it is important to get everyone on board that
17 might have a vested interest. They would have a coordinated effort with them.
18
19 Imhof stated that is his motion.
20
21 McShane stated there are enough citizen and city representatives that there
22 will always be a majority there if the companies become disinterested because the
23 issue is not their area of concern.
24
25 Hoag stated they need to be careful when talking about the cities. Often, the
26 city will want a power line running through.
27
28 Brenner stated now there is an even representative. If they add another
29 industry person, it won't be even with the citizen representation. The cities are
30 government.
31
32 Motion to adopt carried unanimously.
33
34 2. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING
35 ORDINANCE, TITLE 20, TO ALLOW FLEXIBILITY IN THE R AND RF
36 ZONES FOR THE TEMPORARY USE OF RV's, REVISE RV STANDARDS IN
37 THE UR AND RR ZONES, PROVIDE RV STANDARDS IN THE URM, R, RF
38 AND RC ZONES, AND DESIGNATE ADDITIONAL AREAS IN POINT
39 ROBERTS WHICH ARE APPROPRIATE FOR THE TEMPORARY USE OF
40 RV's (AB2000 -215)
41
42 Dawson opened the public hearing and the following people spoke:
43
44 Mario Boeger, 1721 Benson Road, Point Robert, stated he sold recreational
45 vehicles (RV's) for 23 years. They are self- contained road vehicles licensed to be
46 on the road and lived in at a public or private- membership campground, not on
47 private property. Some are not self- contained, as are the Park Models. A Park
48 Model is a 399 square foot RV, not a mobile home. A mobile home is at least 400
49 square feet. Most of the people are from out of the country and, in general, do not
50 even have them licensed. If they enforce the rules, then the units should go into
51 storage. His own unit sits in storage and is licensed. It is used in the winter
52 months. If they are kept, the County should retroactively tax them for their use as
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/27/2000, Page 6
1 a cottage. That is what they are being used for. There is an instance on 1540
2 Benson Road in which there are two RV trailers. The owners of those RV's said they
3 are used as a cottage. Both of these units are not licensed. The American's are not
4 allowed to go to Canada and set up an RV. They are asked to leave after they've
5 done their sight seeing. He respects Canada's laws and expects Canadians to
6 respect American laws.
7
8 Rita Foley, S. Lake Whatcom, stated she is worried because people have
9 small pieces of property that they cannot build on. They know that when they buy
10 the property. They are told that. There are two small properties on Blue Canyon
11 Road that have had motor homes parked on them for six months. That is against
12 the law. The trouble with Whatcom County is it doesn't have the means to enforce
13 the laws that are made. The County has to begin enforcing the law.
14
15 Bruno Moras, 1597 Harbor Seal Drive, Point Roberts, stated he is the
16 President of the Point Roberts Voters Association. Two and one -half years have
17 passed since he requested the County to enforce the RV ordinance at Point Roberts.
18 A year ago, the department began to do so. Some 65 non - resident RV property
19 owners protested. The County Council and the Executive allowed the law to be set
20 aside while a work - around was being developed. In the meantime, violations of the
21 existing ordinance increased as more fifth - wheels, trailers, boats, and motor homes
22 arrived and found storage on vacant lots in Point Roberts. The indecision of
23 Whatcom County has encouraged people to violate the law. By his calculations,
24 there are an additional 20 violations to the original 90+ violations noted two years
25 ago. They are now considering a change to the ordinance, which is against the
26 wishes of the United States residents of Point Roberts. These same residents, on
27 April 18, presented the County Council with a petition stating that they did not want
28 the RV ordinance changed. They wanted it enforced. It is a very simple decision.
29 Don't put the matter back to the Planning Commission or the Council's Planning
30 Committee. Reject any legislative change, and direct Kremen and his department
31 to immediately get on with code enforcement of Point Roberts. If they can't do
32 this, then let the voters of Point Roberts decide it at the ballot box.
33
34 Frank Lucci, 1785 Heather Way, Point Roberts, Vice - President of the Point
35 Roberts Voters Association, which is opposed to a new ordinance. Point Roberts is
36 a small community, similar to Blaine. Blaine is incorporated, but Point Roberts is
37 not incorporated. Blaine is having problems with RV's, and its proposed solution is
38 to establish very strict RV laws prohibiting RV's on vacant lots and improved
39 residential lots. Point Roberts is faced with the County's proposal to lose the RV
40 ordinance. This is in spite of a majority of the residents and voters of Point
41 Roberts, saying they want the present law and they want it enforced. The proposed
42 RV zoning text amendments are not consistent with the goals and policies of the
43 Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan and the Growth Management Act. If
44 approved, there will be negative impacts on the current permanent population. It
45 would slow the influx of permanent residents coming to the Point and encourage
46 the transient, vacation nature of the past. They would go back to the way things
47 were in the 1950's and 1960's. He questioned whether Point Robert is that much
48 different than Blaine. Help Point Roberts work toward becoming a border town as
49 nice as Blaine is becoming.
50
51 (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.)
