Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning January 21 1997WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL Planning and Development Committee January 21, 1997 The meeting was called to order at 9 a.m. by Committee Chair Alvin Starkenburg in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue. Also Present: Marlene Dawson Kathy Sutter Absent: None REVIEW OF THE WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SUBAREAS: POINT ROBERTS, BLAINE/BIRCH BAY (AB96 -051) Staff Also Present: Ward Nelson, Council member Barbara Brenner, Council member (afternoon session) Tom Brown, Council member Dan Gibson, Prosecuting Attorney's Office Elizabeth Sjostrom, Planning and Development Services Carl Batchelor, Planning and Development Services Starkenburg announced the first hour (9 - 10 a.m.) would be for discussion with staff regarding Blaine, Birch Bay and Point Roberts in order to review the remaining issues of these areas. Discussion was held in the Council Committee Room. Starkenburg directed the discussion to Point Roberts. Dan Gibson, Prosecuting Attorney =s Office, pointed out there have been no particular concerns regarding this area. He noted that due to the proximity of Vancouver, B.C., this area =s population increases on weekends to approximately 15,000 from 1,300 permanent residents. Infrastructure concerns include the adequacy of water and sewer. Road issues continue to be ongoing. Elizabeth Sjostrom, Planning and Development Services, noted that Point Roberts has a strong interest in maintaining a character plan and suggested this plan might be incorporated into the Comp Plan in the design or land use chapter. Carl Batchelor, Planning and Development Services, stated the existing character plan was enacted as a development land use regulation and referenced in their special district zoning overlay and used as part of the development approval process, primarily for commercial. Sutter inquired about law enforcement services. Gibson stated the County has a satellite Planning Minutes, 1/21/97, Page 1 in Point Roberts, noting that two deputies are stationed there. He asked about the long -range future of this area, stating that the eventual goal should be incorporation. Many issues heard from the residents are ones which could be addressed by a municipality. Sutter pointed out there is insufficient population, to which Gibson replied that should be part of the discussion. Skip Richards stated he wished to speak on behalf of Bill Geyer about Century Holdings= zoning for the public hearing. Nelson stated there are water and sewer access limitations to the Vancouver, B.C. area. Batchelor reported there is sufficient water under contract to supply the projected population based on current zones (to 2038). Gibson stated that the concurrency requirements come into place when the County would be unable to demonstrate adequate water or septic capacity; development would then be denied. Moving to Blaine and Birch Bay, Starkenburg asked staff if the Blaine Urban Growth Area (UGA) to the south should be serviced by Blaine or Birch Bay Water District. Gibson stated one of the observations needing to be made is that resource lands are not discussed due to characteristics of the area. Sjostrom pointed out that Blaine and Birch Bay are characterized by high tourist populations and the many seasonal residents. She spoke to the need for land justification to the Growth Management Hearings Board (GMHB). A land needs analysis has also been completed of developed and undeveloped lands. Gibson noted there is a dispute resolution mechanism for jurisdictions which are experiencing tension over the placement of their boundaries. The Birch Bay Water and Sewer District was able to capitalize on a federal grant program to construct secondary sewer treatment facilities, so the Birch Bay area is well served. The remaining issues are water and soils, which raise questions regarding long -term pollution in the basin (California Creek/Dakota Creek Watershed), which area being addressed. Starkenburg then directed the discussion to water service areas regarding Council =s authority vs dispute resolution. The water district is looking to the County to resolve this issue, while individual Council members feel the matter needs to go before the Dispute Resolution Board. Gibson stated the County is authorized to set boundaries which, of course, can be challenged by the affected jurisdictions. These boundaries are based on the County =s best estimate of who is best able to serve the particular area and what the relative needs are of the competing jurisdictions regarding this area. There is also a dispute resolution mechanism in place in law to address the issue of competing jurisdictions regarding water service areas. Whether this may be the preferred mechanism in this case needs to be considered closely. Sutter inquired if there were a timeline. Gibson responded no, that was not in the County =s control, noting its posture would be to indicate an area is going to be experiencing urban growth and designate it as such. Speaking to the time - consuming arguments, Dawson thought the idea of going before the Board was a good one; however, she could understand the public =s concern that the Board members are not elected officials. Starkenburg