HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil June 15 19992
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
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Regular County Council
June 15, 1999
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Council Chair Marlene
Dawson in the Council Committee Room, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham,
Washington.
Also Present: Absent:
Kathy Sutter Robert Imhof
L. Ward Nelson
Connie Hoag
Barbara Brenner
Tom Brown
ANNOUNCEMENTS
After the flag salute, Council Member Dawson asked for a moment of silence for
the three children who were killed in the explosion at Whatcom Creek, and to also show
appreciation to the emergency response team.
OPEN SESSION
The following people spoke:
Rita Foley, South Lake Whatcom, expressed sympathy for the tragic pipeline
accident and wondered whether crews working in the area knew what they were
doing. She asked that there be a public hearing held on the changes to the
Development Regulations if any more changes are made. The public is being left
out and things are being done behind their backs that are detrimental to the
watershed, lake, and other parts of the County. She would like to be involved.
Also, the new committee that was formed, the Lake Whatcom Task Force, will come
and go. The County had done enough studies and established enough committees
to know that the County is in trouble. It is a proven fact. She is against the
Whatcom Reach project. She is involved with the County and City on projects. The
developers are shoving the environmentalists in the corner. She is trying to be
middle -of- the -road. However, the County is so crowded with people coming into
the County. It is very frightening. The newly formed committee is a cause of
concern by the loggers. She is for logging carefully done, and no development. At
her end of the lake, there are large timber holdings. The Nielsen Brothers own over
1,000 acres. There are other similar large timber holders. Logging should not be
stopped and the loggers should not be put in a corner where they feel that they
have to sell out to development. Lastly, she was concerned about the Sheriff's
Office. There are wonderful deputies. One of the deputies asked her to speak in
regard to the short amount of staff in the Sheriff's office. The response time is
driving them crazy. It takes an hour and a half to get from one end of the County
to the other end. She asked that more officers be added.
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/15/99, Page 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
Sutter stated that there would be public hearings on any issues that the
Council is proposing to be different than the Planning Commission
recommendations.
Hoag stated that what has been proposed is to only hold a public hearing on
items that will be different than the Planning Commission recommendations. If the
Planning Commission suggested a change, and the Council agrees with the change,
then there will not be a public hearing on that portion.
George Astler, 4815 Alderson Road, Birch Bay, stated that he is a member of
Chamber of Commerce. He complimented the County for improvements on Birch
Bay Drive and would like to see it paved like Grandview, not chip sealed. It would
not be good for the wheel chairs that go up and down the road. The safety
markings would be just like a regular County road. They contribute a large tax
base, and are finally seeing some of that money back. He would like to see a little
more. This particular section should be paved properly and smoothly.
Norm Mourer, Saltspring Drive, Ferndale, discussed a legal notice by the
Lummi Nation regarding water quality standards. This would allow the Tribe to set
the quality standards by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for water
entering Lummi Bay, Nooksack River, and a number of other waterways. The
implication is that it would set water quality far beyond the exterior boundaries of
the reservation. The impact would be hard on the farming industry, refineries, and
manufacturing along the coast. He would like the County to make an official
statement against this request. It has devastating, Countywide implications, to
have an outside source control water quality, which may or may not be attainable.
Dawson stated that the letter can be sent to the Department of Ecology
(DOE), in care of Tom Laurie, the Intergovernmental Liaison, who is taking public
comment until June 30, 1999. The mailing address is: P.O. Box 47600, Olympia,
WA 58504 -7600. The public is supposed to address the Tribe's authority and
capability. She moved to request Dave McEachran, Prosecutor, to address the
issue on behalf of the County.
Motion carried unanimously.
Brenner asked that McEachran address problems that may be created
regarding the Watershed Resource Inventory Area (WRIA).
Dawson stated that he will probably address that in his letter.
Hoag questioned where the EPA gets the authority to grant anyone the right
to set their own water standards. They are seeing more and more instances of
non - elected agencies creating law. Congress should be taking a look at this.
Dawson stated that it is an Executive Order.
Mourer stated that it has been implemented in other states. Once it is
issued, it is difficult to oppose.
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/15/99, Page 2
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
Brenner asked for an administrative opinion also.
Dawson stated that they will be discussing this at the watershed meeting the
next day.
Karen Frakes, Senior Civil Deputy Prosecutor, stated that McEachran intends
to consult with all branches of the County government.