52
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/27/2000, Page 7
1 Dale Zender, citizen, spoke on behalf of three brothers regarding S. Lake
2 Whatcom. They co -own a lot that is not buildable. The intent is to use the lot as a
3 recreational lot. They worked with the County when they purchased the lot. The
4 County understood the desire and how they were going to use the lot. They
5 continue to be harassed on how they are using the lot. He requested that up to
6 four or five RV's be allowed for not more than 120 days. That amounts to six or
7 eight weeks per year that they actually use the lot. To do less creates a hardship
8 on how they intended to use the property.
9
10 McShane questioned the size of the lot. Zender stated it is about one acre.
11 The smaller part is on the water side. It is located just before the fire station.
12 They do care how the lot is used. They are lifetime residents. They homesteaded
13 the area.
14
15 Dawson questioned the zoning of the property. Zender stated the zoning is
16 Rural Residential two units per acre. They retained an attorney to work with them.
17
18 Hoag questioned what would be allowed in that location under the current
19 zoning.
20
21 Sylvia Goodwin, Planning Division Manager, explained that what is allowed
22 currently is one house with one accessory, unoccupied RV, or one occupied RV.
23 Under the proposed change, the Planning Commission proposed one RV plus one
24 guest RV. Additional RV's would be allowed based on acreage.
25
26 Hoag questioned whether Mr. Zender's use would be increased if the change
27 were made. Goodwin stated they would allow Mr. Zender to have one additional RV
28 instead of just one RV. According to the Planning Commission proposal, anyone
29 can have one RV and one guest RV, no matter the size of the lot.
30
31 Zender stated they are asking that the Council consider allowing more than
32 two RV's for not more than 120 days.
33
34 Hoag stated Mr. Zender testified that they worked with the County when they
35 purchased the lot. She didn't understand how they County would allow them to
36 have four or five RV's because that is not the zoning. Zender stated that is their
37 fault. When they purchased the property, they talked with the County to see if
38 there are any issues. At that time, this had not come up. They asked the
39 questions. No one said anything.
40
41 Hoag questioned whether anyone from the County told Mr. Zender that they
42 could have four or five RV's on that lot. Zender stated it wasn't addressed. He told
43 the County how they planned to use the property and that there were four owners.
44 They assumed it was okay.
45
46 Bob Hawss, 2168 Garth Road, stated he spoke at Point Roberts. He wanted
47 to add information that has not been presented. He owns property with an
48 approved septic system on Garth Road in Point Roberts. There has been much
49 discussion about wanting permanent homes and not have any more cottages or
50 RV's. Under current regulations, he cannot build a home larger 680 square feet.
51 That is not a permanent home. There are many people who are faced with that.
52 The approved septic tank permits say that the building cannot cover more than 10
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/27/2000, Page 8
1 percent of the ground area. If the goal is to have people build 500 and 600 square
2 foot cottages, that is one way of going. He represents the Point Roberts
3 Recreational Vehicle Owners Association. In the past year, the Council received
4 vast amounts of information and paperwork on the issue of RV use. It is his
5 intention to summarize what all that information and all those presentations should
6 lead to. Although this issue is a countywide problem, when it comes to Point
7 Roberts, it should be viewed as unique. Point Roberts is unique and should be
8 treated that way. This is an issue that affects many families, some of whom have
9 roots that go back several generations. The family atmosphere and economic
10 environment will be significantly and negatively impacted if a satisfactory solution is
11 not found. The issue of Point Roberts can be quickly solved to satisfy the vast
12 majority of the people and community groups. There is a desire by that significant
13 majority to do the following: designate that existing RV's should be allowed to stay
14 as long as they meet health and appearance standards. A process could be brought
15 forward that would ensure that any new use would need to be properly managed
16 and authorized. The people, community, and family setting of Point Roberts will all
17 be properly served if existing RV's are allowed to stay if they meet health and
18 appearance standards. This is a reasonable and equitable solution.
19
20 Bev Griffith, 1677 Seymour Place, Board Member of the Point Roberts Voters
21 Association, stated that a petition requesting that the County not pass the
22 ordinance was distributed. Five hundred seven people signed the petition. They
23 are permanent residents. The petition supports that the law on the books is
24 enforced. The 1974 ordinance should be enforced.
25
26 Hoag stated she didn't recall any quotation on the petition of what the
27 ordinance says. When the Council went to Point Roberts, there was much confusion
28 over what precisely the ordinance requires. She questioned whether anything went
29 to the members that specifically says the ordinance totally outlaws RV's.
30
31 Moras explained that when the petitions were circulated, the existing and
32 proposed ordinances were available to read at the same time.
33
34 Sid Wallace, 528 South Beach Road, Point Roberts, stated that Point Roberts
35 it the only unincorporated area that has its own character plan. It reflects a broad
36 northwest heritage character. The plan, after some initial growing pains, is proving
37 effective. The details of the plan were developed by the Planning Department and
38 approved by the County Council. At Point Roberts, there is a character plan
39 advisory committee, of which he is a member. RV's are totally incongruous to the
40 character plan for the Point. RV's, as fixed summer living quarters, are a product of
41 the last 40 years. Provisions for them were made in designated parks equipped to
42 accommodate them. Their individual presence in this community destroys the very
43 spirit that the character plan was enacted to preserve.
