HomeMy WebLinkAboutCounty Council February 4 1992(� 1 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
2 Regular Meeting
3 February 4, 1992
4 The meeting was called to order at 4:05 p.m. by Council Chairman Daniel M. Warner
5 in the Council Chambers, 1000 N. Forest.
6 Present Absent
7 Ken Henderson None
8 Bob Imhof
9 Marge Laidlaw
10 Barbara Brenner
11 Larry Harris
12 Dennis Vander Yacht (arrived for 7 p.m. portion)
13 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
14 1. CAPITAL FACILITIES UPDATE (1 HOUR) (AB92 -050)
15 Shirley Van Zanten, County Executive, explained the issue.
16 Dan Taylor, Planning Director, explained how this plan evolved; Diane Harper has
17 been appointed lead on this issue with help from consultants.
18 Diane Harper, Senior Planner, discussed the following: how Natural Heritage fits in
19 with the Growth Management Act (GMA); green belts; utility corridor planning; housing;
20 transportation with Engineering and Planning working together; innovative techniques in
21 zoning; urban growth areas with higher densities where there are services; 2010 projections
22 (170,000 population) with counties showing how they can cope with the growth; cost out the
23 required infrastructure; not allowing permits until the infrastructure funding is in place; level
24 of service and where money will come from; impact fees.
25 Harper went through the revised plan distributed today explaining the changes she
26 had made in response to suggestions she had received. She said the new technician is
27 needed to chase data and enter it on the database; consultants will also be needed to help.
28 Financial details will be handled by the Executive's office. July, 1993 is the deadline for this
29 to be finished (although the Planning Department Ohas asked for a six -month extension) and
30 July, 1994 the deadline to implement the plan. The $50,000 will be needed for staff,
31 computer, software, consulting help not covered by Growth Management funds. The
32 Planning Department is putting $24,000 to $30,000 of staff time in to fulfill the Natural
33 Heritage Task Force (NHTF) plans. Goal #30 on page 13 has Progress as its main focus
34 with the acquisition of certain properties. She discussed protection of vulnerable areas. In
35 GMA, funding must be provided before issues can be planned; cities will need to provide
36 infrastructure to coincide with the anticipated growth.
1 Warner asked if Council is being requested to concur with the plan so money can be
2 appropriated. Harris discussed the possibilities of doing the job themselves instead of hiring
3 consultants.
4 2. LAKE WHATCOM TRANSPORTATION STUDY REPORT AND
5 DISCUSSION (ALTERNATIVES TO LAKE WHATCOM CONNECTOR)
6 (1 HOUR) (AB91 -365A)
7 Van Zanten said she would like the Council to prioritize so the administration could
8 arrange small studies on the preferred options.
9 Harper mentioned pages six and seven as they contain most of the changes; the share
10 that transit can divert, allocation of costs, and area priorities.
11 Items discussed were: safety issues and level of service; connecting Lake Louise
12 Road to Cable or Euclid; development of Yew Street; future level of service in the City;
13 safety, steep slopes on Lake Whatcom Boulevard; building up of Lake Louise Road as a
14 main arterial; transit; work with City of Bellingham; degradation of the watershed; change
15 zoning to comply with the traffic density; forestry-one per 20 acres; lot ownership study;
16 existing owners being downzoned; regulations that will impact Sudden Valley owners to
17 modify road structures to cover non -point pollution; shared liability; sewer and water issues;
18 transportation and water quality; cost of rail prohibitive; developer contribution to road
19 costs; possibility of a southern route through Alger to 15; high speed route for transit only;
20 high speed lane on Lake Louise Road; safety must be enhanced on existing roads;
21
22 Comments were made by: Laidlaw; Henderson; Imhof; Warner; Harris; Brenner;
23 Taylor; Diane Harper, Senior Planner; Jeff Monson, Traffic Engineer;
24 Warner said he would write a letter to the Executive and point out the areas the
25 Council would like pursued as follows: improve the safety of Lake Whatcom Boulevard and
26 Lake Louise Road with Lake Louise Road being considered the most appropriate to be
27 developed as the main arterial from Sudden Valley to Bellingham; work with the City of
28 Bellingham on the traffic bottleneck around the Electric Avenue area in the City; enhance
29 transit opportunities by having buses to Sehome and Western Washington University, faster
30 transit and having an analysis on rail or alternative transit; and analyze the problems
31 associated with a southern route including the possibility of improving the boulevard south
32 to Cain Lake Road or a road over Lookout Mountain which would connect with I -5.
33 Warner said the Public Services and Solid Waste Committee will be scheduling some
34 work sessions to discuss the transportation issues.
35 Lake Whatcom Comprehensive plan study: Taylor said the subarea is next in line,
36 but with all the Growth Management issues the subarea plan has been put off. Harris asked
37 what the study (Lake Whatcom Transportation study) did and did not take into
Minutes, 2/4/92, Page 2
1 consideration. Diane Harper responded, saying that if you wanted a detailed look at the
2 projections (population, growth) you would look in the urban area transportation study,
3 which was done before the impacts of Growth Management were taken into consideration.