Bob Wiesen, 3314 Douglas Road, Ferndale, felt that the Watershed Resource
Inventory Area (WRIA) is the most serious issue for a long time. The County needs
to pull out all the stops to stop the Lummi Nation from being able to set the
standard for water quality. They have demonstrated that they are not cooperative.
The WRIA is dead if this goes through. The County needs to go to federal
legislators. If the Lummis take control, then there will not be any possible public
intervention. They will set the standards without any negotiation.
Sherilyn Wells, 1020 Geneva, Bellingham, spoke on the Ordinance to adopt
amendments to the Whatcom County Title 20 Zoning Text (AB99 -184), and
encouraged the Council to hold a public hearing on the changes. She was stunned
by the deaths of the three young boys. It was a result of a land use decision in the
past, which allowed a pipeline to be put in the middle of the town. Also, they
decided that public health and safety was going to depend on technology and the
control of the pipeline. Most of the time, that would be okay, but when it isn't, this
is what happens. It is the same problem with the Development Regulations. They
are the imposition of technological control in an attempt to protect the public health
and safety of the drinking water. It is not good enough and it will not last. When
and if there is an immediate crisis, there will be severe consequences. The longer -
term cumulative impacts are the spike in the public health problems in 10 -20 years,
but it will be through the Council's hand that it happens. There is an example that
this is what happens when that kind of a choice is made. It is the non - structural
protection of the watershed that guarantees public health and safety. The revision
to Chapter 20.82, the Public Utility Section, has proposed clarification. However,
changes are substantive and are not consistent with the original intent, according to
Dan Taylor, former Planning Director. It is a major policy change. There are
tremendous problems in the way this was written, including the reference to the
sewer and water district's plan, which don't go through the Growth Management
Act's planning process. It is badly worded language that should have a public
hearing. The Council should not use the Determination of Non - Significance (DNS)
on these. It was issued for things that were not created. These did not exist at the
time the DNS was issued. That makes it fundamentally illegal to use the DNS.
Brenner encouraged Wells to come to the committee meetings and submit
testimony earlier.
Hoag reminded the public to bring concerns about the draft document to the
Planning and Development Committee. They shouldn't wait until a public hearing.
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/15/99, Page 3
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
Michael Knapp, Planning and Development Services Director, explained that
they invited a number of people to bring forward suggested changes. This
information from Sherilyn Wells never came before the Planning Commission's
public hearing. It is critical for the Planning Commission to be able to work with
whatever comes to them. They have not seen this or had a chance to work with it.
Wells stated that the package of information that she sent was in response to
what she saw at that time. This package of information is in response to this draft.
Knapp stated that the time to comment on the DNS was during the Planning
Commission process and has passed. It can be appealed. It is important to
respond in a timely way.
Wells stated that the December 8 adoption of the Development Regulations
were what the DNS was designed to address. At that December 8 meeting, she
raised the point that the County Comprehensive Plan called for a Lake Whatcom
Protection Overlay zone. They didn't exist. This is a new process requiring a new
State Environmental Protection Act (SEPA) Determination. They can't even rely on
the County's old Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). There are substantial new
conditions and information on the status of Lake Whatcom that are extraordinarily
serious.
Knapp stated that is debatable, but he would talk with her about it. They can
identify which items she feels are new.
Wells stated that it was raised before the Planning Commission.
Patrick Alesse, 4825 Alderson Road, Birch Bay, stated that he favored asphalt
instead of chip seal on Birch Bay Drive. It would be smoother, quieter, and better
protection for the road and shoulders. Also, he submitted a petition to request that
the County purchase two lots adjacent to Alderson Road and park, to preserve the
view of Birch Bay by the bridge and expand a well -used County park.
Brenner questioned whether they were the two lots that are currently for
sale. Alesse stated that they are. He will give the information to Roger DeSpain,
County Parks Department.
Patricia Alesse, 4825 Alderson Road, stated her appreciation all the work that
has been done on Birch Bay Drive. She favored asphalt over chip seal on the road.
