HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning February 24 19981
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
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Planning and Development Committee
February 24, 1998
The meeting was called to order at 3:00 p.m. by Committee Chair Kathy Sutter in the
Council Committee Room, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
A]-,n prPCPnt-
L. Ward Nelson
Barbara Brenner
Absent:
None
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL
1. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING
ORDINANCE TO REVISE THE STANDARDS FOR ACCESSORY HOUSING
UNITS, THE ZONES AND LOCATIONS WHERE THEY ARE PERMITTED,
AND THE PROCEDURE FOR PROCESSING APPLICATIONS (AB98 -072)
Sylvia Goodwin, Planning and Development Services Planning Manager, submitted
handouts regarding zoning in the County, both inside and outside of the Urban Growth Areas
(UGA).
Nelson gave a history of the accessory dwelling issue in Whatcom County.
There was discussion regarding decreasing density in the Lake Whatcom watershed,
areas of the County where accessory dwellings are being installed, previous accessory dwelling
requirements, prohibition of accessory dwellings, temporary versus permanent accessory
dwellings, and the size of the temporary dwelling units.
Brenner stated that she had a problem with Finding #9 on Council packet page 175. They
are talking about future zoning that allows this. Current areas are out of compliance because the
County did not define which areas are historic zoning patterns.
Brenner moved to amend Conclusion #2, "A significant increase in residential density
outside of urban growth areas wi14 may create additional demands..."
Motion carried unanimously.
Brenner moved to amend Conclusion #5, "Accessory housing units in zoning whie h
would result in densty greater than one unit per two acres outside of Urban Growth Areas
should not be permitted shall not increase density unless the unit and accessory unit are
consistent with underlying zoning."
Goodwin stated that she would refine the wording on this Conclusion.
Planning and Development Committee, 2/24/98, Page 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Brenner stated that her intent for Conclusion #5 is that parcels under five acres in size
should be allowed to have accessory dwellings if the zoning density is not increased.
There was discussion about the Growth Management Hearings Board rulings and intent,
allowable sizes for accessory dwellings, other counties' similar regulations, installing an
accessory dwelling instead of creating a plat, and appeals of the Whatcom County
Comprehensive Plan.
Sutter suggested a friendly amendment to Brenner's motion to change the language to,
"Outside of Urban Growth Areas, where zoning densities are greater than one unit per five acres,
accessory housing units shall not be permitted unless underlying zoning density is not exceeded."
Brenner accepted Sutter's friendly amendment.
Nelson proposed a friendly amendment to Brenner's motion to change ensure that
easements and right -of -ways don't prohibit anything.
Brenner accepted Nelson's friendly amendment.
Motion carried unanimously.
Brenner stated that she did not want prosecution as required in Exhibit, section 20.20.131
under Penalties. If someone in good faith is trying to submit documentation correctly they
should not be prosecuted. She would rather they just revoke the permit.
Karen Frakes, Prosecuting Attorney's Office, addressed the legalities of requirements that
are subject to prosecution.
Nelson moved to change all of the square footage in section 20.20.131 from 1,000 to
1,248 square feet throughout the ordinance.
There was discussion about temporary and permanent housing, affordable housing,
housing for the handicapped, housing for families.
Motion carried unanimously.
Elizabeth Gomes, Bellingham, commented about room for the handicapped.
Frank Bruzika commented on the effect of increased density in rural zoning.
Dan Gibson, Prosecuting Attorney's Office, commented about his neighborhood.
Claudia Holland spoke about what happens to the accessory dwellings after the family
member leaves.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape 1, side A)
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
Brenner moved to amend the language in Exhibit A, page 2, #6, "...larger than 1,000
square feet of floor area;"
Motion carried unanimously.
Sutter clarified that specification will be made throughout the ordinance.
There was discussion regarding the provision of accessory dwelling on long plats and
short plats.
Nelson moved to add language in #10 on page 3 of Exhibit A to exclude easements and
rights -of -way.
The committee concurred.
Brenner moved to add a #12 to page three of Exhibit A, "Detached accessory units shall
not be a visual blight to the neighborhood."
Sutter stated that language was too subjective. They would need to be more specific.
Goodwin cautioned against such restrictions. Location and screening would be better
measures to use.
Brenner moved that the accessory dwelling in all zones must be closer to the main
dwelling than to the adjacent property lines, unless there are physical constraints, which would
require approval of the adjoining property owners. In all cases where the accessory dwelling is
closer to the adjacent property line, there will be sufficient screening between the two units to
minimize visual impacts.
Knapp stated that they would come back with refined language to express Brenner's
intent. Also, it is important to not allow dumping of old mobile homes in the County. It
becomes a problem over time.
Sutter stated that she would like a limitation in this ordinance on the year of manufacture
of the mobile home.
There was discussion about the age of mobile homes, and building standards.
Sutter stated that, in all sections numbered .132, they will be adding a #12 and a #13.
One is for the placement of the home on the property and the other has to do with the age and
screening of any mobile home.
Nelson moved to strike #11 on page three of Exhibit A. There are currently 162 five -acre
parcels in a certain area of the watershed. Commercial forestry, which is the majority of the land
Planning and Development Committee, 2/24/98, 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
mass around the watershed, requires 20 -acre minimum parcels. There is adequate coverage for
protection of the watershed from these parcels.
There was discussion about the density in the watershed, the urban growth area, the
objective in the watershed, allowable size of homes in the watershed, Comprehensive Plan
policies for the watershed, and equal application of the law to all.
Motion failed 1 -2 with Nelson in favor.
Kathy Bovenkamp, Building Industry Association, stated that they are supportive of
accessory dwelling units for affordable housing, but are also concerned about protecting people's
investment. They support the Planning Commission's recommendation of 1,000 square feet.
Brenner moved to amend language to section 20.40.155, "...to accommodate agricultural
employees who work on site, provided:..."
Sutter suggested a friendly amendment to add language, "housing or camping facilities
for households where at least one member of the household derives a minimum of 65% of his or
her income from agriculture on that property."
Brenner accepted Sutter's friendly amendment.
Brown suggested a friendly amendment that the income level requirement be on the
major wage -earner in the family.
Brenner accepted Brown's friendly amendment. The income level should also be based
on the household income derived from work on the property.
The committee concurred with Brenner's amended motion.
Goodwin stated that these are enough changes to the Planning Commission's
recommendations to require a public hearing.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape 1, side B.)
There was discussion regarding residential uses allowed in the Resort Commercial
District zoning, wells and septic systems, parking for the accessory dwelling unit, the size of
attached dwelling units, setback requirements, and deed restrictions on the sale of the property.
Sutter moved to include language in the agricultural section to record a deed restriction
that states such dwellings and land cannot be sold separately from the farm except in the event
that the zoning is changed to another zone district that would permit the land division.
The committee concurred.
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
There was discussion regarding private covenants on parcels with accessory dwelling
units and changes to the subdivision code.
2. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING
MAP FROM LIGHT IMPACT INDUSTRIAL (LII) TO URBAN
RESIDENTIAL FOUR UNITS PER ACRE (UR4) FOR APPROXIMATELY 33
ACRES IN THE BIRCH BAY - BLAINE SUBAREA (AB98 -084)
Nelson moved to recommend approval.
Sutter gave a history of the project. This ordinance will revert the area back to its
original zoning.
Motion carried unanimously.
ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at approximately 5:00 p.m.
Jill Nixon, Record Transcription
ATTEST:
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Kathy Sutter, Council Member
Planning and Development Committee, 2/24/98, Page 5