HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning July 29 1997WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Planning and Development Committee
July 29, 1997
The meeting was called to order at 3 p.m. by Committee Chair Alvin Starkenburg in the
Council Committee Room, 311 Grand Avenue.
Also Present:
Marlene Dawson
Absent:
Kathy Sutter
Staff Also Present:
Tom Brown, Council member
Ward Nelson, Council member
Michael Knapp, Planning and Development Services Director
Sylvia Goodwin, Planning and Development Services Manager
Carl Batchelor, Planning and Development Services
Karen Frakes, Prosecuting Attorney's Office
Starkenburg first addressed committee about the Growth Management Hearings Board
(GMHB). Regarding the most recent order (received today), he stated there was concern about
the contents. He requested an update on the GMHB from Planning and Development Services.
Michael Knapp, Planning and Development Services Director, stated that Sylvia
Goodwin, Planning and Development Services Manager, had completed a summary. Goodwin
distributed a handout (on file) dated July 25, 1997 and addressed committee on GMHB
decisions. Knapp stated there was a need to pull from the record items at issue for clarification
that are contained in this summary. Discussion followed on the volume of records presented to
the GMHB and Sandy Mackie, Whatcom County legal counsel. Starkenburg pointed out the
amount of committee time and effort that went into the work on the Comp Plan. Knapp noted
the alternative was downsizing, as other counties have done. Goodwin then pointed out the
positive aspects of the GMHB's comments.
Discussion followed on the GMHB's decisions. Topics included options: fight vs
downzone; whether Mackie's presentation had been completed; those challenging the Comp
Plan; whether sufficient information was provided to the GMHB; downzoning; litigation issues;
and invalidity.
Those speaking included Bill Geyer; Ward Nelson, Council member; Mark Lee, attorney;
Curt Denke; and Phil Serka, attorney.
Knapp stated he was not in support of downzoning.
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION ONLY
Planning Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 1
Starkenburg gave a history of why these two items below were returned to committee.
He noted the first item needing to be dealt with was the rating system. Committee was in
agreement to submit documentation to the Planning Commission for its review (on file).
DISCUSSION REGARDING THE ORDINANCE ADOPTING ZONING
OVERLAY MAPS TO IMPLEMENT SHORT TERM PLANNING AREAS
DESIGNATED IN THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ON AN INTERIM BASIS (AB97 -170A)
(Clerk's Note: This item was not discussed.)
2. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE ORDINANCE ADOPTING INTERIM
DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS RELATING TO GROWTH
MANAGEMENT AND LAND USE DEVELOPMENT (AB97 -169A)
Starkenburg noted that the treatment of the rural area was that it now looks different; yet,
no work was done on the ag section. There was also a concern about R5 and R10 over 20 acres
on clustering dealing with the 20 percent. Starkenburg noted this issue must be clarified for
interpretation and asked if this were an impossible issue. Discussion followed. Topics discussed
included changing language to make this issue not so insurmountable; the difficulty of the 100
foot setback requirement; other land use issues needing discussion; and examples of various
development issues. Starkenburg pointed out the need to continue forward with the resolution of
these various issues.
Those speaking included Carl Batchelor, Planning and Development Services; Phil
Serka, attorney; and Lesa Starkenburg - Kroontje, attorney.
Goodwin stated staff might want to address ag zone clustering on an emergency basis
before the other issues are discussed. The question is how can clustering be allowed when the
GMHB says this cannot be allowed. If the County were to remove the ag overlay with
clustering, it may be necessary to substitute this with something else which may protect the ag
areas in a different manner.
(Clerk's Note: Tape 1, side B)
Knapp stated the County is "back to square one" based on the GMHB's decisions.
However, as long as there are interim development regulations allowing clustering, these
regulations must be changed. This could possibly be an emergency issue.
Starkenburg noted the subject of accessory housing was being processed before the
Planning Commission and will return to committee. Also, Denke's Petition for Review needs an
Planning Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 2
answer to numbers 28 and 29 before it can be dealt with appropriately.
Goodwin addressed the list staff was working on, which included zoning map changes
and zoning text changes. Discussion followed on committee process and working with staff.
Nelson requested input from those using Title 20 regarding the notification process.
Knapp stated the most expeditious way to do this would be submit input to either Planning and
Development Services or the Planning Commission.
Speaking to Bellingham's urban fringe area, Starkenburg directed the discussion to the
implementation and plan format. He requested staff examine where the County is regarding this
item. Carl Batchelor, Planning and Development Services, commented. Specific zoning and
policy recommendations were made with the city of Bellingham regarding the urban fringe area
plan. One question he was working on was how this plan matches with the adopted Comp Plan.
He stated this plan has gone through both the city and County Planning Commissions as well as
the City Council. Discussion followed regarding background of work involved with these three
entities. Batchelor noted the weight this plan recommendation carries is significant public
process. He pointed out the subarea plans have been adopted in the Comp Plan by reference as
interim development regulations. Batchelor stated all entities envisioned that the subarea plans
would provide more specific detail regarding land use in the subareas.
Bill Geyer pointed out the February 7 final urban growth boundary recommendations
from the city of Bellingham to the County Council were part of the Findings submitted by the
City Council to the County Council, which was approved by the County Council as part of its
Findings. The urban fringe subarea plan has been adopted by resolution by the City Council as a
recommendation to the County Council for adoption as the subarea plan with the zone changes
for that geographic area. Nelson inquired if Council were now in a position to be required to
accept this type of zoning legally. The reply was that it was County Council's jurisdiction. The
rezone process was then discussed. Batchelor stated the Planning Commission did not review
the city of Bellingham's current recommendation in detail.
The status of the overlay zoning issue was briefly discussed, as well as the timelines.
Bill Geyer inquired about an inventory of sites regarding a rezone application. There was
discussion on applications in general. Discussion followed on the process of text changes on the
rezone /Comp Plan. Curt Denke questioned the process for reconsideration. Also questioned
was the hearing on the urban fringe issues in August.
ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 4:35 p.m.
Planning Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 3
Elizabeth Bennett, Recording Secretary
ATTEST:
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Dana Brown- Davis, Council Clerk Alvin Starkenburg, Council Member
Planning Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 4