Doug Campbell, Associated Project Consultants Engineer, spoke about the
Ordinance to adopt amendments to the Whatcom County Title 20 Zoning
Text (AB99 -184), specific to Gateway Industrial Zone Amendments and the
Garrett property. When he worked on the engineering for the Peace Arch Factory
Outlet Mall, the issue of the Gateway Industrial zone came up regarding the
flexibility that the zone needed to have to attract the project. It would not have
occurred had the Planning Commission and Council been flexible enough to attract
the market niche for that location. The way the zone text is written, the Y4 mile
rule works well. The size constraints from the City of Bellingham on the Bakerview
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/15/99, Page 4
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
property are not terribly constraining and can work. The text the way it is written
is well thought out. In addition, traffic is an issue at the Bakerview and I -5
corridors. In 1995, he worked with the Washington State Department of
Transportation (WASHDOT). When they moved, they had to put in two signals, one
on the east side and one on the west side of Bakerview at I -5. Along with that, the
County installed a signal at Bennett. The State indicated that they expect the level
of service to be fine until the year 2007. At that point, the community would have
to make improvements to that intersection. Fundamentally, the intersection has
the necessary capacity and was designed for commercial density. There is
adequate size and capacity at that intersection. Patricia Decker, City of Bellingham
Planning Director, suggested in a letter that the Gateway Industrial designation
allows for appropriate range of uses and scale of development, and provides for
flexible site plan review. This property will eventually be annexed into the City.
When it does, her letter states that the planned contract process allows ample
opportunity to respond to the interests of the parties, particularly the Birchwood
Neighborhood Association. They will have an opportunity to be a part of the
process. He asked that they move ahead with the text. He suggested that a public
hearing was not necessary.
Jack Petrie, 2955 Sunset, Bellingham, spoke about the Ordinance to adopt
amendments to the Whatcom County Title 20 Zoning Text (AB99 -184),
specific to Gateway Industrial Zone Amendments. This item is a finished piece of
work to which people can't resist adding more items. In 1995, Patricia Decker told
the audience at a meeting that it was the 79th meeting on the plan. The total
number of meetings on the Urban Fringe Subarea Plan has been well over 100. The
Gateway plan was long ago finished by the City and the County. The problem with
the public process is that people want to keep adding to it. All of the work,
testimony, compromises, and agreements that went into the plan, which the City
wrote and the County adopted, will be meaningless if it doesn't end. All that
testimony and work was necessary because the Growth Management process was
complicated. Eight months ago, the Bellingham City Council rightfully found that
the City has a shortage of commercial land. It converted the industrial land supply
in the Mt. Baker neighborhood to commercial land. That supply served only a small
need. The current Gateway plan, with the amendments put forward by the County
Planning Commission, should stand. The Council can accept the Commission's
recommendation, or the Council can do politics and throw away 10 years of work by
citizens on both sides of the issue. At some point, an end has to come.
Margaret Wisbey, 3207 West Maplewood Avenue, lives in the Birchwood
Neighborhood. She would like to sell her property but can't because she doesn't
know what her zoning is. She can't sell until they make a decision. She is tired of
the Birchwood group and people saying that they have to do a different zoning.
She is surrounded on three sides by the Garrett property. They have a lot of traffic
on West Maplewood. It is time to quit and let the neighborhood settle down.
Heather Wolf, Attorney with Langabeer, Tull, Sitkin and Lee Law Firm, 709
DuPont, Bellingham, and represents Paul Garrett. He is concerned about the years
of public process being ignored in favor of further changes to the zone. Her client
accepted many limitations imposed by years of compromise and public process.
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/15/99, Page 5
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
The Planning Commission's recommendations reflect extensive public testimony and
years of planning by the County and the City. She asked Council to affirm the
Planning Commission recommendations.
CONSENT AGENDA
Nelson reported for Finance and Administrative Services and stated that,
during committee, there was discussion regarding review of building and
personal property insurance coverage and catastrophic loss at Whatcom
County facilities (AB99 -209).
(Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.)
Nelson continued to state that the recommendation from Finance Committee
is to increase the earthquake insurance cap from $20 million to $30 million and
increase the extra expenses coverage from $2 million to $4 million.
Dave Wareing, Deputy Administrator, stated that they review the County's
insurance coverage from time to time. There is insurance for the public facilities
through The Unity Group. Mr. Barry Hanson is their representative. They want to
make a determination regarding the level of adequate insurance. Specifically, they
are dealing with sub - limits that come into play if there is a flood. The potential is
there for an earthquake. They are looking at raising the sub -limit from $20 million,
which is inadequate for the buildings in the civic center, to $30 million. It has been
recommended by administration that the minimum they should insure for is $40
million.
Barry Hanson, The Unity Group Insurance, explained that their concern came
about based on the total value of property insured for the County in the amount of
$73 million. The policy contract says that the most it will pay in one occurrence is
$50 million for anything other than earthquake and flood, and $20 million for
earthquake and flood. Based on the concentration of values, there was a potential
for being underinsured. These are options for the Council's consideration.