44
45 Mary Jane Anderson, 1025 Sunset Avenue, responded to the question from
46 Councilmember Hoag regarding the information available to the people when they
47 signed the petitions. Originally, the Planning Department looked at the issue and
48 made recommendations to the Planning Commission. The commissioners decided
49 to let the RV's be anywhere at Point Roberts. That fed fuel to the fire. Since that
50 time, a petition was distributed by the Voters Association that asked if people
51 wanted to go back to the 1974 law that didn't allow them anywhere or allow the
52 Planning Commissioner's recommendation to allow the RV's everywhere. No one
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/27/2000, Page 9
1 wants them to be allowed everywhere. The residents weren't given an option to
2 allow existing RV's to continue in certain areas. The Council shouldn't consider the
3 507 people who signed the petition. She talked to a few people on the list and
4 asked them if they understood the issue. They did not. One of those people was a
5 real estate agent. It did become confusing. The 507 people who signed do not
6 honestly represent the actual feelings of the majority of Point Roberts.
7
8 Richard Gilda, Jensen Road, Bellingham, stated he is a member of the
9 Planning Commission. The RV plan that came out of the Planning Commission is
10 the best, well thought out, most workable documents to come out of the Planning
11 Commission for a long time. Lately, it seems they are passing feel -good laws.
12 Now, they are talking about aesthetics. They cannot regulate aesthetics.
13 Regulation has to be about safety, health, morals, or taxation. He suggested
14 pulling Point Roberts out of this ordinance and letting the Point Roberts residents
15 vote on the issue.
16
17 John Gallenger, 1621 Enderby Ave, Delta, B.C. stated he has an RV in Point
18 Roberts. Mr. Moras' answer to Councilmember Hoag's question was misleading. He
19 has friends who were telephoned. Other signatures were collected in front of the
20 Market Place store. Had the store manager known that was what the table was for,
21 he never would have allowed it. The extra summer traffic is business that the
22 grocery store needs. He suggested a compromise that the existing RV's be allowed
23 to stay, and allow new RV's only in certain areas.
24
25 Terri Bosbeck, 1033 Sunset Avenue, urged the Council to allow more RV's on
26 recreational lots in Rural Forestry zones. They own 17 acres on the north fork of
27 the Nooksack River. They purchased it with two other parties five years ago. They
28 cannot build on this lot. It is purely recreational. They bought it to use it
29 recreationally. They didn't read the fine print that said they could only have one RV
30 on the lot. That sort of property is intended for use on a recreational basis. There
31 are many areas like this. She is worried it would be a problem to enforce. They
32 respect the land and try to be good neighbors. She didn't understand why the law
33 would allow one to come in with as many tents as possible, yet only allow one self -
34 contained RV. It is important to be able to go to a spot like this with your family, in
35 these times. She didn't understand why the County would want to prevent that
36 use. The number of days is not an issue, it is the number of RV's.
37
38 Brenner questioned whether part of the proposed change takes into
39 consideration the acreage and zoning. Goodwin stated the proposal would allow
40 one RV, plus one guest RV, plus one additional RV for each of two acres that are
41 owned. Someone with a 17 -acre lot would be allowed eight RV's.
42
43 Bob Weisen, 3314 Douglas Road, stated some councilmembers ran for
44 election on the property rights issue. They should stick to the issue that they ran
45 on. Those who have not been to Point Roberts and observed both sides of the
46 situation should step down from the decision. Those people that are arguing that
47 the RV's shouldn't be there have purchased property over the year at a reduced
48 price because they took advantage of the blight caused by the RV's. Regulations
49 continue to hit the good guys worse than the bad guys.
50
51 Judy DeMeyer, citizen, stated she is on the north fork of the Nooksack River.
52 They do not leave their trailer on the property. They only use it on the summer
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/27/2000, Page 10
1 holidays. She has a total of five acres. When she bought the property, she did
2 everything the County wanted regarding setbacks from the river. The area is
3 cleared for a park and a dike. She wants to invite family and friends on holidays.
4
5 Dawson questioned whether her neighbors have ever complained. DeMeyer
6 stated they have. They have documentation of harassment. She questioned who is
7 going to enforce this.
8
9 Brenner questioned how many RV's did DeMeyer think would be fair to have
10 on holidays. DeMeyer stated the most she's ever had has been seven, when they
11 held a volunteer fireman's picnic. They had the land for it. They haul out their
12 gray water and garbage. They have a lawn they mow. The vegetation by the creek
13 is allowed to go wild, except when the dike was put in.
14
15 Goodwin stated that the bottom of packet page 400 explained that DeMeyer
16 would be allowed to have a total of three RV's. The proponent of a special event
17 that requires more RV's is allowed with a permit from the Planning Division.
