HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning October 7 1997WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Planning and Development Committee
October 7, 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: Absent:
Marlene Dawson None
Kathy Sutter
Staff Present:
Ward Nelson
Barbara Brenner
Tom Brown
Michael Knapp, Planning and Development Services Director
Sylvia Goodwin, Planning and Development Services Manager
Dan Gibson, Prosecuting Attorney's Office
Jeff Griffin, Planning Services
Steve Fox, Planning and Development Services, Land Use
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL
ORDINANCE ADOPTING A PERMANENT WHATCOM COUNTY CODE
CHAPTER 16.16, CRITICAL AREAS, TO COMPLY WITH THE
WASHINGTON STATE GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT (AB97 -226A)
Starkenburg gave background on this issue, especially regarding the last committee
meeting. Public participation in this meeting was encouraged.
He began by reviewing the current draft Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) and requested
any staff input. Sylvia Goodwin, Planning and Development Services Manager, stated all
changes were incorporated where there was firm direction from Council. Jeff Griffin, Planning
Services, spoke to specific language regarding Department of Ecology (DOE) issues. He
reported he spoke with Steve Fox, Land Use, Planning and Development Services, regarding
streams and erosion on page 5. Specifically mentioned was "H ": "The non - chemical
maintenance (but not construction) of drainage ditches and other constructed stormwater
management facilities." Fox commented briefly.
On page 8, Griffin spoke to Options 1 and 2 (handout on file). He specifically addressed
policies 11L -4 and 11L -5. He noted most state agencies follow sequencing. The larger projects
require sequencing and a permit; the smaller depend on local decision. Starkenburg clarified that
Option 1 covers the larger projects through sequencing. Fox reported that the Corps of
Planning Minutes, 10/7/97, Page 1
Engineers become involved after a certain level or if there is construction, etc. within 100 ft of a
creek. The DOE is involved with the smaller projects. Roger Almskaar, land use planner,
commented, as did Skip Richards, regarding sequencing and mitigation. Barry Wenger and Dick
Grout, DOE, replied. Bob Andersen, land use planner, commented regarding mitigation and a
Lake Whatcom Watershed analysis. Starkenburg clarified that one of the issues was mitigation
banking. Discussion included which option to accept and its placement in the document.
Starkenburg requested staff examine this point. Wenger commented.
Ward Nelson, Council member, pointed out the replacement ratio on page 10. Griffin
responded this matched state recommendations for irreplaceable wetlands. Richards
commented, as did Andersen and Almskaar. Starkenburg requested staff examine the definition
of "mature forested wetlands ". Also commenting were Wenger and Barbara Brenner, Council
member, as well as Nelson. Staff was requested to examine the draft vs the original language on
this particular section.
On page 11, "physical condition" under variance criteria should be added:
"...including, but not limited to size, shape, topography, physical condition,
location or... ".
On page 14, Sutter provided a scrivener mark in 16.16.285A to break up that long
sentence.
farmer.
Nelson commented regarding the conservation program and how it fits with the hobby
(Clerk's Note: Tape 1, side B)
Henry Bierlink commented, as did Dan Gibson, Prosecuting Attorney's Office. Gibson pointed
out farms are exempt in this section. The discussion topic was activities as being exempt.
Discussion followed. Staff was requested to examine this section to ensure there is an
appropriate threshold level for the best management practices (BMPs).
Nelson was concerned about open space taxation on page 15. Discussion followed.
Beginning on page 17, Griffin spoke to the maps, which will be addressed later.
Wetlands, page 23, was next discussed. Sutter spoke to the functional level of the
definitions of wetlands and non - regulated welands. Griffin, Richards and Almskaar commented.
Clarifying language was suggested in 16.16.610C3:
"...the dominant functions of which are r-estt4eted to stormwater storage /flood
attenuation, ... ".
Planning Minutes, 10/7/97, Page 2
Gibson responded to the question of what is trying to be accomplished with this #3 with a
language change suggestion:
"...stormwater storage /flood attenuation, and the functions of which are e"al a
l are no greater than alternative ... ".
Griffin explained with an example. There was discussion.
Tom Westergreen introduced the discussion on buffers, pages 25 -26. The section on
reduced buffer width (page 26, C2) was specifically discussed. Richards commented, as did
Andersen.
Starkenburg moved to strike C2, page 26:
"The proposed land uses are of low intensity and require greater buffers and the
applicant demonstrates that smaller buffers will adequately protect wetland, river
or stream functions."
Sutter stated the language on 16.16.650B2, page 25 -26, would read:
"The proposed land uses impacts are of high iii ensity and require greater buffers
to ...".
Discussion followed on preventing expansion of wetlands, streams and buffers. Brown
cited a specific example and asked about a time deadline regarding buffer areas. He was
concerned about property erosion and expanding buffers. Discussion followed on possible
solutions; maintenance and the need for same; and the suitability of the ordinance regarding
maintenance.
(Clerk's Note: Tape 2, Side A)
Starkenburg requested staff examine language on page 5, "G ", perhaps adding further language
regarding this issue.
Roger Ellingson, attorney, spoke regarding the mandatory clustering on page 24,
16.16.640B, and requested "may" instead of "shall ". Discussion followed. Starkenburg
requested staff examine this section for recommendation.
Nelson questioned the stormwater discharge section on page 26. Bob Andersen
responded regarding enhancement. This section was left in place as is.
Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas (page 27) was discussed next. Griffin
responded regarding designation, preservation and location of critical areas. Maps were
reviewed. Discussion topics included various species; mapping; and impacts on forestry.
Planning Minutes, 10/7/97, Page 3
Gibson commented regarding buffers; Roger Ellingson commented about the scope of the
definition of species. Steve Fox also commented. Direction was taken to discuss "species" in
the management plan. Andersen commented regarding habitat and the conservation plan.
Starkenburg directed staff return with specific references regarding various species.
Starkenburg then moved to definitions on page 30. Sutter suggested adding language to
the end of "functions" (page 36, #38): "These beneficial roles are not listed in order of priority."
She asked the definition of "high primary productivity ". Andersen suggested adding language
to #25, page 34, deepwater habitats, to tie this definition language in with what is on page 30, G.
Sutter questioned why geologically hazardous areas were broken down as listed (page 36, #41).
Also, regarding "impervious surface" (page 37, #47), Sutter requested consistency. Griffin will
review the ordinance. On "public interest" (page 38, #68), Sutter suggested adding
"unmitigated ": "...there will be no significant unmiti ag ted adverse impact... ". There was further
discussion. Starkenburg suggested this be reviewed in light of the topic only on page 4.
(Clerk's Note: Tape 2, side B)
Sutter called attention to "river" (page 39, #71). There was no change to this section. Andersen
isolated wetlands (page 37, #48) by suggesting adding language for clarification: "Have, under
natural conditions, no contiguous connection by wetland h.. d�gy to a stream, ... ".
Starkenburg requested staff review the proposed changes and return to committee for
final decision.
ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 5:30 p.m.
Elizabeth Bennett, Recording Secretary
ATTEST:
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Dana Brown- Davis, Council Clerk Alvin Starkenburg, Council Member
Planning Minutes, 10/7/97, Page 4