HomeMy WebLinkAboutCounty Council July 2 1991WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting
2 July 2, 1991
3 The meeting was called to order at 7 p.m. by Council Chairman Dan Warner.
4 Present Absent
5 Mary Vanderpol None
6 Dennis Vander Yacht
7 Marge Laidlaw
8 Emily Jackson
9 Bob Imhof
10 Don Hansey
11 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING
12 1. URBAN TRANSPORTATION STUDY: PRESENTATION BY THE
13 COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS (AB91 -242)
14 Mark Challender, Whatcom County Council of Governments (WCCOG) introduced
15 Dean Hobson, Kittelson & Associates, Inc., who has worked through the WCCOG's
16 Transportation Technical Advisory Committee and with a 16 member Community Ad Hoc
17 Committee to develop the 2010 Transportation Plan. He explained the flip charts noting
18 that this is a 20 year planning study. A handout was distributed and can be found in AB91-
19 242. Hobson spoke of the increased demands by 2010 and of the kinds of roads that will
20 be required.
21 Hobson stated the ten goal areas contained in the Plan are as follows: 1)
22 Intergovernmental Coordination & Implementation; 2) Public Education; 3) Land Use,
23 Development and Construction; 4) Environment and Energy; 5) Demand Management; 6)
24 Highways and Arterials; 7) Public Transportation; 8) Service for Senior Citizens and Citizens
25 with Disabilities; 9) Non - motorized Transportation; and 10) Rail and Freight.
26 The focus is to get people away from their single occupant vehicles. The group is in
27 support of bringing Amtrac service back to the area to reduce traffic on I -5. The non-
28 motorized study showed that bicyclists would like extra width to allow safe cycling;
29 pedestrian paths have also been considered. Total cost is $174 million in current dollars;
30 most is for the widening of roads.
31 - Challender said on July 10 the Executive Board will consider the facilities and
32 projects. If no changes are made it would be ready for the July 24 meeting of the Executive
33 Board and will come to Council in September for adoption. It would then be a cooperative
34 effort.
35 COUNCIL MEETING: ACTION ITEMS
36 1. DISCUSSION /POSSIBLE DECISION ON MAJOR DEVELOPMENT
37 PERMIT APPLICATION FOR THE BELLINGHAM INTERNATIONAL
�8 AIRPORT RUNWAY EXTENSION (AB91 -056)
1 Ed Good, Hearing Examiner, said this has had a great deal of public interest with
2 noise being the main issue. The facts are that the extension will produce more noise as air
3 planes will be heavier so they will travel further before lift -off according to Good.
4 Warner listed the conditions recommended by the Hearing Examiner as follows: 1)
5 Regularly scheduled jet aircraft should be limited to those producing noise at a level known
6 as Stage III; 2) A curfew should be placed on all flights from 11 p.m. to 5:45 a.m., except
7 for emergency operations, and occasional late arrivals or departures; 3) The Port should
8 acquire property within the noise contour or provide adequate noise insulation for dwellings
9 or facilities that do not wish to relocate; 4) A 200 - foot.buffer should be maintained between
10 airport operations and residentially zoned property in most cases; 5) Wildlife protection
11 measures should be taken; and 6) Various construction, drainage and permit measures
12 should be complied with.
13 There was discussion among Laidlaw, Warner, Imhof and Good regarding the ability
14 to discriminate between jet or prop airplanes, the ability of the curfew to apply to all aircraft
15 whether the control tower would remain open during a curfew, the penalties that could be
16 imposed for disobedience, the compensation being proposed for those who will be relocated,
17 the buffers required, prop planes flying out of flight patterns, and aircraft linking in with
18 other carrier's schedules.
19 Jackson asked if the Hearing Examiner had received a copy of the Federal Aviation
20 Authority (FAA) memo; a copy was given to him. There was discussion between Jackson
ii and Good on whether airports could restrict Stage II aircraft, the need for restrictions on
22 Stage III aircraft to be approved by the Secretary of the Department of Transportation and
23 the need for an applicant to mention the wetlands, or other environmental concerns in the
24 original application.