pointed out the district and city both have much at stake. Nelson clarified the situation. Gibson stated Blaine and Birch Bay are both prepared to state they are able to service the area if it were to be placed within their growth Planning Minutes, 1/21/97, Page 2 boundary. One appropriate consideration would be the cost of infrastructure and support for existing systems as a potential critical matter. Nelson called attention to the difference in rate structure for sewer and water services from the city of Blaine and Birch Bay Water District. Gibson replied that if -- regarding rate structure- -there is a good alternative dispute resolution mechanism, the question must be asked if the County would decide this issue or if there is an alternate entity to make this decision. Gibson noted that one of the key features of the southeast corner of the Blaine area is its proximity to the border, I -5, and rail. From a planning standpoint, he wondered if those features have come together in a manner requiring further planning consideration in terms of placement of the intermodal transfer facility and, if so, he asked how this bears on existing residental zoning concerns in those areas; e.g., Custer. Sutter inquired about the aquifer recharge area. Sjostrom replied she was not sure if Blaine were still proposing this. Gibson responded that in view of the GMHB =s decision, Blaine would be interested in addressing issues regarding land needs analysis, critical area constraints, vacation home population, and other various issues which bear upon the question of whether or not Blaine needs all the territory it has identified for its UGA. Another question needing to be asked is what are their capital facilities plans to address the servicing of these areas. In view of the questions raised in the GMHB =s decision, it would be expected that the city of Blaine has been working on this and is either prepared to address it today or submit something in the very near future. Sutter asked if this is not allowed in the UGA by the GMHB, does the County have a responsibility to address its concerns regarding the aquifer recharge area? Gibson stated this would be part of the critical areas issue. It is, however, a part of the County =s general concern. Other areas needing to be included in the discussions were: the Blaine Wellhead Protection Area Plan; the I -5 Corridor, particularly at the Birch Bay - Lynden intersection; and the long -range prognosis for the Birch Bay area. Batchelor pointed out more recent information on water and sewer is available than what Council members already have. (Clerks Note: This section was adjourned at 9:40 a.m.) Starkenburg called the meeting to order at 10 a.m. in the Council Chambers. He first noted that at the last committee meeting regarding the urban fringe areas around Bellingham, committee =s time ran out and Judy Tilley wanted to testify regarding south Yew Street. Starkenburg stated he had a telephone conversation with Judy Tilley, who expressed her concerns but still wanted to testify publicly. Judy Tilley, 1650 Galbraith Lane, Bellingham, read from a letter to Council (on file) regarding the Yew Street Road. She requested Council to leave the area as it is. Planning Minutes, 1/21/97, Page 3 Directing discussion to Point Roberts, Skip Richards was present for Bill Geyer on behalf of his clients regarding the status of 52.6 acres regarding service. Batchelor addressed this question, stating this area has not yet been platted. He noted his department will be reviewing this area. Richards requested information regarding what the client needs to bring forward so Council can make its decision. The location of this area was discussed. Starkenburg requested staff respond to Geyer's November 21, 1996, letter. Richards questioned the zoning. Starkenburg reviewed the schedule for Richards. Gibson stated the primary concerns are the character of the existing area, availability of services, transportation infrastructure, water /sewer, law enforcement, school, etc. Starkenburg spoke to valid documentation. Hearing no one else wishing to speak to Pt. Roberts, Starkenburg moved the discussion to Blaine and the service providers. He requested new information and dialogue, especially regarding the status of negotiations between the water district and Blaine. Anthony Mortillaro, Blaine City Manager, stated Blaine =s proposed UGA is similar to what has been previously proposed. The water and sewer service contract has one year remaining. The level, amount and rate regarding water needs to be resolved. He stated there is optimism regarding the outcome of the discussions. There is, however, sufficient water supply to meet Blaine's demands. Canery Row and Semiahmoo were discussed. Well replacement is being completed. The wellhead area is also being restored. Birch Bay needs to secure its own water rights. Blaine continues to pursue additional water rights. A ramping down is anticipated for the water supply to Birch Bay. Perhaps a base amount of water could be settled. Pat Sizemore, General Manager, Birch Bay Water and Sewer District, showed maps to Council members outlining water facility boundaries (display only). All Birch Bay's water comes from the city of Blaine. The second map showed the sewer system for the urban boundaries. A