18
19 Pat Zender, 8035 Ham Road, stated it is amazing they are all trying to figure
20 out how to live together. A hundred years from now, their grandchildren will still be
21 faced with how to live together. They are looking at recreational vehicles. They all
22 work hard. They want to have fun with their families and be able to go somewhere
23 and enjoy life. They have neighbors that, apparently, are not enjoying life. All they
24 seem to think about is how to interrupt someone who works, pays taxes, and sets
25 family first. These other people are selfish. He hoped they do zoning changes that
26 are broader. They all have to live together. People have to give and take.
27
28 Hearing no one else, Dawson closed the public hearing.
29
30 Crawford moved to adopt the Planning Commission recommendation with
31 one change at the top of packet page 400 in section 20.72.051(1) regarding the
32 Point Roberts special district, "All recreational vehicles shall be connected to a
33 holding tank er a permitted on -site sewage system; or public sewer. OF shall
34 dispese ef all sewage, ineluding gFay water, at a reereatienal vehiele durnp site,
35 have such sewage and waste wateF Femoved by a lieensed sanitary disp
36 "
37
38 Dawson stated she wanted to put this into committee to address the
39 flexibility of having RV's in the forested areas. She agreed with Mr. Gilda's position
40 that adopting any of this is the single family residential areas, like Point Roberts,
41 will complicate things legally. They can't regulate aesthetics. When they liberalize
42 a law, it becomes more abusive. The situation is bad to begin with. If they allow
43 RV's to stay in certain areas in the Point Roberts area, they will end up with spot
44 zoning. RV's are incongruent and incompatible in single family residential
45 communities. In the forested zones, there is some leeway there. She will not
46 support the change. She moved to refer to committee. Her motion supercedes the
47 other motion.
48
49 Brenner stated she supported Dawson's motion. It is important that how one
50 wants to live is his or her business. If they are not creating a health hazard and
51 are not visible to neighbors, it isn't anyone else's business. That said, the whole
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/27/2000, Page 11
1 purpose of a recreational vehicle is that it be a recreational use, which is not a full -
2 time use.
3
4 Hoag called point of order and requested a parliamentary inquiry on whether
5 a motion to refer to committee can be discussed.
6
7 Dana Brown - Davis, Clerk of the Council, stated brief discussion is allowed
8 regarding the date and time of the schedule.
9
10 Hoag stated she supported the motion to refer to committee. She heard
11 from some people who believed that the Council would take in testimony and then
12 schedule it in committee. That is what she told those people. Those people would
13 be upset with her if the Council voted on the ordinance.
14
15 Nelson questioned when it would come out of committee.
16
17 Imhof stated the Council can bring it out of committee by a motion from the
18 floor.
19
20 Nelson stated it is too important of an issue and the public wants an answer.
21 He would rather not see it spend six or eight months in committee.
22
23 Hoag offered a friendly amendment to refer to committee and full Council for
24 the next meeting.
25
26 Dawson accepted the friendly amendment.
27
28 Brenner stated it is important that councilmembers have their comments
29 ready before committee so they can be discussed. This is about time. If they are
30 putting it on for a committee meeting and decision at the next meeting, it is
31 incumbent on councilmembers to have their concerns and comments ready for that.
32
33 Motion carried 6 -1 with Crawford opposed.
34
35
36 CONSENT AGENDA
37
38 Imhof reported for Finance and Administrative Services Committee and
39 moved approval of Consent Agenda items one through eleven.
40
41 Hoag withdrew item numbers one, four, eight, and nine.
42
43 Motion to approve items two, three, five through seven, ten, and eleven
44 carried unanimously.
45
46 Dawson stated that included in the Consent Agenda items is a resolution
47 approving the Whatcom County Law and Justice Council. She thanked all who have
48 been participating on the steering committee.
49
50 1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BID #00-
51 63 FOR THE SUMAS AREA PRELEVEL PROJECT TO THE LOWEST
52 RESPONSIVE BIDDER, WILDER CONSTRUCTION, IN THE AMOUNT OF
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/27/2000, Page 12
1 $645,000 (AB2000 -238)
2
3 Hoag asked for clarification on the project.
4
5 Imhof stated the project is for roads in the Sumas area that need pre -
6 leveling. Two weeks ago, the Council approved the Blaine area project, which was
7 the northwest corner. This is the northeast corner project.
8
9 Hoag questioned whether the work takes out the bumps and dips in the road.
10
11 Imhof stated it does. The work sits for a year, and the year following that
12 the roads will be chip sealed.
13
14 Hoag asked if her road would be eligible for pre - leveling if it was recently
15 chip - sealed.
16
17 Nelson suggested Hoag call Dick Prieve and ask him the questions.
18
19 Brenner stated Councilmember Hoag asking about her road is a private
20 matter.
21
22 Hoag stated she is talking about Halverstick Road, which is several miles
23 long. She is not the only one who uses it. There is a safety question.