25 Jackson asked if the FAA memo could be made a part of the record. Watts said it
26 would be wise to make it part of the record under the Appearance of Fairness doctrine.
27 Warner said the FAA memo stated the County could not legislate the noise of
28 aircrafts but the airport may want to do this on its own.
29
30 Watts spoke about several relevant court cases and legal citations showing that the
31 _ noise issue is federally controlled. He said the Port is a municipality and they are subject
32 to suit if the noise is of such a volume that it creates a nuisance. The Port has the power
33 of eminent domain. The law says that a proprietor can regulate but a regulator cannot.
34 He also discussed whether any future strengthening of the runway would require another
35 major development permit. He further stated the Port should pay market value and actual
36 relocation costs to the people being bought out.
37 Good said the people being moved will be paid for the actual cost of relocation.
Minutes, 7/2/91, Page 2
1 IMHOF MOVED TO APPROVE THE HEARING EXAMINER'S RECOMMEN-
2 DATION FOR THE MAJOR DEVELOPMENT PERMIT.
3 IMHOF MOVED TO AMEND BY DELETING RECOMMENDATION ONE
4 AND TWO BECAUSE THE COUNCIL IS PREEMPTED BY LAW FROM THIS
5 AUTHORITY.
6 After some discussion, the -motion to amend carried unanimously.
7 IMHOF MOVED TO DELETE RECOMMENDATION THREE.
8 Warner said if the Port wants to strengthen the runway, it needs to come back for
9 an application. Jackson asked Watts if the Council would need to amend the Code to
10 accommodate this; Watts said the Code would need to be amended.
11 The motion to amend carried unanimously.
12 IMHOF MOVED TO CHANGE NUMBER FOUR ON LINE SIX OF PAGE 20,
13 ENDING THE SENTENCE WITH THE WORD "ACT." AND DELETE THE WORDS
14 "BUT FOR NO LESS THAN FIFTEEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($15,000.00) BEYOND
15 MARKET VALUE FOR A COMPARABLE UNIT."
16 The motion to amend carried unanimously.
17 IMHOF MOVED TO INCLUDE THE RECOMMENDATION BY THE PORT,
18 STATED IN THE MAY 30TH MEMO FROM SOLIDAY, BE ADDED AS AN
19 ADDENDUM: (1) TARIFF MODIFICATIONS TO ENCOURAGE DAY OPERATIONS
20 AND OPERATIONS OF QUIETER AIRCRAFT; (2) ESTABLISH A VOLUNTARY
21 OPERATIONS CURFEW AND (3) ADOPT A NATIONAL NOISE POLICY.
22 Warner asked if the recommendations listed in the memo of May 31 are to be
23 attached to the ordinance and be marked as Exhibit A; Imhof agreed. Warner restated the
24 motion as follows: .
25 IMHOF MOVED TO STRONGLY URGE THE PORT TO CONSIDER THE
26 _ ADOPTION OF THE RECOMMENDATION BY THE PORT, STATED IN THE MAY
27 30TH MEMO FROM SOLIDAY, AS FOLLOWS (1) TARIFF MODIFICATIONS TO
28 ENCOURAGE DAY OPERATIONS AND OPERATIONS OF QUIETER AIRCRAFT;
29 (2) ESTABLISH A VOLUNTARY OPERATIONS CURFEW AND (3) ADOPT A
30 NATIONAL NOISE POLICY, AND HAVE THESE RECOMMENDATIONS ADDED
31 AS "EXHIBIT X.
32 The motion to amend carried unanimously.
Minutes, 7/2/91, Page 3
1 JACKSON MOVED TO AMEND BY REQUESTING THAT THE PORT ON ITS
2 OWN INITIATIVE RESTRICT STAGE TWO AIRCRAFT, AND IMPOSE A CURFEW
3 ONSTAGE THREE AIRCRAFT BY ACQUIRING APPROVAL OF THE SECRETARY
4 OF THE FEDERAL DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.
5 Warner said this asks the Port to restrict the Stage Two operations; and restrict Stage
6 Three at certain hours. The letter from FAA shows there is a mechanism whereby the Port
7 could curtail noisy planes and impose a curfew.