third map showed Birch Bay's proposed water treatment plant instead of a pipeline. PUD #1 would be hooked into this pipeline and would service their area sufficiently. This is a 20 -year plan. Mortillaro pointed out there are some areas of overlap regarding service. Dawson asked about the dispute resolution board regarding the disputed boundaries. Sewer rates were discussed briefly. In response to the same question, Mortillaro requested the County to restrain from interjecting itself into a contractural dispute, stating there are mechanisms already in place regarding this dispute. There are vested developments looking for service in the areas. He then addressed water and sewer rates paid by the consumer. Dawson wished her question be clarified regarding the County setting the boundaries in dispute. Gibson stated the County does not establish water service areas; it does set the UGA boundaries. Nelson questioned the capacity and zoning of the water district currently in the district boundaries. Sizemore noted the projection is for an entire service area greater than the legal boundaries and includes some Gateway Industrial property, as well as others. Bob Carmichael, 1700 D Street, Bellingham, attorney for Blaine Water and Sewer District, clarified the ongoing meetings among the cities and state agencies discussing the water issues by suggesting the County be present at a meeting. He stated the current language in the Plan does not foster optimism regarding this issue. He referred to a letter to Council dated Planning Minutes, 1/21/97, Page 4 January 17, 1997 regarding proposed water and sewer systems. Effort is taking place but solutions are not realistic before the Plan is adopted. He suggested his above - referenced letter be reviewed. Mortillaro stated he has a copy of that letter also and would like to discuss it with Carmichael. Carmichael stated he is submitting new information on sewer and water rate comparisons, as well as comparisons of water and sewer connection charges among Birch Bay, Ferndale and Blaine. He also spoke to district development in the Birch Bay area, as well as fire services. The district is able to provide levels of service with the understanding the water treatment plant is built. Sutter asked if the figures for rates and hookup fees are available for when and if the new water treatment plan is built; they are presently unavailable. Gibson posed a question: Birch Bay UGA is not an area heavily influenced by basic resource activity. He requested Sizemore address this issue to clarify the correctness of this observation. Starkenburg requested Sizemore address this in written form. Don Montfort, commissioner, Birch Bay Water and Sewer District, spoke to the decision on what to do about the water. For him, the basic issue was the need to finance that project. The north area is the one which will be growing in the future. If this issue is not resolved, the residents of Birch Bay will be the ones getting the financial burden. He stated they are looking to the County to represent them. The second choice would be to work out a solution with Blaine. Questions included commission work regarding long -range planning and other options considered. Sutter pointed out incorporation needs to be discussed at some time. Sjostrom stated incorporation could be a viable alternative. Nelson asked if the Custer area were a consideration regarding the Loomis Trail Road industrial area. Sizemore responded regarding service areas, calling attention to the large expenditure. Bill Grant, President of Gold Star Resorts, addressed Gold Star's interests, mainly water, noting Birch Bay is highly urbanized and does not want to be incorporated at this time. He spoke to the outlay of the area and the economic impacts on the County. His company has purchased more acreage and has been working on a golf course. Development is proceeding cautiously due to the water situation. Financing is difficult. He wondered why the water district is putting existing development areas in jeopardy. Grant indicated that the outlet mall would double in size if sewer and water lines were available. Jon Sitken, 1616 Cornwall, Suite 209, speaking on behalf of Loomis Trail, noted the State Department of Health has a hearings board of appeals. He stressed the importance of resolving issues through an interlocal agreement. Starkenburg announced the discussion will return to the city of Blaine. Planning Minutes, 1/21/97, Page 5 Anthony Mortillaro, city of Blaine, commented on the UGA, focusing on protecting critical areas, Drayton Harbor, and the aquifer recharge area. Service to roads from central Blaine to Semiahmoo is provided by the city of Blaine, which also provides service to County residents. He felt that those should be in the Blaine GMA area. Fire and police personnel daily travel through and service County areas. The Drayton Harbor main line has been serviced. The city has committed to a $1.1 million contract for expansion of the waste water treatment plant. The UGA has been established solely on its historic service district boundaries. Birch Bay must have a secured water supply before expanding. In the next twenty years, 8,500 residents will be living in Blaine. Approximately 50 percent of land in the city of Blaine is owned by outside