24
25 Dick Prieve, Assistant Director of Administration, stated Councilmember
26 Imhof is correct. He didn't believe that Halverstick Road is included.
27
28 Hoag questioned whether she should contact Mr. Prieve if she has a concern.
29 Prieve stated that is correct.
30
31 Imhof moved to approve.
32
33 Motion carried unanimously.
34
35 2. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BID #00-
36 65 FOR THE MARINE DRIVE AREA PRELEVEL PROJECT TO THE
37 LOWEST RESPONSIVE BIDDER, WILDER CONSTRUCTION, IN THE
38 AMOUNT OF $90,221.25 (AB2000 -239)
39
40 3. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING AN ENHANCED WHATCOM COUNTY LAW
41 AND JUSTICE COUNCIL (AB2000 -240)
42
43 4. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN
44 EXTENSION OF THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH
45 NORTHWEST REGIONAL COUNCIL FOR SUPPORT SERVICES FOR LAW
46 AND JUSTICE PLANNING FOR AN ADDITIONAL CONTRACT AMOUNT
47 OF $43,000, RESULTING IN A TOTAL AMENDED CONTRACT AMOUNT,
48 UP TO $76,957 (AB2000 -241)
49
50 Hoag asked for clarification on page 118 about this being new in scope.
51
52 (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side B.)
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/27/2000, Page 13
1
2 Imhof stated it is staff support for the planning council that the Council is
3 setting up.
4
5 Hoag stated she knew that. She didn't know what it meant by being new in
6 scope. She questioned whether that is the same as what they were doing.
7
8 Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated Hoag was correct. It is not
9 exactly new in scope. They finished the plan. Now, they want to begin the
10 implementation phase. That is what he intended when he used the phrase 'new in
11 scope.'
12
13 Imhof moved to approve.
14
15 Motion carried unanimously.
16
17 S. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING COUNTY ROAD PROJECT NO. 997012
18 AND THE AWARD OF CONTRACT TO ONE WAY CONSTRUCTION INC.
19 AS THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE BIDDER, FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF
20 STEIN ROAD BRIDGE NO. 92 OVER DAKOTA CREEK, IN THE AMOUNT
21 OF $279,364.45 (AB2000 -242)
22
23 6. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
24 CONTRACT AMENDMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY HEALTH AND
25 HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND WHATCOM COUNSELING AND
26 PSYCHIATRIC CLINIC, TO PROVIDE CHILDREN'S SCHOOL -BASED
27 MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES IN SIX WHATCOM COUNTY SCHOOLS, IN
28 THE AMENDED AMOUNT OF $23,500, FOR A TOTAL CONTRACT
29 AMOUNT OF $254,500 (AB2000 -243)
30
31 7. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
32 CONTRACT AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY HEALTH AND
33 HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND CURRENT INDUSTRIES, TO
34 PROVIDE PREVOCATIONAL SERVICES CONSISTING OF TRAINING
35 AND PAID EMPLOYMENT IN BUSINESSES THAT ARE ORGANIZED AND
36 DESIGNED TO PROVIDE EMPLOYMENT TO PERSONS WITH
37 DISABILITIES, IN THE AMOUNT OF $174,924 (AB2000 -244)
38
39 8. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
40 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN
41 SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND CASCADE VOCATIONAL SERVICES —
42 INDIVIDUAL EMPLOYMENT TO PROVIDE EMPLOYMENT PLACEMENT
43 AND FOLLOW -UP SERVICES NECESSARY TO ASSIST PERSONS WITH
44 DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES, IN THE AMOUNT OF $44,640
45 (AB2000 -245)
46
47 Hoag asked for clarification in this item and the next item. She questioned
48 the difference between individual employment and group employment.
49
50 Imhof explained that some of the clients are more severely disabled and
51 have to have personal help to keep their employment. Some of them are done in
52 groups.
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/27/2000, Page 14
1
2 Hoag moved to approve.
3
4 Motion carried unanimously.
5
6 9. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
7 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN
8 SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND CASCADE VOCATIONAL SERVICES —
9 GROUP EMPLOYMENT, TO PROVIDE EMPLOYMENT PLACEMENT, ON-
10 THE -JOB TRAINING AND FOLLOW -UP SERVICES NECESSARY TO
11 ASSIST PERSONS WITH DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES IN THE
12 AMOUNT OF $79,272 (AB2000 -246)
13
14 Hoag moved to approve.
15
16 Motion carried unanimously
17
18 10. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
19 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN
20 SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND CASCADE VOCATIONAL SERVICES —
21 COMMUNITY ACCESS, TO PROVIDE AN INDIVIDUALIZED PROGRAM
22 FOR PERSONS WHO ARE NOT ABLE TO ACCESS EMPLOYMENT
23 OPPORTUNITIES DUE TO THE SEVERITY OF THEIR DISABILITIES OR
24 OTHER BARRIERS, IN THE AMOUNT OF 442,860 (AB2000 -247)
25
26 11. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN
27 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF BLAINE TO ESTABLISH
28 PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
29 AMENDMENTS WITHIN THE BLAINE URBAN GROWTH AREA (AB2000-
30 249)
31
32
33 OTHER ITEMS
34
35 1. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 16.20, WHATCOM
36 COUNTY SHELLFISH PROTECTION DISTRICTS (AB2000 -188A)
37
38 McShane reported for the Natural Resources Committee and stated the
39 committee made amendments. He moved approval of the substitute ordinance.