8 Hansey said if the noisier planes were prohibited the contours would shrink; this
9 would mean people would not be bought out that would be with the present contours.
10 Watts agreed if the Port restricts the stage two aircraft the contours will be modified and
11 less people would need to be bought out.
12 The motion to amend was passed 5 -2 with Imhof and Vanderpol against.
13 Motion to approve the amended permit application carved unaninmously.
14 2. RESOLUTION ENDORSING THE NATURAL HERITAGE PLAN AND
15 GOALS (FOLLOWING A SHORT PRESENTATION BY THE NATURAL
16 HERITAGE TASK FORCE) (AB91 -077)
17 Craig Cole, Chairman of the Committee: Many people have worked very hard on
18 this. It was begun a year ago and the members have tried to decide what would ensure
19 Whatcom County will continue to be a liveable community. He stated that the plan was
20 shaped by public input received from the many public hearings. The Committee found a
21 small group of residents who think this should not be undertaken, but the vast majority
22 believe that something ought to be done.
23 He stated that many feel there are steps that should be taken now and the public is
24 willing to make a modest investment; Cole said the Committee should search for trails that
25 should be preserved. This is a checklist for action for the rest of the decade. This plan
26 takes work and the members fear it will be accepted then not acted on. This plan may not
27 enhance but will at least preserve the Whatcom County way of life. The Committee used
28 citizen volunteers, not paid consultants on the plan; it has the support of people across the
29 board. The Committee asked the Council to be decisive and have a sense of direction.
30 Cole said if there are sections the Council does not like, the sections should be omitted
31 _ prior to the vote on the whole plan. The Committee does not want faint or mixed signals.
32 LAIDLAW MOVED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION.
33 VANDERPOL MOVED TO AMEND THE RESOLUTION AS FOLLOWS: LINE
34 35, PAGE 1, DELETE "AND ADOPTED AS COUNTY POLICY" AND ADD "AND
35 SHOULD BE PURSUED SUBJECT TO CONTINUING LEGISLATIVE REVIEW AS
36 APPROPRIATE'; LINE 41, PAGE 1, DELETE "AND ADOPTED AS COUNTY
37 POLICY" AND ADD "AND SHOULD BE PURSUED SUBJECT TO CONTINUING
Minutes, 7/2/91, Page 4
1 LEGISLATIVE REVIEW AS APPROPRIATE"; LINE 20, PAGE 2, DELETE "ADOPTED
2 GOALS" AND ADD "ENDORSED GOALS "; LINE 28, PAGE 2, DELETE "GOALS
3 ADOPTED" AND ADD. "GOALS ENDORSED "; AND LINE 34, PAGE 2, DELETE
4 "ADOPTED" AND ADD "ENDORSED ".
5 After discussion between Warner, Jackson and Vanderpol the vote was taken.
6 The motion carried unanimously.
7 IMHOF MOVED TO AMEND ON LINE 39; PAGE 2, #8 to say " THE COUNTY
8 EXECUTIVE SHALL DESIGNATE THE POSITION OF NATURAL HERITAGE (OR
9 CONSERVATION) OFFICIAL FOR CONSIDERATION IN THE 1992 BUDGET
10 PROCESS. HIS /HER DUTIES SHALL BE AS GENERALLY DESCRIBED IN THE
11 HERITAGE PLAN."
12 After discussion among Vander Yacht, Imhof, Laidlaw, Jackson and Warner, Imhof
13 withdrew his amendment.