individuals, of which 42% are living there less than six months out of the year. Much of the land in the city of Blaine is inappropriately zoned. Starkenburg requested clarification on the acreage in the critical areas; Mortillaro responded that further refinement needs to be done. Gibson asked what unit sprawl devices Blaine has. Mortillaro stated they are looking at annexation policy, which will establish what and when in an orderly fashion. He also discussed the infrastructure. Financial feasibility will determine much of that. Gibson questioned impact fees. Mortillaro responded that the city will be approaching its Council to impose impact fees. He noted all the critical infrastructure plans have been developed. Annexation of the south Drayton Harbor area was discussed. Mortillaro stated the city has not determined exactly the timing on annexation of this area. However, if they continue the current policy of taking an active role in protecting this area, action on annexation must be done at a more accelerated pace than is currently being done. Brown questioned planning for mineral resources areas. Mortillaro responded that he was not aware of any other areas within their planned UGA. Sutter asked if Drayton Harbor itself were considered a resource area. Mortillaro responded perhaps, depending on the shellfish production and the wildlife habitat. Janet Hanson, a member of the Drayton Harbor Shellfish Protection District Advisory Committee, proposed the Comp Plan needs to consider that the groundwater be drinkable, the lakes, rivers and streams be fishable, and the marine waters be harvestable. She requested language in the proposed Comp Plan about the value of shellfish harvesting, including a watershed approach. Timber harvesting, limits on buffers, and planning development should not affect people downstream or the harbor. Sutter asked about a potential $1 million shellfish harvest, and what those figures are based on. Hanson responded that they are based on the income of the shellfish growers, as well as the income of the Lummi shellfish harvesting. Sutter requested those figures. Sjostrom pointed out Council has a document from Geoff Menzies that would answer that question. Starkenburg announced they will conclude the Blaine area, Birch Bay, Custer and other Planning Minutes, 1/21/97, Page 6 areas after lunch. (Clerks Note: Meeting adjourned for lunch at noon) The meeting was reconvened at 1:05 p.m. Jon Sitkin, 1616 Cornwall Avenue #209, representing Loomis Trail (handout on file), requested inclusion of this area in the UGA for Blaine. Capacities have been extended and services are available. A no protest annexation agreement was signed years ago with Blaine. He urged an interlocal agreement be developed. Connie Hoag, 2633 Halverstick Road, Lynden, spoke to the aquifer recharge zone for Blaine, noting the mineral designation area is in the aquifer recharge zone. She was concerned about spills in the area. Hoag listed spills by mining operations that affected wetlands, quoting information received from the Department of Energy (DOE). These listed events happen in the course of gravel business. She thought Council should be concerned about having mining operations over aquifers. Gibson stated it is an unfortunate geographical fact that gravel is an excellent water - bearing medium. He asked for her suggestion. She replied that there are a number of sites not over aquifers serving cities. Given the number of people dependent on public water supply, it makes sense to protect that supply. Sutter pointed out that mineral resource lands designated for east of Blaine are outside Blaine =s aquifer protection area. Jean Freestone, 3200 Vallette Street, stated the testimony of Geoff Menzies should disclose he is also an employee of Cooperative Extension. Menzies testified before the Growth Management Hearings Board (GMHB) without revealing his employment at WSU Extension. May Grabel, Birch Bay Chamber of Commerce, stated the Chamber of Commerce would like to endorse water district lines now designated. Additionally, she stated the Chamber would like the area to remain Birch Bay, not a part of Blaine. There are currently at least 3,600 residents within the area; however, she stated the number is actually closer to 8,000. Birch Bay is serviced with water, sewer and fire districts. Lines are in place for schools and education. Grabel noted there is much concern over police protection, safety, engineering, and maintenance of parks and recreation. A grass roots organization is considering stepping forth with incorporation efforts. The residents voted not to become an incorporated city; however, because of police, road, and park concerns, some people are beginning to recognize the importance of incorporation. The original turndown for incorporation was due to fear of tax increase. Brenner inquired about the population of that area, and Grabel responded by pointing out the new units that have been recently built, which total 1,000 units. Currently, 67 businesses belong to the Birch Bay Chamber of Commerce. Also, there are 96 lodging units in this area. There are over 1,100 registered voters for the incorporated election. Sjostrom asked what the anticipated growth needs in the growth arena might be. Grabel responded that some development