HomeMy WebLinkAboutCommittee of the Whole May 13 19971
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
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Committee of the Whole
WORK SESSION
May 13, 1997
The meeting was called to order at 10 a.m. by Council Chair Ward Nelson in the
Council Committee Room, 311 Grand Avenue.
Alcn PrPCPnt-
Marlene Dawson
Barbara Brenner
Tom Brown
Alvin Starkenburg
Kathy Sutter
Absent:
Robert Imhof
Staff Present:
Michael Knapp, Planning and Development Services Director
Sylvia Goodwin, Planning and Development Services Manager
Carl Batchelor, Planning Services
Dan Gibson, Prosecuting Attorney's Office
1. REVIEW PROPOSED EMERGENCY DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS TO
IMPLEMENT THE PROPOSED WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN (AB97 -169)
Michael Knapp, Planning and Development Services Director, introduced Sylvia
Goodwin, Planning and Development Services Manager. Knapp distributed a handout (on file)
summarizing all changes made to the Comp Plan, the Development Regulations, and the
Findings since his department's previous handout.
Nelson wanted to proceed with the Development Regulations first, as he felt if his, as
well as other Council members', questions were clarified, it would show how the Development
Regulations and the Comp Plan are tied together.
Goodwin turned the meeting over to Carl Batchelor, Planning Services, who reviewed
changes with Council members. Reviewed was "Revisions to Exhibit A" (part of Knapp's
handout). Regarding item #3, page 1, he explained that this relates to 1995, when accessory
apartments and detached dwelling units were changed from conditional uses to administrative
approval uses; the ordinance for this expired June 15, 1996, so the apartments and units reverted
to conditional use status. All changes in #3 are to correct the references to the accessory
apartments and detached dwelling units. Nelson clarified those referenced are in the short -term
planning areas only.
Committee of the Whole, 5/13/97, Page 1
2 Gibson stated the farm worker accessory units are not affected by this item. These are
3 accessory units within short-term planning areas. Population should be concentrated within
4 urban growth areas rather than outside these areas. With more population located in the rural
5 areas, the smaller the urban growth boundaries. Gibson reminded Council members this is an
6 interim plan.
7
8 Staff stated all counties allow for accessory dwellings. Our Comprehensive Plan would
9 not allow accessory swellings outside the short-term boundaries, the reason being to maintain
10 our rural density. Staff is afraid accessory dwellings would double the density of rural areas.
11
12 Brenner pointed out she obtained data that shows the density difference has only been
13 10 %to 20 %. It has never been double density.
14
15 Staff stated this is something to come back to in 60 days.
16
17 The next item of discussion was #3, Chapter 20.20b. Batchelor clarified this addressed a
18 section of the Whatcom County Code (WCC) that has been deleted, so this number "b" should
19 be deleted also. He noted the intent is to change the reference to short-term planning areas only
20 from the permitted to the conditional uses. Gibson clarified that what is being proposed is that
21 accessory units be conditional uses but only be allowed in short-term planning areas in the
22 interim.
23
24 Starkenburg suggested framing the issues and noted for the record that there is a problem
25 with the WCC numbers which staff will continue to correct in order for this meeting to go
26 forward.
27
28 Other topics of discussion included being overly protective perhaps on designations in
29 the short-term planning areas; types of facilities proposed for inclusion only within short-term
30 planning areas; adoption of the maps; the Foothills and South Fork areas, which will be added to
31 the rural areas. Council brought up the fact that the maps were not correct and that would be
32 corrected at a later date. The maps were general. (Clerk's Note: end of tape 1 side A). UR
33 services; the need for concurrency; number 18, page 7, "Exhibit A " -- Section 20.22.052 should
34 be deleted; and conditional uses, especially schools.
35
36 Sutter moved to change language concerning URM zones on page 9, Section 20.22.150
37 and elsewhere, by deleting " apply" and substituting "allowed ":
38
39 "Items indicated by an " *" are not apply allowed outside Short Term Planning
40 Areas and outside Urban Growth Areas."
41
42 Motion carried unanimously.
43 Sutter resumed the conversation by discussing clustering, pages 11 -15. Batchelor replied
44 that #24 and #25 refer to rural residential and do not eliminate clustering. Clustering bonuses are
Committee of the Whole, 5/13/97, 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
what should be eliminated. This issue needs to be directed to Sandy Mackie.
Sutter moved to reinstate the deleted language on page 11, Section 20.32.010, with
follow up clarification from Mackie:
"...plan map and implement the appropriate subarea comprehensive plan policies.
in addition, it is the in4ef A of th s distfiet to provide the oppeftunity for- the
development of building sites whieh fna*imize the effleient use of both ener-g
and lmd by allewing an option for eltister-ing of r-esidential lots."