14 HANSEY MOVED TO AMEND THE RESOLUTION BY ADDING THE
15 FOLLOWING: LINE 51, PAGE 1 PUT A PERIOD AFTER "GOAL 21" AND DELETE
16 THE REST OF THE SENTENCE. ADD THE FOLLOWING SENTENCE,
17 "EXPENDITURE FROM THIS BOND ISSUE FOR CONSERVATION
18 OPPORTUNITIES MAY BE COMPLEMENTED FROM YET -TO -BE DETERMINED
9 AMOUNTS FROM EXISTING FUNDS SUCH AS THE REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX
20 (BEET):'
21 Hansey said the proposal is the dedication of $155,000 per year for 20 years from the
22 REET fund. Hansey is against linking it exclusively for 20 years to REET as it would be
23 tying the hands of future Council members.
24 There was discussion among Jackson, Warner, Laidlaw, Vanderpol, and Hansey on
25 this issue.
26 Hansey withdrew his amendment.
27 _ HANSEY MOVED TO AMEND AS FOLLOWS: LINE 6, PAGE 2, AFTER THE
28 PERIOD ADD 'PROVIDED IN NO EVENT SHALL THE POWER OF EMINENT
29 DOMAIN BE UT UZED IN RESPECT TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE BAY TO
30 BAKER RAIL -TR.AEL REFERENCED IN GOAL #36.
31 Jackson, Hansey and Imhof discussed the issue.
32 The motion failed 3-4 with Jackson, Imhof, Warner and Laidlaw against.
Minutes, 7/2/91, Page 5
1 Jackson said each district is different; her district is predominately zoned agricultural
2 and is the greatest contributor to open space.
3 JACKSON MOVED. TO POSTPONE ACTION FOR SIX WEEKS TO HAVE
4 MORE TIME TO EXPLAIN THE IMPACTS TO THE PEOPLE WHO DISAGREE
5 WITH IT.
6 There was discussion among Jackson, Vander Yacht, and Imhof.
7 The motion to amend failed 2 -5 with Jackson and Vander Yacht for.
8 The motion carried 5 -2 with Jackson and Vander Yacht against.
9 3. PRIORITIES FOR WATER RESOURCES (AB91 -170)
10 WARNER MOVED THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT PUT THESE ITEMS IN
11 PRIORITY ORDER.
12 Laidlaw disagreed; she said it is the Council's responsibility.
13 Warner withdrew his motion.
t4 Vander Yacht said it should have come to the Council with a recommendation.
15 Woods explained the document he had on the flip charts (document found in AB91-
16 170).
17 Vanderpol thanked Bob Woods for the work he put into this. Vanderpol is not
18 interested in pursuing the ranking of priorities. The Health Department does not really
19 want a ranking so he thinks the Council should forward this to the Health department.
20 HE SO MOVED.
21 The motion was passed with Vander Yacht, Laidlaw and Warner against.
22 - ADDENDUM
23 1. REPORT ON THE INTEREST FREE DEBT PROPOSAL SUGGESTED
24 BY BEN HENKLE AT THE 6/25/91 MEETING.
25 Woods said the proposal of the group "Sovereignty" is to print money to loan to
26 governments. The basic problem is that it adds to the money supply in astronomical
27 amounts. That amount of infusion would cause hyper inflation and could be devastating.
28 He recommends the Council not pursue this.
Minutes, 7/2/91, Page 6
1 INTRODUCTION
2 1. RESOLUTION ADOPTING A SALARY SCHEDULE FOR THE
3 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL (introduced for information purposes;
4 action on July 9) (AB91 -243)
5 Warner said the Council is not adding to its own salary schedule. This action ensures
6 that future Council Members will- not have to vote on their salaries.
7 HANSEY MOVED APPROVAL OF THIS RESOLUTION.
8 The motion was carried.
9 2. RECEIPT OF PETITION FOR VACATION OF BROADWAY BETWEEN
10 SUNSET AND WOOLRIDGE, FILED BY GREGORY EATON
11 (HEARING TO BE SCHEDULED ON ENGINEER'S REPORT)1(AB91-
12 241)
13
14
The above item was received and a public hearing will be set on the engineers report.
The meeting adjourned at 9:52 p.m.
15
16 ATTEST:
17
18 4Bar a Maher, Deputy ouncil Clerk
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Daniel M. Warner, Chairman
Minutes, 7/2/91, Page 7