is needed in Birch Bay, especially stores -- grocery, hardware, Planning Minutes, 1/21/97, Page 7 e.g., as well as franchise organizations. Banking services are not there because of a lack of police service. Also, engineering has not responded to the community needs of roads and flooding. The Chamber would like the current parks and recreation facilities to be maintained. Sjostrom also inquired if the proposed commercial zoning is adequate for a healthy economy, to which Grabel responded in the affirmative. Sutter asked about the demographics of the population. Grabel stated 30% is Canadian; 20% retired. The rest of the population is overflow from the surrounding areas for job or business reasons. Gene Hanasack, 8601 Semiahmoo Drive, spoke to his opposition to be included in Blaine's UGA. He is currently served by Birch Bay Water and Sewer District. He chose to join Birch Bay because it is a better run system, has infrastructure, and development pays as it goes. Blaine has a history of problems providing services to its own community, let alone an extended growth area. Also, roads in Blaine are a low priority. The sales tax on gasoline has not helped improve the situation. The lack of police is well documented in the Blaine area because of the border problems. Blaine is asking to extend into an area they cannot service and is already well serviced by another entity. Peter Spencer, Project Manager, representing Gold Star Resorts of Birch Bay, 7824 Birch Bay Drive, gave background information on land ownership of World Mark (maps on file). He spoke to various projects his company has developed. Tourism has increased substantially, and 45 permanent jobs have been created so far. Significant expense on water and sewer would be required at this site. He encouraged Council include this site in the Gateway Industrial zone. He stated this area is serviceable. Lastly, the 60 acre parcel at Blaine and Arne Road is fully serviced with water and sewer. The UR4 zoning must remain. He requested a 10 acre commercial strip along Blaine Drive be re- created. His company would subdivide this property into an approximately 120 unit subdivision with a 10 acre commercial strip. Some of his thoughts regarding development included senior housing, mobile home park, and single family homes. Jack Swanson, 1200 Harris Avenue, stated when the Cherry Point industrial area becomes active, a good portion of the people who will be working there will live in Birch Bay, which is going to become the commercial and residential hub for people working at the industries that will locate at Cherry Point. Specifically, there is a 60 acre tract located on Blaine Road and Alderson, which originally had 10 acres in that zone, and he requested Council consider replacing these acres. Also, if light industrial needs are expected to be met in the community, Council must look carefully at Birch Bay - Lynden Road and the I -5 intersection, which has massive traffic and great freeway exposure. Additionally, changing this property from R5A to Gateway Industrial would pay for bringing the sewer across the freeway. This location does not have the political controversy as other areas and may not be challenged in lawsuits. Brenner asked if there were any demographic statistics to show where current employees of existing Cherry Point industries live and what percentage live close to work. Knapp replied Planning Minutes, 1/21/97, Page 8 that finding the answer to this would require a significant survey. People would live close to work if there is a variety of housing choices. Brown noted the trip reduction program with COG (Council of Governments) will be providing some of the requested information. Joe Grant stated a study has been done regarding the issue of housing in the Birch Bay area. Many employees of the various industries live within a short distance of work. Many who do not would like to move closer, but there is not affordable housing. Claudia Holland, 8240 Birch Bay Drive, was concerned about Blaine's growth boundaries. The County cannot keep giving away assessed evaluations. Residents in this area do not want to be annexed into Blaine. She emphasized developers must pay impact fees. She expressed her concerns regarding traffic and safety. A requested weight limit was granted but is not enforced. Speeding is also a problem. Her goal is safety and to return Birch Bay Drive to a family destination resort, which is not possible with all the traffic. John Sitkin and Roger Almskaar, representing Wayne Allen and Whisper Lake Development on the Blaine Road, requested this site be included in the Birch Bay UGA. This development will contain affordable housing in the medium - priced range. This area cannot support another Semiahmoo. The 1987 Birch Bay Plan had no land use analysis, only water district boundaries. Tight urban growth boundaries are not good public policies, as costs will be driven up. Fighting sprawl is better by metering utilities. Starkenburg thought if there is going to be growth in this area, there needs to be strong consideration for this area to be incorporated. He requested Gibson respond. Gibson stated there has been talk about the need for greater commercial services and the need for greater law enforcement. This points to the need for local people