There was discussion on the motion.
Motion carried unanimously.
Residential Rural (RR) was discussed next. Gibson pointed out time was an important
issue regarding zone changing in that there was insufficient time to review the entire Title 20. In
this section, Council is not prohibiting cottage industries outside short-term planning areas in the
Comp Plan.
Starkenburg pointed out the application of conditional uses in the interim needs to be
completed by day's end. Gibson stated existing conditional uses - -if outside the short-term
planning areas - -would then become nonconforming uses, and any change to a nonconforming
use would occur by means of the conditional use process. This area must be revisited.
Sutter stated the bonus schedule has not been removed by staff. The cluster provisions,
on the other hand, have been removed but need to be reinserted.
Sutter moved to reinstate the cluster provisions and delete the bonus schedule in Title 20.
Motion carried unanimously.
Starkenburg questioned Section 20.36.059, page 17, regarding the County Mineral
Extraction Code. Gibson recommended language: "consistent with Code provisions pertaining
to mineral extraction ".
Nelson inquired of staff how water tables were addressed in the Interim Development
Regulations.
Knapp replied not at all.
Gibson stated virtually all the existing operations are currently in permitted sites. There
are almost no new MRLs that would require immediate processing in order for an extraction to
occur. This is not an issue in the very short term.
Committee of the Whole, 5/13/97, 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
Brown thought (9), page 21, was very restrictive. Code states in R10A if you want 4
employees, you have to have 10 acres.
Council wants clarification that this pertains only to cottage industries and not farming.
Because of the overlay maps, this may not be clear.
Nelson stated Council may wish to revisit this item at a later date, as well as page 22
regarding recreational uses in rural areas.
On pages 24 and 25, Batchelor stated maximum and minimum lot sizes and width and
depth do not need to be eliminated. These should be reinstated with asterisks stating "on parcels
not subject to the requirements of the proposed new resource land overlay
Gibson pointed out the possibility that those who are not subject to the resource land
overlay may voluntarily cluster.
Sutter moved to reinsert the above language. Gibson stated the concern about this would
be setting a minimum lot size inconsistent with a cluster for those who voluntarily cluster.
Starkenburg requested this issue return to Mackie and staff for review before action is taken by
Council. Nelson stated this item would return at next Tuesday's meeting.
(Clerks Note: tape 2, side A)
Starkenburg pointed out the intent of the agricultural resource overlay was for mixed
uses, but now appears to be focused on the agricultural side (Section 20.38.010).
Brown stated the Planning and Development Committee's intent was to save this land for
commercial agriculture.
Council had moved the motion for clustering to occur on 20% to 30% of the land. Staff's
written documents state 20 %.
30 %).
The issue was discussed.
Sutter suggested passing another motion right now to clarify this issue (to state 20% to
Gibson stated that Council said there needed to be room for flexibility.
Starkenburg stated Sandie Mackie was to work with this according to what the committee
had stated, not to work with it to 20 %.
Sutter proposed a clean up of the Purpose Statement and the applicability section. She
pointed out there are many problems with the remainder of this section and suggested language
Committee of the Whole, 5/13/97, Page 4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
to the effect that, as an emergency measure, all lands in the resource land overlay would be
required to be subject to the cluster subdivision provisions of the ordinance. Sutter stated this
language would eliminate everything after "development standards ". Nelson inquired if she
would be willing to bring up this issue if staff's suggested language is not acceptable at next
Tuesday's session. Sutter answered in the affirmative. There was further discussion about this
section and especially about subdivisions of larger acreage, drainfields, and clustering.
Starkenburg noted the intent for today's meeting was to discuss the basic issues of staff's
changes for next Tuesday's meeting. He noted Cherry Point language changes need to be
discussed in Planning and Development Committee. There was some discussion regarding
Council member comments to Planning and Development Services and Council direction to
staff.
2. REVIEW PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW OF
THE WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (AB97 -051L)
3. REVIEW STAFF WORK ON THE WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN (AB97 -051 THROUGH 051A)
OTHER BUSINESS
Knapp addressed the emergency ordinance regarding farmer markets. He noted it would
probably be an interim for six months and will be put soon on the agenda as an introduction item.
ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 12:10 p.m.
Jill Nixon, Recording Secretary
These minutes were approved by Council on Mqy 4 , 1999.
ATTEST:
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
L. Ward Nelson, Council Chair
Committee of the Whole, 5/13/97, Page 5