40 There is one other amendment he wanted to make.
41
42 McShane moved to split the paragraph of the ordinance beginning, "BE IT
43 FINALLY ORDAINED..." into two sections. "BE IT CTnTIALL —Y FURTHER ORDAINED that
44 coordination, review, and reporting of this plan shall be the responsibility of the
45 Whatcom County Health and Human Services Department, with support from the
46 Water Resources Division;. Affd BE IT FINALLY ORDAINED that a budget will be
47 submitted at the appropriate time by the Health and Human Services Department
48 w+tli in coordination with the Water Resources Division."
49
50 Motion to amend carried unanimously.
51
52 Motion to approve the substitute ordinance as amended carried unanimously.
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/27/2000, Page 15
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
49
50
51
2. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT AMENDMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND NORTH SOUND REGIONAL
SUPPORT NETWORK (NSRSN) TO PROVIDE FUNDING FOR MENTAL
HEALTH ADMINISTRATION PLANNING, COORDINATION, AND
COMMUNITY -BASED SERVICES FOR WHATCOM COUNTY IN THE
AMENDED AMOUNT $52,726, FOR A TOTAL AMENDED AMOUNT OF
$276,628 (AB2000 -222)
Imhof reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee and
moved approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
3. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2000 BUDGET, REQUEST #8 (AB2000-
233)
Imhof reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee and
moved approval. There are four items in the appropriation.
Imhof further moved to amend the ordinance to add a $35,000 appropriation
to the Prosecuting Attorney for legal fees to be incurred in I -99 litigation.
The Council concurred on the amendment.
Motion carried unanimously.
4. ORDINANCE ADOPTING NEW WHATCOM COUNTY LAND DIVISION
REGULATIONS (TITLE 21), REPEALING THE EXISTING WHATCOM
COUNTY SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS (TITLE 21), AND MAKING
MINOR MODIFICATIONS TO TITLE 2 AND TITLE 20 (AB2000 -160)
Hoag reported for the Planning and Development Committee and stated this
will be held in committee. This is scheduled to be out of committee after its next
meeting in two weeks. All changes by the Council should be submitted by that
date.
Crawford stated the committee is producing a pretty good product.
S. DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE REVISIONS TO WHATCOM COUNTY CODE
20.80, STORMWATER SPECIAL DISTRICTS, REVISING PORTIONS OF
ORDINANCE NO. 99 -086 (AB2000 -229)
McShane questioned whether this is supposed to be a docketed item.
Hoag stated this item was not held in committee.
McShane stated the committee moved it forward.
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/27/2000, Page 16
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
Hoag reported for the Planning and Development Committee and stated the
recommendation is to docket this item to the Planning Commission, who would
send it to the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), along with two memos from
Bruce Mills. One of the memos was regarding the technical specifics of the
stormwater special districts. This item has to be on the Planning Commission's
docket by June 30. This is the last meeting the Council can docket this item. The
Planning Commission can bring it back to the Council after they've had adequate
review and recommendations. Those memos are to provide guidance for the TAC
and the Planning Commission. She so moved.
Crawford stated the committee clarified that the four changes in the technical
memo was not direction, only a suggested starting point. The Council doesn't know
if those suggestions are appropriate.
Motion carried unanimously.
6. APPOINTMENTS TO THE SURFACE MINING ADVISORY COMMITTEE
(AB2000 -069C)
Surface Mining Industry Member Representative
Imhof voted for Alvin Starkenburg.
Hoag voted for James Wiedman.
Nelson voted for Alvin Starkenburg.
Dawson voted for Alvin Starkenburg.
McShane voted for James Wiedman.
Brenner voted for Bradley DeHaan.
Crawford voted for Alvin Starkenburg.
Alvin Starkenburg was appointed.
Forestry Representative
Crawford voted for Tom Westergreen.
Brenner voted for David Chamberlain.
McShane voted for David Chamberlain.
Dawson voted for Tom Westergreen.
Nelson voted for Tom Westergreen.
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/27/2000, Page 17
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
Hoag voted for David Chamberlain.
Imhof voted for Tom Westergreen.
Tom Westergreen was appointed.
Environmental Consultant Representative
Hoag stated of the two applicants for this position, one was already
appointed to the previous position. The other applicant, Charles Lindsay, is
appointed automatically. She moved to appoint Charles Lindsay.
Motion carried unanimously.
Dawson moved to confirm the appointment of George Boggs to the
Conservation District representative appointment.
Motion carried unanimously.
McShane stated the Council can't approve or disapprove the Conservation
District appointment. It is written into the ordinance that the district makes its own
appointment. The Council doesn't vote on it.
Nelson stated the Council can concur with the appointment.
7. APPOINTMENTS TO THE LAKE SAMISH CITIZEN'S ADVISORY
COMMITTEE (AB2000 -176B)
Large Parcel Property Owner
Imhof voted for Frederick Winton Wefer.
