Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSpecial Council April 21 1992 12 pmWHATCOM COUN'T'Y COUNCIL Special Meeting Tuesday, April 21, 1992 The meeting was called to order at 12:07 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 1000 N. Forest St., 2nd floor, by Chairperson Dan Warner. Also present: Absent: Ken Henderson Barbara Brenner Dennis Vander Yacht Bob Imhof Marge Laidlaw Larry Harris Terry Galvin of the Planning Department and Kathy Stromer, Brenner's intern, were also present. CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE (AB92 -058) Siltation: Brenner said one of the comments from the town meetings was that stream siltation was not adequately addressed. Galvin pointed out that the theory of the buffers is to provide soil locking so that siltation does not occur or is minimized. Mitigation: The plan provides that new wetlands created to mitigate the loss of filled wetlands be planned and approved at the same time and that the work on both be carried out concurrently. Language addressing the functional value of the wetlands has been added to the plan. Some concern was expressed about the danger of losing wildlife etc. during the transition process. The two to one mitigation requirement (which survived in Planning, although under serious attack), should minimize any damage from this. Category 1 and 2 wetlands are very very difficult to alter under the ordinance. Tax reductions for wetlands: Open space is available to people now, but under state law there is no other provision for Council's reducing taxes. Imhof pointed out that some court cases will be decided in June which could well impact this legislation in terms of takings. He feels that this issue should be addressed in the ordinance. Galvin pointed out that while a number of things are going on at the state level concerning these critical areas regulations and incentives for conforming, there are many options that could be put into a non - regulatory ordinance like tax incentives, land acquisitions, etc. that could considered. Considerable discussion followed concerning takings, loss of "rights" in terms of land use, decisions made for the public good, time frame for the non - regulatory incentives and acquisitions. Critical Areas Discussion, Council, 4121192, Page I LAIDLAW MOVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION BE DIRECTED TO DEVELOP NON - REGULATORY INCENTIVES (SUCH AS TDR'S, MITIGATION BANKING, CLUSTERING, AND OTHERS) AS AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE ORDINANCE AS SOON AS THESE OPPORTUNITIES BECOME AVAILABLE. The motion passed unanimously. Implementation. There was some discussion about the problems of implementing the plan. Nancy Cohn suggested using volunteers who were informed and part of the community who could go out and work with others in the community. Warner pointed out that perhaps something patterned after the "Master Gardeners" that used lay people who were educated would be a place to start. Imhof called them "Lay Planners." Brenner suggested a Citizen Advisory Committee to which anyone could belong, rather than being appointed. The consensus is that an education /communication /assistance outreach program be implemented. Originally the Granges were set up to do this. After all, as Galvin pointed out, this ordinance is written for administrators -- ordinances have to be - -and it is difficult to understand in many places. Further, the ordinance is not in its final stage. Imhof suggested a small, perhaps ten -page manual in conjunction with lay people. As Vander Yacht pointed out, the most regulated activity will occur in the most rural, small holding area; the thinking seems to focus on the developers, but when the dust settles, the small farmers will be the most impacted. BRENNER MOVED THAT AFTER ADOPTION OF THE CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE, STAFF WILL WORK WITH AGENCIES AND INTERESTED PARTIES TO SET UP A COMMUNITY OUTREACH PROGRAM TO PROVIDE EDUCATION, ASSISTANCE, AND SUGGESTIONS TO INDIVIDUALS FOR EASING IMPACTS CREATED BY THE CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE. Motion carried unanimously. Page 26: Henderson asked about the differences in the background requirements of the various individuals involved, particularly that the geologists needed so many qualifications. Galvin clarified that the others came under the direction of the Army Corps of Engineers, but the geologists didn't. Henderson pointed out that wildlife specialist standards need to be defined. LAIDLAW MOVED TO REQUEST PLANNING TO DEFINE WILDLIFE SPECIALIST ON PAGE 26. Motion carried unanimously. Expansion of wetlands by beavers: Planning discussed this at the meeting last night Critical Areas Discussion, Council, 4121192, Page 2 and regulations in the agricultural section handle this adequately. Farmers will be allowed to restrict the activities of beavers so that farmers don't lose use of their land due to beaver activity. While what's there can't be altered, measures can be taken to maintain status quo. Practical alternative test: Laidlaw expressed concern that this would immediately trigger the involvement of the Army Corps of Engineers and become exceedingly expensive and complicated. The Corps has no regard for local planning. She would like the Planning Commission to explore other options for this temporary measure. Galvin suggested that this be adopted as an interim, then studied M further depth for the final ordinance. Galvin says it won't trigger the Corps' involvement; Laidlaw says that it will. Imhof requested that Council receive a copy of the Corp's CSF(S) regulation that is involved in this. LAIDLAW MOVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW OPTIONS TO PROTECT HIGHER VALUE WETLANDS OTHER THAN PRACTICABLE ALTERNATIVE TEST (PAGE 53). Harris suggested that we check with Counsel to see if going through this practical alternative test will trigger the Army Corps involvement or not. Motion carried 5 to 2 with Harris and Warner voting no. The '37 vs. '39 manual: Henderson asked if using the '87 rule removes about 15% of the wetlands from the ordinance. Warner pointed out that Planning had already been asked for a review of this. Galvin said that Planning had discussed this last night and voted to stay with the '87 because the state is staying with it. Harris pointed out that Council needs to take some time to think about a way to thank the Planning Commission for their hours and hours of work. Page 53, Role of Soil Conservation District. Henderson wants to know how the Soils Conservation is to be imbursed for this. Galvin pointed out that Soils plans to ask the Council for budget to administer this program, which will include one additional staff person. It is up to Council to determine this. Memo from Roger Almskaar: Laidlaw pointed out that this letter needs to be addressed. The letter asks for a delay, which Warner says is because a group of people out there want to torpedo the whole thing. Further announcements: Laidlaw announced that Keith Dearborn and others are bringing a scientist and an economist to meet on May 13th at two meetings, one of them public in Ferndale and the other an invitee only luncheon; they plan to go through this specific ordinance one on one. It is sponsored by the Chamber of Commerce. Warner reminded them about the meeting Thursday at the Pacific First Federal Bank Critical Areas Discussion, Council, 4121192, Page 3 Building re the land swap. Also, there's a meeting at 4:15 p.m. to discuss the Shoreline's issue; the meeting will end about five minutes before six. The meeting was adjourned at 1:30 p.m. ATTEST: WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL �.�-- Nancy P6n, Acting Clerk Daniel M. Warner, Chairman C: /NANCY /COUNCIL.421 Critical Areas Discussion, Counci4 4121192, Page'4