4 Warner said the study . should consider the watershed, density, etc. then look at traffic
5 patterns.
6 Items discussed were: the scheduling of the subarea review was delayed until after
7 the Growth Management Act (GMA); Lake Whatcom Transportation study addressed
8 projections of growth and populations; the need to consider impacts on watershed, density
9 and traffic patterns; car - pooling; study needs to include the cost of the road.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Comments were made by: Dan Taylor, Planning Director; Harris; Laidlaw; Warner;
Henderson.
There was a break at 6:40 p.m.
The Council reconvened at 7:08 p.m.
Vander Yacht arrived for this portion of the meeting.
The following motions were made on Committee of the Whole issues when the
Council convened at 7 p.m.
LAIDLAW MOVED TO APPROVE THE CAPITAL FACILITIES AND
NATURAL HERITAGE TASK FORCE PLAN.
The motion carried unanimously.
LAIDLAW MOVED THE COUNCIL REQUEST THE ADMINISTRATION TO
STUDY THE ALTERNATIVES TO THE LAKE WHATCOM CONNECTOR AS
FOLLOWS: THE SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS NECESSARY ON LAKE WHATCOM
BOULEVARD AND LAKE LOUISE ROAD; OFFER TO WORK WITH THE CITY ON
THE BOTTLENECK AT ELECTRIC AVENUE AND LAKEWAY DRIVE AREA OF
THE CITY; THE POSSIBILITY OF IMPROVED TRANSIT OPPORTUNITIES; AND
A SOUTHERN CONNECTOR EITHER SOUTH OF SUDDEN VALLEY TO CAIN
LAKE OR OVER LOOKOUT MOUNTAIN TO CONNECT WITH I -5.
28
29 3.
30
31
The motion carried unanimously.
POINT ROBERTS TRANSPORTATION STUDY REPORT (AB91 -468)
This item was taken last.
Warner explained this issue.
Minutes, 2/4/92, Page 3
1 BRENNER MOVED TO ASK FOR A STUDY OF THE PROPOSALS TO
2 ALLEVIATE TRAFFIC PROBLEMS AT THE BORDER.
3 Brenner withdrew her motion.
4 HENDERSON MOVED TO ASK THE ADMINISTRATION TO FORM AN
5 ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO PRIORITIZE THIS ISSUE.
6 The motion carried unanimously.
7 ADDENDUM ITEM
8 5. RESOLUTION REGARDING THE POTENTIAL EXEMPTION FOR A
9 FILM STUDIO PLANNED COMMUNITY FROM THE NORMAL LAND
10 USE ACTIVITIES SCHEDULE, FOR EMERGENCY PURPOSES (AB92-
11 062)
12 Warner explained the reasons for this resolution discussing the critical timing issue.
13 Grant Allan, CEO of Beacon Group and a resident of Blaine discussed the following:
14 community concept of a motion picture studio; non - polluting concept; entire development
15 $125 million in buildup with $50 - $60 million in construction; tax benefits to the County;
16 fairly steady contract labor with $20 - $35 per hour for tradespeople; university and high
17 school training programs; skilled tradespeople will come from British Columbia and
18 California until local people can be trained.
19 IMHOF MOVED TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION TO EXEMPT THE
20 GROUP FROM THE NORMAL WAITING PERIOD IN THE PLANNING PROCESS.
21 Allan said half the skilled workers may be brought in initially; he said the rest of the
22 development including hotels and houses are the mitigating hedge against the high risk of
23 developing the studio.
24 The motion carried unanimously.
25 OTHER ITEMS
26 4. DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE DECISION REGARDING THE PLANNED
27 UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND BINDING SITE PLAN APPLICATIONS
28 FOR CANNERY HILL, FILED BY SEMIAHMOO COMPANY (AB92-
29 048)
30 PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM WAS TAKEN BY THE HEARING
31 EX MINER COUNCIL ACTION MUST BE BASED ON THE RECORD
Minutes, 2/4/92, Page 4
1 GENERATED AT THE HEARING EXAMINER LEVEL OR RECEIVED
2 UNDER CERTAIN SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES.
3 Ed Good, Hearing Examiner, explained the application for Cannery Hill, filed by the
4 Semiahmoo Company. He discussed the following: cluster development would have to be
5 dealt with by plats rather than binding site plans; Point 4 shows the applicant is concerned
6 the Hearing Examiner did not allow a golf course to go ahead without either plat or binding
7 site plan; his recommendation that the golf course could be approved at this time but not
8 the rest of. the development.
9
10 Items discussed were: the need for potable water for binding site plans; future traffic
11 access to avoid another Sudden Valley mess; applicants to be required to help with road
12 improvement; change in recommendation 19; proof of available water required by binding
13 site plan; who provides the services, the County or Blaine; herbicides and pesticides; the
14 number of single family dwellings.
