HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning June 22 1993WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
June 22, 1993
The meeting was called to order at 1:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 1000 N.
Forest St., 2nd floor, by Dan Warner, Chair.
Also present: Absent:
Larry Harris
Barbara Brenner (late)
Also in attendance: Council members Marge Laidlaw, Ken Henderson, and Bob
Imhof.
1. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY
ZONING ORDINANCE, TITLE 20, TO ALLOW THE COMMERCIAL
EXTRACTION OF SAND AND GRAVEL KNOLLS AND RIDGES AND
ACCESSORY SORTING OF MATERIALS IN THE AGRICULTURE
DISTRICT (AB93 -214)
Topics discussed: Background; reason for Whatcom Conservation District's request;
explanation of requirements; operation limits; putting the words "conditional use" in the title
of the ordinance; enhancement of farmlands versus real estate values; definition of "farm
enhancement'; enforcement of the rules and regulations; need for writing enforcement
procedures; performance bonds to ensure reclamation; review by Soils Conservation District;
fee schedule; timing and interrelationship with Growth Management; potential problems in
the flood plains and flood areas; Exhibit AN confusion in wording (two contiguous
operations -- farming? or mining ?); need for defining "reclamation," "restoration," and
"progressive rehabilitation "; line 11A add "restoration'; performance bonds needs to be
defined and set; accessory sorting.
Persons speaking: Warner; Jeff Griffin, Planning; Harris; Brenner; Laidlaw.
Evelyn Nolte: Opposed to this ordinance. She detailed some of the problems that
come from extraction, especially in areas of shallow aquifers. Later, near the end of the
public comment period, she added clarification comments about wet fields.
John Van Bovin: Did the excavation referred to by Mrs. Nolte. He explained the
work Van Bovin had done and the efforts they made to protect the aquifer. He is in
agreement with the ordinance.
Bob VanWeerdhuizen, dairy farmer: Talked about the work they have been doing.
Some of the hills are dangerous; it's safer to level these hills in order to be in compliance
with DOE and to maintain the water purity. He explained the exchange he made of gravel
for topsoil, so that his land is better than it was before. Near the end of the public comment
period, he refuted some of the arguments against the ordinance.
Tony Velthuizen, farmer: Described the improvements resulting from flattening a
knoll on his farm, including increased production. Discussed some of the problems identified
by Mrs. Nolte and explained them. Approves the ordinance. Near the end of the public
comment, he detailed the expenses he faced in irrigating land that had not been leveled. He
also detailed how the expenses can go down with easier work areas.
Georgeanne Webster: Expressed concern with some of the ways the ordinance is
written, although she said she believes people should be able to do what they want with
their own land within reason. She is concerned with the safety issue on the knolls and
ridges- -but there are other methods of working with the knolls and ridges without taking
them out. She is concerned with the water issue and questioned who is going to monitor the
water issue and enforce the rules. She is also concerned about multiple small pits
everywhere. She said that the Growth Management Act is supposed to address these issues.
Mary Ellen Sweeney: Detailed the problems faced by the small property owners who
live in the areas of gravel mining. She is opposed to the ordinance.
Alvin Starkenburg: Expressed amazement that something so simple could be made
so complex. He also detailed problems faced by the farmer when farming land with knolls
and ridges. Removing these, he says, improves the land, and he supports the ordinance.
Later in the public session Starkenburg discussed the sorting process of the gravel and
answered questions.
Phyllis Kronenberg: Expressed concern for real estate prices in the areas of gravel
pits and for the effects of mining. She is concerned about allowing rock crushing in
agricultural areas. She questioned regulation enforcement and wondered how a half -time
person could manage. She said she thinks it is important for the County to adhere to the
Mineral Resource Lands and not allow mining to expand.
Bas Scholten, representation of Whatcom County Conservation District: Feels that
leveling is good farming practice which adds to needed farmer cash flow. Approves the
ordinance.
Ken Schilke, farmer: Has leveled some of his acreage which enhanced the farmability
of his land and improved the safety factor.
Henry Bierlink: Said the question was really whether or not the material could be
sold rather than piled elsewhere on the land; a farmer can already do a certain amount of
leveling. He pointed out that most farms don't have a lot of gravel, so the problem has been
made bigger by the opponents than it really is. He approves the ordinance.
