HomeMy WebLinkAboutCommittee of the Whole April 29 1999I WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
2 Committee Of The Whole
3
4 April 20, 1999
5
6
7 The meeting was called to order at 5:45 p.m. by Council Chair Marlene Dawson in the
8 Council Committee Room, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
9
10 Also Present: Absent:
11 L. Ward Nelson
12 Connie Hoag
13 Barbara Brenner
14 Tom Brown
15 Robert Imhof (15 minutes late)
16 Kathy Sutter
17
18 Dawson announced that Dan Gibson has withdrawn item #4 on the agenda.
19
20
21 1. UPDATE FROM WHATCOM COUNTY WATER RESOURCE PLANNER SUE
22 BLAKE ON LAKE WHATCOM MANAGEMENT AND DISCUSSION OF THE
23 RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 1999 LAKE WHATCOM MANAGEMENT
24 PROGRAM (AB99 -056)
25
26 Sue Blake, Planning and Development Services Water Resources Planner, stated that the
27 resolution is not an issue. The resolution adopting the program has already been approved. The
28 committee would just be getting an update. The Council members asked for written one -page
29 summaries and quarterly verbal updates on what they are doing. This is the second quarterly
30 update. She is polling on who would like a notebook. There will be places in the notebook to
31 put the quarterly updates, summaries, interlocal agreements, work programs, and other
32 information. The City of Bellingham and Water District #10 want a book for the public in case
33 they come in looking for information. She offered a notebook to the Council for that purpose as
34 well.
35
36 Brenner suggested that they label the binders on the spine.
37
38 Hoag stated that Sherilyn Wells submitted a document to the Council that she wanted on
39 the record. Blake stated that she has seen the document. She has not reviewed all of the
40 testimony. She will address some of the concerns during the discussion regarding stormwater.
41
42 Blake stated that the Council determined three areas in the work program that were high
43 priority; stormwater, urbanization and land use, and watershed ownership.
44
45 Hoag suggested that Blake look at Wells' document and comment. Blake stated that
46 Wells' concerns are expressed in the context of the review by Richard Horner of the stormwater
47 scope of work. It is clear that he does not have a full understanding of the program. The County
48 will not be doing only structural controls. There are a lot of areas in which the County needs to
49 provide additional information to him. She wanted to preface the discussion by saying that the
Committee of the Whole, 4/20/99, Page 1
I County is very interested in any comments people have about that scope of work and how the
2 County is proceeding with stormwater. When they get to the end of the program, they would
3 like to make sure that everyone supports it.
4
5 Hoag stated that they don't need a response now, but suggested that she review it and
6 provide the Council feedback. Blake stated that she would. She has requested that information
7 from Wells, but has not received it. She has also been identified as one of the stakeholders.
8 Wells was one of the people invited to give their perspective on the stormwater program.
9 However, she did not respond or participate.
10
11 Brenner suggested that the Council send a letter to Wells requesting that, if she has
12 important information on these issues, she provide them to the Council at least a few days ahead
13 of time. Otherwise, the Council members can't assimilate the information.
14
15 Hoag concurred with Brenner.
16
17 Brenner stated that two years ago she made a personal request to Wells about providing
18 information earlier than on the day of the Council meeting. That message may not be getting
19 through to her.
20
21 The committee concurred to send the letter.
22
23 Sutter suggested sending Wells the questions that Becky Peterson has been using for her
24 interviews. They should also suggest a deadline.
25
26 Michael Knapp, Planning and Development Services Director, stated that they've been
27 inundated with requests from Wells for public disclosure act information. The most recent
28 request was 15 years' worth of Conditional Use Permit (CUP) records to be copied. That is
29 1,000 to 1,500 files. She is not paying for it. The interpretation from the Prosecuting Attorney's
30 office is that the Planning Department only has to provide the files that she can go through. She
31 is upset that the Planning Department won't put that information together for her. She has to
32 come into the office and review them from their boxes.
33
34 Blake stated that, in terms of stormwater, the consultants have been on board since mid -
35 to end of February. Since then, they've been identifying early action projects. There is
36 background work and central work that needs to be done. At the same time, they also need to
37 move forward on some early action, easy to do, concrete projects that will make some water
38 quality difference. The first thing to do is compile the list of suggestions. Part of the role of
39 Geneva Environmental/Becky Peterson is to interview stakeholders and ask a variety of
40 questions. She has been asking for ideas for early action projects. They have gotten a good list
41 of suggestions that not only apply to early action items, but also other suggestions for program
42 planning for next year. Between the stakeholder interviews and some of the work the Planning
43 Commission did, they are getting some good ideas for what to target. That has been useful.
44 They are hoping to initially pare down the list by the end of this week, then move forward on
45 getting going on some of the projects. The projects that aren't identified as early action projects
46 will not be dropped from the list. They may see them again in other program planning efforts.