15 Comments were made by: Harris; Warner; Jeff Munson, Traffic Engineer; Good;
16 Henderson; and Laidlaw.
17 Donovan Kehrer, representing the applicant: The binding site plan is one mechanism
18 for dividing land and this indicates it is the only way it could be divided. He would prefer
19 to have the option to divide it by either long or short plat as well as the binding site plan.
20 The original site plan was denied because water was not present at that time. The binding
21 site plan is not used for single family homes. The developer is willing to allow mitigation
22 to provide for roads so Phase I can be put forward. The residential area is entirely within
23 Blaine which makes a logical division. Maintenance plan will go to the technical committee
24 with members of the Engineers and Buildings & Code division. Blaine passed a resolution
25 to cooperate with Birch Bay regarding water and sewer on this issue.
26 Good said he would agree to change item 10 to say "allow construction to proceed
27 with the golf course itself but not allow the residential construction to proceed until lots are
28 created."
29
30 Comments were made by: Warner; Good; Watts.
31 IMHOF MOVED TO ADOPT THE HEARING EXAMINER'S
32 RECOMMENDATION FOR THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT.
33 LAIDLAW AMENDED PAGE 20, #10, LAST SENTENCE WOULD READ
34 "CLEARING AND GRADING ASSOCIATED WITH RESIDENTIAL TRACT
35 DEVELOPMENT SHALL NOT PROCEED UNTIL LOTS ARE CREATED AND
36 CLEARING AND GRADING PLAN ARE APPROVED BY THE COUNTY."
37 The amendment was unanimously approved.
Minutes, 2/4/92, Page 5
1 LAIDL.AW MOVED TO AMEND BY ADDING TO ITEM C ON PAGE 19
2 AFTER 104, NEW SECTION C: "HEIGHT: FOR PROJECTS IN THE CANNERY HILL
3 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, BUILDING HEIGHT MAY EXCEED THE
4 MAXIMUM PERMITTED IN THE UNDERLYING ZONE BY 50 PERCENT,
5 PROVIDED THAT THE PROJECT DESIGN PROTECTS ADJACENT USES BOTH
6 INSIDE AND OUTSIDE OF THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FROM
7 ADVERSE IMPACTS ON PRIVACY, LIGHT, AND AIR."
8 The current C. would become D.
9 There was discussion about 'view" among Henderson, Good and Kehrer.
10 HENDERSON MOVED TO ADD TO THE L.AIDLAW AMENDMENT AFTER
11 THE WORDS "LIGHT AND AIR" THE WORDS "AS WELL, AS VIEWS FROM
12 OUTSIDE THE PROPERTIES."
13 There was a discussion on the meaning of 'view."
14
15 Frances Wong, Director, Semiahmoo Private Golf Club Limited Partnership, spoke
16 of the impact on third parties; he said there are no lots located behind the project so noone
17 would have a view blocked. There are two parcels that were not acquired but they are not
18 located where view would be a problem.
19 The motion to amend carried 4 -3 in favor with Warner, Laidlaw and Imhof opposed.
20 Good said he was persuaded that the applicant was able to mitigate the wetlands
21 drainage issue.
22 LAIDLAW MOVED TO AMEND PAGE 10, LINE 3 OF FINDINGS AND
23 CONCLUSIONS, TO DELETE THE WORD "CONDOMIl41UMIZED."
24 The motion to amend was carried unanimously.
25 WARNER AMENDED PAGE NINE, 2B, THE NUMBER 160 SHOULD BE
26 INSERTED RATHER THAN 27.
27 The amendment carried unanimously.
28 BRENNER MOVED TO POSTPONE THIS ISSUE UNTIL THE NEXT
29 MEETING.
30 Wong said postponement would have a detrimental impact; they are in a time crunch
31 to obtain financing.
Minutes, 2/4/92, Page 6
1 Brenner spoke in favor of waiting for one week so more information could be
2 gathered regarding the issue of drainage onto adjoining properties.
3 The motion to postpone failed 6 -1 with Brenner in favor.
4 The amended main motion made by Imhof carried 6 -1 with Brenner opposed.
5 ADDENDUM ITEM
6 Lake Whatcom Health Hazard Designation: Frank James, County Health Officer,
7 distributed a report on the Lake Whatcom potential for public health emergency. This
8 action notifies the public there is a potential risk. Water District 10 occasionally has a spill
9 resulting in raw . sewage going into the lake; runoff from the roads and homes also adds
10 pollutants to the lake. James said he hopes this will force the entities to work on this issue.
11 Items discussed were: who has the authority to make this designation; will this mean
12 the state can obligate the county to build treatment plants, etc.
13 Comments were made by: James; Laidlaw; Henderson.
14 REPORTS AND OTHER ITEMS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS
15 Planning Commission Meetings: Harris requested that Council members attend
16 Planning Commission meetings; he said very sensitive issues are being discussed.
17 The meeting adjourned at 9:07 p.m.
18 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
19 ATTEST: WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
20
21 B' ara Maher, Depu rk Daniel M. Warner, Chairman
Minutes, 2/4/92, Page 7