Dave Ernst, member of Planning Commission: Expressed some concerns about some
Planning Minutes, 6122193, Page 2
of the specific wording of the ordinance. He pointed out that the ordinance this amends
hasn't been in effect long enough to test. Also, this could be dealt with more holistically if
kept with the GMA process. He said he feels that the farmer's being able to gravel mine
has the potential of destroying good farmland.
Darlene DelBoca: Objects to this ordinance; there are better ways to diversify and
to enhance farming. She described how aquifers work and the value of gravelly areas. She
also expressed concern about the timing of this ordinance, considering the work being done
on GMA and critical areas and water quality. She suggested that the Committee should put
its energies toward economic enhancement in other ways.
John Gillies, Soils Conservation District: Came to the podium to discuss enforcement.
He pointed out that his office is not regulatory. He explained the role of the SCD and the
work it does as a Federal agency.
Craig McConnell, Cooperative Extension: Stressed that removing the knolls and
ridges is done for common sense reasons. He pointed out the advantages Whatcom County
offers dairies, which is why so many are here, and he said that thinking about changing to
other types of crops is not practical or sensible.
HARRIS MOVED TO DELETE THE WORDS "AND ACCESSORY SORTING"
FROM THE ORDINANCE.
Warner said he would like to hold this ordinance in Committee until further
information on enforcement and other issues are further clarified by the Executive.
Brenner said she would support holding as long as it wasn't held too long. She
expressed concern about waiting until the GMA is done because of the length of time the
GMA is taking. She supports restrictive mineral resource land overlay districts, but she said
she feels that people need to be able to work on their land and to farm, and supporting
farmers and allowing farmers to farm is important.
Warner said he is opposed to deleting "and accessory sorting." Warner will write a
memo to the Executive. The ordinance will be kept in Committee until a special meeting
of the Committee July 6.
2. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY
ZONING ORDINANCE, TITLE 20, AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT,
CHAPTER 20.40 TO ALLOW ROCK CRUSHING AS A CONDITIONAL
USE WHEN WITHIN A MINERAL RESOURCE LAND (MRL)
OVERLAY DISTRICT (AB93 -215)
Topics discussed: Purpose of rock crushing; definition of land use; relationship
between availability of this operation and the cost of the aggregate; environmental impact;
Planning Minutes, 6122193, Page 3
noise impacts; definition of rock crushing as an industrial use.
Persons speaking: Harris; Brenner; Warner.
Lisa Starkenburg: Gave the background of the issue and detailed the events leading
to the request for this ordinance. Only those operations already DNR permitted will be
allowed to crush rock. These operations are crushing as a non - conforming use, a use easily
lost, particularly since some of these rock crushers are portable. She outlined the advantages
of permitting the rock crushing as a conditional use.
Darlene delBoca: Said she can understand, after hearing the Committee talk today,
why our arts are as vicious and black and brutal as they are.
BRENNER MOVED TO RECOMMEND ADOPTION.
The motion carried 2 TO 1 with Harris opposed.
3. APPLICATION FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FILED BY
HARBORVIEW DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, FOR HARBOR
LIGHTS RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY (HE FILE NUMBERS PUD92 -3,
SHS92 -1) (AB93 -225)
Topics discussed: Explanation of a PUD; difference between Hearing Examiner
appeal and a PUD; water sources; 45 additional conditions; typo on page 14 of the
application "public system. Septic...."
Persons speaking: Warner; Brenner; Jesus Moulinat, developer; Harris; Ed Good,
Hearing Examiner.
HARRIS MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
Warner complimented the developer and Good for an excellent job.
Helen Harmon, 4985 Drayton Harbor Rd.: Asked some questions about the narrow
road and its widening. This would cut into her front yard considerably. She also asked
questions about public easement to the beach. Moulinat answered her questions, stating that
the road would be made to fit into the existing right of way through her property, so she
won't lose her front yard. Access to the beach would be only through the property of the
developer, not through her personal part.
The motion carried unanimously.
4. OTHER BUSINESS
Planning Minutes, 6122193, Page 4
Brenner asked to get the meeting with the Ag Preservation Committee put on the
agenda. It will be added to the July 6 meeting agenda.
The meeting was adjourned at 3:52 p.m.
ATTEST: PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
-r� r
Nancy ohn, Assistant Clerk Daniel M. Warner, C air
Planning Minutes, 6122193, Page 5