47
48 Brenner questioned whether any priority items identified would have to be agreed upon
49 by both the City and Water District #10. Blake stated that was correct. That is why there is a
Committee of the Whole, 4/20/99, 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
49
team working on this to identify which items the entities would jointly agree to as early action
items and who should be doing those items.
Blake stated that, during the interview process, they asked if there are other people that
should be interviewed that haven't been. Four or five additional people have been identified to
interview. They are interviewing people and asking questions that have to do with their issues
and concerns about stormwater, perspectives and preferences about management options and
funding, early action recommendations, and other questions.
Another effort has been to identify a peer review committee, which is the outside review
panel. They have identified the skills that they would look for, which would be very strong
technical skills. There are a number of reviews that they need the committee for. They are
looking at having three people that have the skills and don't have any ties to the program. They
will also request additional review by other people that are interested.
Sutter stated that they are looking for a review of the scientific factors. Blake stated that
was correct. They are working on forming the committee. There is a list of names of people
who they are contacting.
Brenner stated that another option would be to ask people that would know other people
to make recommendations. Blake stated that they did. They asked the State Department of
Ecology (DOE), Robin Matthews, and the Water District #10 panel. Everyone agreed that it
needs to be an independent panel.
Brenner suggested Pat Jones for the committee.
Blake continued to state that the contractor is beginning to pull together the documents
for the assessment portion. In terms of urbanization and development, there has been quite a bit
of activity, which will come before the Council in June. She distributed a one -page summary of
the stormwater plan. The Planning Commission has been working on coming up with proposals
related to Lake Whatcom. One of the proposals is related to the density Transfer of
Development Right (TDR) program. The current version of that program is available. The
Planning Commission also unanimously passed a water resource protection overlay district and
changes to the stormwater in the land clearing regulations. In the overlay district, there will be
different uses allowed in the watershed. There are a number of recommendations geared toward
reducing impervious surfaces in the watershed.
Brenner questioned whether this overlay district is similar to the idea that the Building
Industry Association brought forward. Their idea was to collect monies for retrofitting old
systems. Blake stated that their suggestion was on setting up a funding mechanism. This is not
the funding mechanism.
Hoag questioned whether the Comprehensive Plan called for this. Blake stated that the
Comprehensive Plan called for an overlay related to the Urban Growth Areas (UGA), but they
expanded it to the watershed. This project can be refined. It is a start.
Brenner questioned whether the Lake Whatcom Watershed Initiative would have any
effect on this if it is passed. Blake stated that it is hard to predict. The concern about the
initiative is that people are being asked to pay a fair amount of money into a property purchase
Committee of the Whole, 4/20/99, 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
49
program. The question is going to be if people are willing to do that and if so, are they willing to
pay for correcting other problems, such as stormwater, that buying property will not correct.
There are funding mechanisms set up, but it might not be enough. A part of what they are doing
this year and in the first phase of the stormwater program is to identify the longer term funding
needs for some of these projects. The current funding level will not cover some of them.
Hoag asked the status of the overlay district. Blake stated that the Planning Commission
has to look at it one more time on April 22nd. They modified it based on suggestions made at
their last meeting. They adopted it unanimously.
Sylvia Goodwin, Planning and Development Services Plannin Manager, stated that it
would probably be brought forward to the Council as soon as June 15t .
Blake stated that there were also changes related to land clearing and stormwater. One
change regarding stormwater is the identification of the watershed as a special district. The
provisions are there and it has been recommended by the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
in the past. The Planning Commission recommends that they get rid of the exemption for single
family homes, which currently do not have to put in any kind of permanent stormwater facilities.
The challenge would be to figure out how to make it work.
Sutter questioned whether Blake was referring to new construction. Blake stated that it
was for new construction and also remodels.
Brenner questioned whether the County requires retrofitting of stormwater management
systems on existing development. Stormwater has already been identified as the worst offender.
Goodwin stated that this ordinance requires people who are expanding their building
more than 50% of the assessed value to bring it up to standards.