Brown questioned whether concentration of values refers to the proximity of
the buildings. Hanson stated that was correct. There is the Courthouse,
Courthouse Annex, and the Public Safety building, which total $51.4 million of
value. In the event of a catastrophic earthquake, $20 million would be significantly
underinsured if the Courthouse had a major structural failure. There are several
items that make up the insurance. One is the cost of reconstructing the building, it
addition to the cost of removing the debris and preparing the existing site. There
are also additional costs regarding extra expenses, such as expenses to continuing
operation and provision of services to the community.
Nelson questioned whether the sub -limit was only for earthquake and flood.
Hanson stated that was correct.
Nelson stated that the cap amount is for the maximum allowed during one
occurrence. Hanson stated that was correct.
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/15/99, Page 6
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
Nelson stated that if a flood was enough to demolish $30 million in the
property, everyone had better be getting on the Ark. That one is not the major
issue. Earthquake could be a major issue. This is not an easy decision. The
reason to look at it is that the Courthouse is a $30 million structure and the jail is
about $15 million to $20 million. The whole area would essentially have to be
wiped out to exceed the sub -limit cap. The question is whether it is reasonable that
could happen during an earthquake. It could, but it also means the other
structures in the vicinity are destroyed.
Dawson stated that destruction of that magnitude would qualify the area for
federal money.
Nelson stated that the County would still have to pay the federal money back
if it was received for a disaster, but the County would have to consider whether the
civic area was an appropriate area for rebuilding.
Hoag asked if an earthquake, followed by a tsunami, would be treated as
separate flood and earthquake events, or would they be considered under one
event.
Wareing stated that they would be one event. If both occurred as one event,
the sub -limit would apply currently at $20 million.
Hanson stated that he believed it would be one occurrence.
Hoag questioned whether other areas that have had catastrophic
earthquakes typically destroy a building structurally, so that it must be destroyed,
or a majority of the buildings just need to be repaired.
Hanson stated that building codes come to play when there has been a
catastrophic failure in a building. The current policy has $5 million in coverage for
the code. The code can require the entire building to be torn down if only a certain
percentage were to be structurally damaged. He did not have any specific statistics
on structural damage in other areas.
Brenner questioned the deductible. Hanson stated that it is 2% of the
insurable value, which is approximately $1.5 million.
Sutter asked what kind of earthquake - proofing measures have been done at
the Courthouse. Wareing responded that the Courthouse is heavily fortified. It is
sitting on pilings that have been driven under it to bedrock. The jail is also. That
was necessary due to the content of the soil underneath. There used to be a
landfill in this area some time ago. The new section of the Courthouse has been
heavily engineered to withstand major earthquakes. The problem is that the core
of the building on which the new section wraps around is the old building. He didn't
know the standard to which it had been built.
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/15/99, Page 7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
Sutter asked about the Civic Building. Wareing stated it is a steel pillar
building. They will reinforce that building so the floors remain welded to the
vertical columns. Once reinforced, it will be fairly stable and secure. It was built
for eight floors.
Brown stated that during the Finance Committee he believed $30 million was
an ample amount. However, the facts point to the possibility that the big
earthquake is coming. They need to be prepared, but not over - insured.
Hoag questioned whether the change in the sub -limit changes the deductible.
Hanson stated the deductible is based on 2% of the total insured value.
Nelson stated that the committee recommended $30 million for the sub - limit.
Brown stated that they also raised the other item by $2 million.
Nelson stated that was correct. They raised the extra expenses item by $2
million.
Pete Kremen, County Executive, spoke in favor of the increase to the $40
million amount to be good stewards of the public's investments and property. It is
an investment. This is good financial responsibility. Even though it will cost more,
it is the prudent thing to do.
Nelson moved to approve the increase to the $40 million cap and include
extra protection and or expense up to $4 million.
Brenner stated that her home has earthquake insurance, with a $25,000
deductible. She questioned what if the County were to go with a higher deductible.
Hoag stated that $1.5 million is a lot already.
Brenner asked how it worked exponentially if the County were to get a higher
deductible. Hanson stated they are currently being quoted under $400 per million
of earthquake coverage, which is a very low rate. The County is getting a volume
discount based on the entire holdings of the County. If he had to purchase excess
earthquake coverage, he would not be able to bring to the County a premium
quote.
Brown questioned whether aftershocks are considered a part of the initial
coverage, or a separate incident. Hanson stated that aftershocks within 72 hours
are considered the same event. It is associated with the tsunami question about
how much of the damage from the initial incidence is considered one occurrence.
Wareing stated that the extra expense sub -limit is raised from $2 million to
$4 million.