Hoag voted for Bruce Harris.
Nelson voted for Frederick Winton Wefer.
Dawson voted for Bruce Harris.
McShane voted for Bruce Harris.
Brenner voted for Paul Isaacson.
Crawford voted for Bruce Harris.
Bruce Harris was appointed.
Small Parcel Property Owner
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/27/2000, Page 18
1
2
Crawford voted for Bruce Phillips.
3
4
Brenner voted for Barbara Vaughan.
5
6
McShane voted for David Beatty.
7
8
Dawson voted for Mark Herrenkohl.
9
10
Nelson voted for Bruce Phillips.
11
12
Hoag voted for David Beatty.
13
14
Imhof voted for Bruce Phillips.
15
16
The two top vote - getters were Phillips and Beatty.
17
18
Imhof voted for Phillips.
19
20
Hoag voted for Beatty.
21
22
Nelson voted for Phillips.
23
24
Dawson voted for Phillips.
25
26
McShane voted for Beatty.
27
28
Brenner voted for Beatty.
29
30
Crawford voted for Phillips.
31
32
Bruce Phillips was appointed
33
34
Developer or Business Owner
35
36
Imhof moved to appoint Paul Issaacson.
37
38
Motion carried unanimously.
39
40
Concerned Neighbors of Lake Samish Representative
41
42
Crawford voted for Barbara Vaughan.
43
44
Brenner voted for Barbara Vaughan.
45
46
McShane voted for Mark Herrenkohl.
47
48
Dawson voted for Mark Herrenkohl.
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/27/2000, Page 19
1
2 Nelson voted for Barbara Vaughan.
3
4 Hoag voted for Mark Herrenkohl.
5
6 Imhof voted for Mark Herrenkohl.
7
8 Mark Herrenkohl was appointed
9
10 Lake Samish Association Representative
11
12 Imhof voted for Douglas Wight.
13
14 Hoag voted for Douglas Wight.
15
16 Nelson voted for Douglas Wight.
17
18 Dawson voted for Douglas Wight.
19
20 McShane voted for Douglas Wight.
21
22 Brenner stated the other applicant, Bruce Harris, was already appointed to
23 the large parcel property owner position.
24
25 Dawson moved to appoint Douglas Wight.
26
27 Motion carried unanimously.
28
29 Water District #12 Representative
30
31 Imhof moved to appoint Terry Klimpel.
32
33 Motion carried unanimously.
34
35 Forester or Forest Property Owner
36
37 Crawford stated two of the three applicants for this position have already
38 been appointed to other positions. He moved to appoint Frederick Winton Wefer.
39
40 Motion carried unanimously.
41
42 Members at Large (1St position)
43
44 Imhof voted for Barbara Vaughan.
45
46 Hoag voted for David Beatty.
47
48 Nelson voted for Paula Tiscornia.
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/27/2000, Page 20
1
2 Dawson voted for Rebecca O'Brine.
3
4 McShane voted for Barbara Vaughan.
5
6 Brenner voted for Barbara Vaughan.
7
8 Crawford voted for Barbara Vaughan.
9
10 Barbara Vaughn was appointed.
11
12 Members at Large (2nd position)
13
14 Crawford voted for Paula Tiscornia.
15
16 Brenner voted for David Beatty.
17
18 McShane voted for David Beatty.
19
20 Dawson voted for Rebecca O'Brine.
21
22 Nelson voted for Paula Tiscornia.
23
24 Hoag stated they are privileged to have Mr. Beatty apply for this position.
25 His application includes being the president of Skagit Fisheries, a retired professor
26 of zoology, and other qualifications. She voted for David Beatty.