Blake continued to state that they have also updated population projections. They are
lower than a lot of the other numbers out of there. Regarding watershed ownership, they've been
gathering information from various groups that deal with protecting watershed to determine
which areas are the highest priorities. Other activities include education, a workshop on March
6th, and other miscellaneous items. Many of these things were a part of the education items that
the building community put together. This summer there will be a mural on a container used to
hold spill response equipment at Bloedel- Donovan Park. The website is listed and they will
update the website at the end of April. People can find a variety of reports.
Sutter suggested a link on the website to Washington State University. Blake stated that
this would have a different URL name from the County.
Blake continued to state that the Council member can give her a call with any other
questions. It is not too early to start giving her suggestions for program planning for next year.
The plan this year is to have the work program for 2000 adopted this September so that it can be
incorporated as a part of everyone's program in the budget.
2. DISCUSSION REGARDING OFFICIAL RETENTION OF PLANNING
COMMISSION RECORDS (AB99 -146)
Committee of the Whole, 4/20/99, Page 4
I Michael Knapp, Planning and Development Services Director, stated that typically most
2 of the records include letters that come in to the Planning Commission. The question that
3 they've raised is where the records should be located and how do they insure that there is one
4 record that is consistent. A lot of the information that the Planning Commission receives may
5 not reach the Council members.
6
7 Sutter stated that she spoke with George Reid, Information Services Manager, who
8 suggested that everything is put on the County's J drive. They can scan information into the
9 system. The Council can do that as well.
10
11 Hoag stated that Dave Wareing, Deputy Administrator, was looking into getting the
12 Council a scanner.
13
14 Goodwin stated that it is a lot of information for someone to have to scan. Some of the
15 information is bound materials, or is in color.
16
17 Sutter suggested that things that are difficult to scan could be listed as documents that are
18 available.
19
20 Brenner suggested that instead the Planning Department could just keep a file at their
21 facility that the Council members can look at.
22
23 Hoag suggested that anything that is three pages or longer be listed, and anything less be
24 scanned.
25
26 Brown questioned whether they were concerned with long -term retention. Knapp stated
27 that it is for two reasons. One is that, with all of the litigation that occurs, compiling an official
28 record is troublesome. It becomes a legal issue for the Prosecuting Attorney's office.
29
30 Goodwin stated that it hasn't been a problem in the past, but now that they are batching
31 items, such as rezones, it may be an issue. They used to keep all the general correspondence and
32 send the Planning Commission documents to the Council. If additional information comes into
33 the Council, then there is an agenda bill assigned. If there is an appeal, the Planning Department
34 retrieves its file and the Council agenda bill file is retrieved. It hasn't been a problem, that is the
35 way it has been done. That process means that the Council members may not get every piece of
36 correspondence.
37
38 Sutter stated that the process the Council office has established may help the issue. She
39 brings letters that she receives to the Planning and Development Committee to be addressed.
40 Knapp stated that would help.
41
42 There was discussion about Council members' correspondence being filed.
43
44 Knapp stated that they would keep a complete record. They would work on the
45 procedure to distribute items over three pages in length.
46
47 Brenner stated that they should just send a list of their information. The Planning
48 Department should get a list of information received from the Council.
49
Committee of the Whole, 4/20/99, 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
Dawson stated that it should be the responsibility of the chair of the Planning and
Development Committee to ensure that the correspondence gets to the Planning Department.
Knapp recommended that anything three pages or less could be sent to the Planning
Department. Anything more could be listed and the list be sent to the Planning Department.
Sutter moved to go into executive session to discuss items three and five.
Motion carried unanimously.
3. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S
DECISION ON FILE NUMBER CUP98 -0038. THE REQUEST IS TO CONSTRUCT
A 20,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING TO BE USED IN AGRICULTURAL
PRODUCTION. THE APPEAL WAS FILED BY LESA STARKENBURG-
KROONTJE FOR DARI -TECH (AB99 -093)
4. DISCUSSION WITH SENIOR DEPUTY PROSECUTOR DANIEL GIBSON
REGARDING POTENTIAL PENDING LITIGATION (AB99 -018)
(Clerk's Note: This item was withdrawn)
5. DISCUSSION WITH SENIOR DEPUTY PROSECUTOR KAREN FRAKES
REGARDING PENDING LITIGATION (AB98 -018)
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 6:50 p.m.
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
These minutes were approved by Council on Ma 4 , 1999.
ATTEST:
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Marlene Dawson, Council Chair
Committee of the Whole, 4/20/99, Page 6