Hoag stated that the original proposal from the committee is for $30 million.
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/15/99, Page 8
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
Nelson stated that the administration is recommending the $40 million, which
is a $2,932 dollar difference per year.
Motion to insure at $40 million and $4 million for the extra expenses carried
unanimously.
Nelson reported for Finance and Administrative Services Committee and
moved approval of Consent Agenda items one through three.
Brenner removed item one.
Motion to approve items two and three carried unanimously.
1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY
AND ROB KELLY AND MARY DUMAS TO PROVIDE PUBLIC
INFORMATION AND EDUCATION SUPPORT TO THE WATERSHED
MANAGEMENT PROJECT FOR WRIA #1 UNDER ESHB 2514, IN THE
ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF $12,450 (AB99 -207)
Nelson reported from Committee and moved approval. There was a lengthy
discussion in committee. The recommendation from Committee was for approval.
Brenner stated that she hoped they would see totally asphalted roads from
now on, and no more chip seal. She questioned why they are doing another
interim contract and whether the County has gone out for a Request for Proposals
(RFP). She was also concerned that the people are mostly doing facilitating. She
questioned what the County was doing besides managing caucuses. She would
rather see the money focused on informing the public. If it is just facilitation that
the County needs, then she suggested they have the caucuses facilitate their own
meetings.
Brown state that was discussed at the committee level. The grant before the
Council is to set up the forum and accomplish what is needed to get through
October. He has had mixed views on it.
Nelson stated that this is out of the $100,000 allocated for the educated
process. Cooperative Extension has been designated as the lead agency for the
education portion. This is a placeholder until they can set up their education
program. The intent of this money is to see what the public wants to have, the
materials they are going to need, and the number and location of meetings.
Brenner questioned whether the County will go out for an RFP for the
permanent coordinator.
Sutter stated that the County Council already approved Craig MacConnell to
do that.
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/15/99, Page 9
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
Nelson stated that Cooperative Extension will be the lead agency establishing
how the $100,000 will be spent.
Wareing stated that the Public Information Education (PIE) Coordinator
position will soon be filled. This is to bridge the gap between then and now.
Brenner questioned how they are filling the PIE Coordinator position.
Wareing stated that it will be posted through the normal hiring process. This is
such a new area that they are learning how to do this along the way.
Brenner stated that she would like to see more education and less meeting
facilitation. Wareing stated that would come when they hire the coordinator.
These people are facilitating the public process to get the public's input at the
beginning of the process.
The Motion carried unanimously.
2. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN
AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE UNITED STATES
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR INSTALLATION OF ADDITIONAL
INSTRUMENTATION AT THE DEMING GAGE SITE AND A NEW STREAM
GAGE AT NUGENTS CORNER TO PROVIDE A MORE RELIABLE AND
ACCURATE SYSTEM FOR THE EARLY FLOOD WARNING SYSTEM, IN
THE AMOUNT OF $29,000 (AB99 -208)
3. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ADDITIONAL COUNTY ROAD
CONSTRUCTION FUND AUTHORIZATION FOR THE STRUCTURAL
PRELEVEL AND SHOULDER WIDENING OF BIRCH BAY DRIVE IN THE
ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF $117,000 (AB99 -209)
OTHER ITEMS
1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR PAYMENT OF COUNCIL MEMBER
TRAVEL AND /OR EXPENSES (AB99 -22H)
Nelson reported for Finance and Administrative Services Committee and
stated that the committee is having discussions on the reimbursement policies. The
Finance Committee is working with the administration to work out how this will be
handled in the future. The committee also recommended moved approval of
Brenner's request for payment of a seminar.
Hoag asked for approval to also go to the seminar on "How to Handle People
with Tact and Skill" on July 19. The amount of the seminar is $129 for each
participant.
Brenner questioned why the conflict resolution seminar had not been
scheduled.
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/15/99, Page 10
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
Dana Brown - Davis, Clerk of the Council, stated that there is not enough
interest by the Council, since several members are leaving office. The conflict
resolution seminar will instead be held at the beginning of 2000 to include the
newly elected Council members.
Dawson also asked to be included to attend the "How to Handle People with
Tact and Skill" seminar.
Motion carried 5 -1 with Sutter opposed.
2. ORDINANCE ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE WHATCOM COUNTY
TITLE 20 ZONING TEXT AND MAP (AB99 -184)
Sutter reported that they will be docketing the Cottage Industry
regulations (AB99 -220) for the Planning Commission. One of the things they
want to do differently with the Planning Commission docket is to send them the
Council's specific concerns of what they should address during their review.