to address that in terms of municipality. The most comprehensive way to do that is through incorporation. Special purpose districts would be another way. Dawson pointed out that with Canadian dollar redistributing itself, this will create additional pressure in terms of housing. Sutter spoke to incorporation and wondered how the process can be expedited. Gibson replied that from a planning standpoint, if that is the direction headed, the question becomes how as a County this plan is enabled and how to create a plan for successful incorporation with a tax base. Pat Alesse, 4825 Alderson Road, Birch Bay, spoke to incorporation. If Birch Bay were a city, it would rank eighth in valuation per capita in this state. Birch Bay produces taxes that are used in the other parts of the County. It also has a well - developed variety of housing types. Planning Minutes, 1/21/97, Page 9 Greg Wood, 8545 Semiahmoo Drive, owner of Sea Links Golf Course, stated Birch Bay is an urban area. There may not be the proper zoning to meet the needs of the area in the future. Water district policy is counterproductive to what the County is trying to achieve under GMA. Currently, if someone pays now for water needed in the future, they are guaranteed the water. People in the district have already prepaid for the water. Starkenburg directed the topic to Custer. Gibson stated the Custer area was rezoned to light impact industrial placed in a UGA. He asked what the character of development in the area was and what the zoning or designation would be the people would be seeking. Phil Serka, 400 N. Commercial, and Curtis Smelser, representing Leclezios, stated this area is still planned for a transportation facility. There is a confluence of two major transportation corridors. The location is close to the Canadian border having all- weather roads. The GMA encourages intermodel transportation facilities. The COG studies encourage Council consider intermodel facilities. This proposed location is one of the best in the country. Industry is a necessary prerequisite to encourage this use. The area is already committed to an industrial use. Roads are adequate because they are all weather. There is industrial capacity for power and natural gas. The spur and railroad line are already there. Infrastructure is present. The COG and Chamber reports state that the County has always ignored freight mobility. Feasibility should be considered regarding a good east -west connector. The benefits of this facility are economic and also reduce truck trips on existing systems. In planning for the next 20 years for transportation, the COG report states there will be a 34% increase in Canadian export in the next 10 years; a 16 -24% increase in exports; and 24 -34% increase in imports from Canada. The site is most suitable for industrial and should be included in the UGAs. Starkenburg asked about fire suppression. Serka replied that it would have to be dealt with at the development phase. There might have to be water reservoirs. Gibson asked why, from a geographical standpoint, would one off -load at Cherry Point onto rail and then off -load again at Custer to trucks? Serka replied that when the Cherry Point proposal was considered, the main focus was more of a marine base for handling commodities and not rail. Curt Smelsor, 601 Union Street, Seattle, noted that in port development one can either unload onto railcars and ship out directly or break bulk and redistribute it at different facilities until shipment is ready, whether by rail or truck. Because port water - related facilities are so expensive, the port likes to move containers out of the system before bulk is broken. Also, with the free trade zones, which allow countries to ship in goods, goods can be assembled within a free trade zone and shipped out again without paying import duties. Typically, those are located close to but outside the port area. Smelsor referred to a letter dated November 21, 1996 to the Council in which he stated the reason Council should make this designation. Outside the uniqueness of the site is the history of this project and the difference between a legislative and a quasi-judicial matter. There are substantial public policies stating if the policies are applied, this is exactly what is wanted exactly where it is wanted. There are goals and policies in the Comprehensive Plan that drive the designation of this site as industrial. Planning Minutes, 1/21/97, Page 10 Starkenburg then asked committee to extend time for the public hearing. John Hruby, 7401 Valley View Road, representing the CUSTER Association, stated that Serka and Smelsor are requesting an urban area under the GMA. He asked if this is a request for an urban area. Gibson replied that the request is in the direction of an industrial area and a concomitant to urban area. Hruby requested committee refer to Mackie's outline. If the County is interested in pursuing industrial development, there is an obligation to answer questions, specifically, physical and infrastructure demands and limitations. There is no evidence of water availability to this site under the GMA. Birch Bay Water /Sewer District is not legally bound to service this area. The County must demonstrate there is a water supply available for this site. Regarding Nelson's