27
28 Imhof voted for David Beatty.
29
30 David Beatty was appointed.
31
32
33 INTRODUCTION ITEMS
34
35 Imhof moved to accept the Introduction Items.
36
37 Motion carried unanimously.
38
39 1. ORDINANCE CONTINUING A MORATORIUM ON THE ACCEPTANCE OF
40 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATIONS FOR REGIONAL
41 TRANSMISSION PIPELINES OF PETROLEUM, PETROLEUM PRODUCTS,
42 AND NATURAL GAS; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY (AB2000-
43 216A) (HEARING TO BE SCHEDULED)
44
45 2. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY CODE,
46 TITLE 20, TO REVISE STANDARDS AND APPROVAL PROCESS FOR
47 HOME OCCUPATIONS AND COTTAGE INDUSTRIES IN VARIOUS
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/27/2000, Page 21
1 ZONING DISTRICTS AND ADD A NEW CATEGORY OF " "RURAL
2 BUSINESS" TO THE CODE (AB2000 -251)
3
4 3. ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A $30 PETTY CASH REVOLVING FUND
5 FOR ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES -HUMAN RESOURCES (AB2000 -252)
6
7 4. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY CODE,
8 TITLE 20, TO CLARIFY CHAPTER 20.04.030 INTERPRETATION AND
9 CONFLICT (AB2000 -253)
10
11 S. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING
12 ORDINANCE, TITLE 20, TO CLARIFY UR -MX ZONING TEXT
13 REGARDING COMMERCIAL CENTERS, BUILDING SETBACKS, THE
14 CALCULATIONS OF THE PERCENT ALLOWABLE MULTI - FAMILY
15 STRUCTURES AND TO PROVIDE FOR SIGN REGULATIONS IN THIS
16 ZONE (AB2000 -254)
17
18 6. RESOLUTION IN THE MATTER OF WHATCOM COUNTY SIX YEAR
19 COMPREHENSIVE ROAD PROGRAM FOR THE YEARS 2001 THROUGH
20 2006 (AB2000 -255) (HEARING TO BE SCHEDULED)
21
22 OTHER BUSINESS
23
24 Hoag reported that she and Dawson spoke in Abbottsford, British Columbia
25 about Judson Lake. Someone was proposing to mine the lake. The state
26 Department of Ecology, specifically Dick Grout; Jack Metcalf's office, specifically
27 Kirk Pearson and Roy Atwood, and; the County Council were helpful in defeating
28 that proposal. She proposed that the Council write thank you letters to the City of
29 Abbottsford for hearing their concerns and denying the proposal; to Jack Metcalf's
30 office for their assistance on this, and; to the State Department of Ecology,
31 specifically Dick Grout and Dave Garland, who were very active and helpful in the
32 project. She so moved.
33
34 Motion carried unanimously.
35
36 Brenner thanked the administration's staff for all their help in writing the
37 Utilities Planning ordinance. Senior Planner Kraig Olason came in and had an
38 ordinance in writing that was perfect. She also thanked Planning Division Manager
39 Sylvia Goodwin and Land Use Manager Roland Middleton.
40
41 Also, she would like a report from the Planning Department on environmental
42 impacts of mining pits.
43
44
45 REPORTS AND OTHER ITEMS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS
46
47 McShane stated he had three items to report. First, Canyon Creek has been
48 before every single committee of the Council. He questioned what the Council
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/27/2000, Page 22
1 wants to do with it. He suggested that the councilmembers think about it. This
2 came before the Council in January.
3
4 The second item is about the Blaine sewer line. The camera went down the
5 line and found some holes. It is not good news for the Shellfish Protection District
6 because, ideally, they would have hoped to find a big, gaping hole. They didn't.
7 The problem is likely from many small things. They haven't run the camera under
8 the harbor. That might be where the problem is.
9
10 The third item is about the Orca Pipeline. He was asked to tour a portion of
11 the line that he had concerns about. They are addressing his concerns well for the
12 time being. He was impressed with their forthrightness and willingness to get a lot
13 of information. They originally had the pipeline run through the Y Road landfill. He
14 mentioned that issue to them.
15
16 The fourth item is that the Flood Committee is meeting Thursday night. They
17 came before the Public Works Committee two weeks ago and gave a presentation
18 that they are going to request more staffing. The committee gave them direction
19 to create a priority list. They are going to talk about that list on Thursday night at
20 their special meeting. Councilmembers should anticipate requests for more staff
21 from them.
22
23 The fifth item was that the Natural Resources Committee was informed by
24 Land Use Manager Roland Middleton that there have been hearings before the
25 Planning Commission on gravel pits outside of the mineral resource overlay areas.
26 The Natural Resources Committee provided direction that the Planning Commission
27 moves that item forward to the Council and not hold it for the newly formed gravel
28 committee. Mr. Middleton gave an indication that the Planning Commission may go
29 a different direction than what some councilmembers were thinking.
30
31 Nelson stated there is a joint meeting tomorrow from 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
32 at Forest Street with the Lake Whatcom Management Committee. He questioned
33 whether there is an agenda for that meeting.
34
35 Brenner stated they would have a presentation.
36
37 Hoag stated the constituents in her area wanted to thank the Council
38 regarding the Judson Lake issue.
39
40 Second, the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC) testimony had to
41 be in yesterday. Hearings are schedule for July 25 and 27.
42
43 Brenner stated July 25 is a Council meeting night. July 27 is the County
44 picnic. The councilmembers can go to the picnic and still make it to the hearing.
45
46 Imhof stated he had a great time in Alaska fishing.
47
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/27/2000, Page 23
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
Pete Kremen, County Executive, stated there is an annual reception on July
13 honoring the County Council, the Lummi Indian Business Council, and the
Nooksack Tribal Council. He hoped that everyone's schedules permit him or her to
attend. It is very important to have a good showing and a demonstration of
interest and willingness to get along, get to know each other, and work together
with the two nations that are living within Whatcom County. No business will be
conducted and it will not be at the public's expense. The event begins at 5:30 p.m.
and will probably end at 7:30 or 8:00 p.m. It will go a long way to show interest
and goodwill if they all can show up for at least an hour.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 9:17 p.m.
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
These minutes were approved by Council on July 25 , 2000.
ATTEST:
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Marlene Dawson, Council Chair
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/27/2000, Page 24