Sutter reported for Planning and Development Committee and stated they
need to pull the Gateway Industrial zone item, File # 60 -98:ZT and File # 71-
98:ZT, and vote on whether there should be a public hearing on June 29. The
committee recommended 2 -1 to make substantive changes, and the County has a
commitment to pass this item by June 30.
Brenner stated that she feels there are substantive changes on which the
committee voted unanimously to make.
Hoag stated that several people spoke during open session against having a
public hearing on this historically lengthy process. However, they gave information
that was not accurate, and she wanted to fill in the gaps. They said that the
Bellingham City Council accepted the Plan. The Bellingham City Council accepted
the Subarea Plan, which was adopted on September 24, 1997. The County Council
has now the Development Regulations to implement the Subarea Plan. The County
Council is looking to make changes from the Planning Commission
recommendations because they don't feel it implements the Plan that was adopted,
which is what the County Council is supposed to do, by law. Also, someone asked
that they don't change the zoning. The County Council is not proposing to change
the zoning. It is designated Gateway Industrial. The County Council is identifying
which uses can occur in certain locations, in order to implement the Subarea Plan.
Ms. Wolf, who represents Mr. Garrett, was concerned that years of public process
may be ignored. That is her concern also. The Subarea Plan is a result of years of
public process. The County Council is now talking about making some changes to
those without allowing a public hearing. She read from the Subarea Plan regarding
limiting uses in the zone and allowance of commercial uses. The language from the
Planning Commission does nothing to discourage commercial uses in certain areas.
Section 4.22 of the Subarea Plan discusses the intent of the Gateway Industrial
zone. It is intended to provide concentrated areas located in proximity to major
transportation corridors that will present a favorable image of Bellingham and
Whatcom County to travelers. In areas immediately adjacent to full freeway
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/15/99, Page 11
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
interchanges, uses that serve the traveling public are provided. The proposal from
the Planning Commission was to allow areas serving the traveling public to be
within Y4 mile of the freeway interchange, which takes up almost the entire area.
The Planning Committee is asking that retail uses be allowed only within 770 feet of
the interchange, and they be designed to serve the traveling public. The Plan also
goes on to say that the designation intends to facilitate safe and efficient circulation
systems, etc. The underlying rationale of the designation is to supply a reasonable
amount of land for industrial development during the current planning period. The
recommendations from the Planning Commission allow commercial uses in the
other areas. There was testimony that said commercial land pays more. If there is
not language restricting commercial to a certain area, then they are not
implementing the Subarea Plan. What the County Council is supposed to be doing
is not accomplished in the document from the Planning Commission. It is not right
to cut the public out of it at this point just because the proponents have what they
want.
Sutter reiterated that if a hearing is to be held, it would only be on the
proposed changes by the Planning Committee to the Planning Commission
recommendations. There are already volumes of testimony on everything that is in
there and everything that is not in there. Everything is available in the record, if
they need to look at it. She wanted to ensure that they don't repeat what has
already been done, and that whatever they hear is specifically addressed to the
proposed changes.
Nelson questioned whether the request for a public hearing is because of the
proposal to change from Y4 mile to 770 feet.
Hoag stated that was a portion of the change. They also propose to include
language that says the uses outside of the 770 feet would be light industrial, unless
it is clearly more appropriate for commercial or is an accessory use to light
industrial. If that language is not in there, the entire area will be developed
commercially and the Subarea Plan would not be implemented.
Nelson stated that this entire area has been scrutinized for four to five years.
The Y4 mile designation has always been scrutinized. This whole area has been
questioned. Hoag is essentially halving that distance and modifying the
development requirements in those areas. He questioned what has been done
about the impacts of changing the designation to 770 feet, given the current
availability of what effective commercial areas are in those areas. They have also
heard the shortcomings of the commercial properties within the City. Where those
are going to be placed is a critical concern that the Council has to make sure to
address for the future. Choosing 770 feet was done arbitrarily. He had concerns
about jumping in the process, after years of public hearings and negotiations.
Brown stated that he liked the flexibility that is in the Plan now and would
like to maintain that. He was not in favor of cutting it down. He was satisfied with
the Plan.
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/15/99, Page 12
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
Sutter reminded people that commercial is not just retail. It also includes
office buildings and services that are not considered retail. By restricting
commercial development, they are also restricting those uses.