comment, Judge Mura did not rule that water services did not have to be available for the rezoning. The pertinent issue at hand are the requirements of the GMA. Services are planned for first. The Council =s job is to encourage areas of infrastructure, not plan rezones. Trans - County rail corridor is a major issue that the County has not defined. Infrastructure of where the rail corridor should be will dictate activity. There are potential areas along the Burlington Northern lines that may serve as intermodel facilities. That area could be used for an industrial site if the conditions are right, such as water and sewer. There has been no analysis on free trade zones. Studies by the County need to be done before deciding on an area for industrial development. Gibson stated this area was previously zoned Light Impact Industrial. If it is strictly defined as a zone with limited uses, that would be figured into the infrastructure equation. Questions to ask are, what is the water that will be needed for the defined activity? What are the sewage facilities that will be required for what may occur in that area? What are the fire suppression, hazardous material, road, and law enforcement issues? In terms of comprehensive planning, are service needs being limited to a facility? Jean Freestone, 3286 Creasy Road, spoke as a small property investor. Hruby stated Judge Mura had not ruled on the water and sewer requirement. Mura actually ruled LII does not require water and sewer. Intermodel facilities can be included in a LII zone. Small properties owners do not want a requirement for water and sewer. Also included in LII is open storage, which does not require a lot of infrastructure. For industrial properties, she suggested a planning period of a much longer time than 20 years. The current zoning is RIO. This is not a local industrial development but a West Coast industrial development. Long term, this area and Cherry Point will grow together. LII is going to require much buffering; there are wetlands in the area, which are natural greenbelts. Good language is needed under essential public facilities, which do not have to be publicly owned. Nelson inquired about water and sewer availability in Birch Bay. The water and sewer district alluded service is available at a cost of $1 million. He asked if this was a consideration when examining the issue of industrial development. Also, he requested clarification regarding an intermodel transfer area or free trade zone, which would include manufacturing. Smelsor replied that 440 acres would be ultimately designated as urban and identified as LII. Nelson asked how much industrial land supply is available. Estimates are varied; people looking for Planning Minutes, 1/21/97, Page 11 locations are looking for serviced industrial sites. Smelsor stated his client would examine this issue in the economics of developing the property. His client maintains there is no requirement to have water and sewer to develop the site. LII zoning and land use requires far less water and sewer than residential, commercial, and manufacturing. There is no need to extend water and sewer to a site to develop it. Serka noted that private sources of a facility is a possibility. In some cases, industrial uses do not have a lot of demand. Public sewer is not always needed. Sutter stated there is a demand to define what is going into this area before giving it a zoning designation. Normally, when designating LII, there are designated uses, accessory uses, and uses not allowed. It is not a requirement to know what the use is going to be. Gibson replied that if something is going to be zoned a certain way because of unique attributes, the area should not be wasted with common uses. Brenner stated the reason the Custer rezone is being considered is because people came forward to the County saying it is a unique area and has nothing to do with light industry that ordinarily occurs around the County. Gibson asked that when this area is examined for inclusion in the UGA, if this is unique for transportation abilities, can it achieve its potential if it is developed piecemeal or does it need a master plan? Starkenburg requested committee give him input regarding continuing testimony. It was decided to hear testimony regarding forestry and MRL. Gerald Holmquist, 9821 Holmquist Road, farms 128 acres of hazelnuts. He stated Council should not designate MRLs above and beyond what is needed; designate only what is necessary. This designation will take away the current owners rights in favor of some future buyers. Roger Almskaar urged Council stay to schedule and adopt the Comprehensive Plan by March 11. He stated that in commercial forestry, there is a ban on housing. Whatcom County is the only county in the state that has gone that far. The notions of incompatible uses or conversions are important, but the Plan does not define what is an incompatible use for MRL. The definitions for forest lands is not very operable. ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned at 3:50 p.m. Elizabeth Bennett, Transcriptionist ATTEST: WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Planning Minutes, 1/21/97, Page 12 Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk Alvin Starkenburg, Council Member Planning Minutes, 1/21/97, Page 13