Brenner stated the motion was to restrict the retail, not the commercial. She
would like to have a hearing on anything to do with Gateway Industrial. A public
hearing is very appropriate and necessary. It is difficult for people to get the
message of what the County is doing. A public hearing with the County Council is
more highly publicized, and there is more information available. It is a subversion
of the public process to assume that everything is going to be done in committee or
by the Commission. Most of the Commission members would not be offended if the
County Council held a hearing. A lot of things have happened in the last few years.
There is no issue that would have too much public process. It has remained
controversial all these years, which should inspire the Council to hold the hearing.
Hoag stated that the regulations are supposed to be carrying out the Subarea
Plan. If they don't then the County is back in court. If the public wants to talk to
the Council about an issue, then they should not say they don't want to hear it.
She urged the Council to look at this issue until they have something that works for
that area and implements the Plan that was adopted. She questioned whether the
advertisement for the Planning and Development Committee specified the location
and issues to be discussed.
Nelson stated that some people view the attorneys representing the public as
public input.
Hoag stated that that she was wondering whether the people that are going
to be affected, besides the project proponents, were aware that the County Council
is even looking at this. She was concerned that they are not aware.
Dawson stated that their attorneys would get the word out. If they try and
work on this until they come up with something that works for the area, then there
will never be consensus.
Hoag stated that she was referring to people that don't have attorneys, not
project proponents. She was referring to people that live in the area and are
interested in what the County is doing in the area. It is important that what the
County Council does is done in a public forum, that people realize what they are
working on, and they can talk to the Council about their concerns. That is how they
get good legislation, not by saying that the Council doesn't want to talk to the
public.
Michael Knapp, Planning and Development Services Director, stated that the
public hearing, held by the Planning Commission, clearly outlined what was going to
be considered in that public hearing. The County Council has given authority to the
Planning Commission to hold that public hearing prior to the County Council
receiving the recommendations. The public did have adequate notice for the public
hearing. The committee meeting was not a public hearing. It was noticed, but
wasn't intended to draw the public. The attorneys that are there to represent both
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/15/99, Page 13
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
sides are hired by the neighborhood on one side and the applicants on the other
side. They have a network that is out there as well, even though that is not a
public hearing and doesn't require the same type of notification. There have been
so many public hearings on this.
Hoag stated that the Planning Commission public hearing doesn't consider
anything that the Council would consider changing, which happens after the public
hearing. That is why there is generally a public hearing at this level.
Knapp stated that the committee level isn't intended for a public hearing.
Hoag stated that the majority of the people don't know that this is
happening.
Brenner stated that she trusted Knapp's information about adequate
notification.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side 8.)
Brenner stated that regular people, without attorneys, generally give their
information to the County Council. She appreciated what the Planning Commission
does. They tend to summarize things and do a lot of work that the County Council
doesn't have to do. She believed that there is more information, is still a
controversial issue, and deserves a public hearing with a lot of public notification.
Sutter clarified that the Gateway Industrial amendments have to be voted
upon by June 30. The next meeting is on June 29. Should the County Council
decide not to hold a public hearing, that means that the amendment will come
forward as it is from the Planning Commission, and the Council cannot make any
changes to that document.
Brenner stated that she didn't understand how the committee can vote to
make a substantive change, and then the Council could vote not to have a public
hearing. It is slamming the door on the issue.
Hoag stated that in between this meeting and the Council meeting on June
29, the Planning Committee is having work sessions. If they vote to hold a public
hearing, then there will be ample opportunity to present a finished document on
June 29.
Sutter moved to have a public hearing on the Gateway Industrial amendment
to the Comprehensive Plan text amendments on June 29.
Motion failed 2 -4 with Hoag and Brenner in favor.
Hoag stated that money talks.
Dawson called Hoag out of order.
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/15/99, Page 14
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
Hoag stated that she probably was. That vote was too.
Dawson stated that there was plenty of discussion and a majority vote. If
they all carried on like that when they were unhappy with a vote, they wouldn't get
very far.
Hoag stated that this wasn't a matter of her being unhappy with the vote. It
is a matter of the public being excluded from the process.
Nelson stated that wasn't true.
Hoag stated that she saw all the lawyers for the proponents in the back
rooms prior to the meeting and she did not approve of what happened. If they
want her to go down quietly, then they have another thing coming.
Dawson asked Hoag to take a time out. It would be appropriate, so that she
could cool down. Otherwise she would ask Hoag to refrain from commenting for
awhile.
3. RESOLUTION ADOPTING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR OPEN SPACE
TIMBER APPLICATIONS (AB99 -210)
Sutter reported for Planning and Development Committee and stated that
this item will be held in committee for two weeks.
4. TEAMSTERS HEALTH CLERICAL COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
AGREEMENT (AB99 -211)
Dawson stated that this was taken off of the table for discussion. There was
also discussion during Committee of the Whole regarding litigation concerns, and
direction was given.
S. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO REAPPOINT DAN
TAYLOR TO SERVE ON THE WHATCOM COUNTY PARKS AND
RECREATION COMMISSION FOR HIS SECOND FOUR -YEAR TERM,
ENDING JUNE 30, 2003 (AB99 -212)
Nelson moved to approve the appointment.
Motion carried unanimously.
6. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPOINT BEN
MORRIS TO SERVE HIS FIRST TWO -YEAR TERM ON THE
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE,
ENDING JUNE 30, 2001 (AB99 -213)
Dave Wareing, Deputy Administrator, announced that this item has been
withdrawn.
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/15/99, 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
INTRODUCTION
Dawson stated that a fifth item had been added to the Introduction Items,
regarding the Budget Modification Request #5.
Nelson moved acceptance of the Introduction Items.
Motion carried unanimously.
1. RECEIPT OF AN APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION ON
FILE NO. CUP98 -0028, FILED BY TERRY BEARDSLEY, REGARDING
INSTALLATION OF A 24 SQUARE FOOT SIGN TO ADVERTISE A HOME
OCCUPATION (AB99 -168)
2. ORDINANCE REGARDING ESTABLISHING SPEED LIMITS ON CERTAIN
COUNTY ROADS (AB99 -214)
3. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY CODE,
TITLE 20, CHAPTER 20.42, TO ALLOW MEETING FACILITIES FOR
NATURAL RESOURCE -BASED EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES; AND
RELATED USES INCLUDING RENTAL CABINS OR OTHER LODGING
STRUCTURES, COOKING AND DINING FACILITIES, RETAIL SALES OF
MEETING SUPPLIES AND GIFTS AS A CONDITIONAL USE, IN THE
FOOTHILLS SUBAREA, SOUTH FORK VALLEY SUBAREA, THE
NEWHALEM EXCLAVE AND THE BAKER LAKE EXCLAVE (AB99 -215) ER
4. AFFORDABLE HOUSING STUDY RESULTS AND FUTURE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING PROGRAMS (AB99 -216)
S. ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 5 TO THE 1999 BUDGET (AB99 -221)
REPORTS AND OTHER ITEMS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS
Dawson stated that she might start a policy of addressing items that have to
do with County business and are going to be on cable television. On June 24th and
26th, the May 25th Lake Whatcom Management Joint Special Meeting will be
telecast on Channel 10. Also, a three -part series on Y2K issues will be telecast on
Mondays at 8:00 p.m. from June 21St through August 16th. It is regarding getting
prepared for unplanned emergencies. She announced several upcoming meetings.
Sutter stated that the Barrett Lake Steering Committee met for the first time
this Monday. They are defining the scope of the work and tasks. Also, the
Economic Development Strategies work is progressing. They have heard from all of
the jurisdictions in Whatcom County, with the exception of Nooksack. They are
working on compiling information for a consultant to write a draft of an overall
economic development strategy for Whatcom County and all of the jurisdictions.
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/15/99, 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
Brenner stated that there was a discussion in Public Works regarding
alternatives to road spraying (AB99 -202). There are a few ways a property
owner can maintain their own property along roadways. They need to contact the
Public Works Department, and there are rules and restrictions to be followed. Right
now, there are 1,000 miles of County roads, half of which are sprayed. There are
only 53 people who have joined this program. She urged people to begin
maintaining their own properties.
Brown stated that, by allowing the County to maintain the right -of -way, they
may be prolonging the life of the road. 53 people are actually a high number to
have in the program, if it is compared to other areas. Also, the Council looked into
the possible purchase of some timberland on the north fork of the Nooksack River.
There hasn't been a report on that. There is now an opportunity for the owner to
take advantage of another offer.
Sutter questioned whether the other offer would still preserve the timber.
Brown stated that he couldn't go into that. There should be a status report.
Administration will check into this matter.
Nelson stated that the Council already approved that.
Brenner stated that the Council voted unanimously to do that. It was with
Jake Steiner.
Dawson suggested that the Council follow up with the staff.
Dawson stated that she was headed to an Association of Counties
conference.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m.
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
These minutes were approved by Council on July 13 , 1999.
ATTEST:
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Marlene Dawson, Council Chair
Regular County Council Meeting, 6/15/99, Page 17