HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning and Development May 8 1990WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
May 8, 1990
The meeting was called to order at 2 p.m. by Committee
Chairperson Marge Laidlaw in the Council Conference Room.
Others present: Absent:
Emily Jackson None.
Marge Laidlaw
1. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A "ROAD -END PARK" ON
ALDERSON ROAD, AN UNDEVELOPED ROAD RIGHT -OF -WAY WITHIN
SHORELINE JURISDICTION, TO PROVIDE PUBLIC ACCESS (AB90-
158)
2. REQUEST TO RELEASE RON MACE FROM A SPECIAL COVENANT
REQUIRING CONSTRUCTION OF A RESTAURANT ON ALDERSON ROAD
END RIGHT -OF -WAY (AB90 -159)
Matt Aamot explained that the two items relate to a request
dating back to 1979, when the Hearing Examiner approved a permit'
to construct a restaurant on this property. Later the property
was divided by a short plat. The owner is proposing to build a
public toilet and a small park area, and would like to be
released from some terms of the original covenant.
Laidlaw asked if the shorelines permit was in place; Aamot
said yes, number 14 -89. Laidlaw clarified that the Council was
being asked to waive a former agreement that restricted Mr. Mace
to building a restaurant; now Mr. Mace would like to build
condominiums.
Tideland rights were given up as part of the application, as
well as a 10 foot easement to the public, Mace said. Discussion
ensued. Mr. Mace exhibited two maps showing the dimensionstof the
property and the proposed design of the condominiums. Discussion
continued.
Laidlaw asked who would maintain the park and facilities;
Mace said the Hearing Examiner said he and the condominium
owners' association would maintain the park; the restroom
facilities would be turned over to the Parks Department for
maintenance.
HANSEY MOVED THAT THE COMMITTEE RECOMMEND THE APPROVAL TO
RELEASE MACE FROM THE RESTAURANT RESTRICTION AND TO APPROVE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE ROAD END PARK.
Motion carried unanimously.
3. ORDINANCE ADOPTING INTERIM EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION
CONTROLS FOR.LAKE WHATCOM WATERSHED, SAMISH LAKE
WATERSHED AND OTHER CRITICAL SURFACE WATERSHEDS OF THE
COUNTY (AB90 -156)
Laidlaw said she and Imhof have been working on this
ordinance for a while, following the recommendation of the joint
City- County Lake Whatcom Watershed Committee. Jackson asked if
the ordinance would be consistent with the actions taken by the
City; Laidlaw said this would be better, including.fees and
penalties that the City's controls do not include. Jackson said
the intent should be to make the City and County regulations
equal in order to make things easier for developers and private
citizens. Laidlaw pointed out some of the differences between
the City and the County regulations, noting that they are, in
part, due to the different nature of the properties within the
City and the County; for example, the City doesn't have
agricultural land., she said.
Discussion continued. Hansey asked Deputy Public Works
Administrator John Tyler to comment. Tyler explained how the
City's and the County's development standards are being
developed, how the proposed regulations are consistent with the
Uniform Building Code, and discussed the justification for
penalties. Hansey asked where "critical watersheds" are defined;
Tyler said they are defined in the herbicide ordinance.
Discussion continued.
There was discussion of whether a hearing or a Planning
Commission review was needed. Laidlaw said she understood the
ordinance would not need a hearing or Planning Commission review.
Jackson said any ordinance with fees or penalties needs a
hearing, and Hansey said the ordinance establishes "official
controls" in land use, which means Planning Commission review is
needed. Discussion ensued, and the.Clerk was directed to call
Civil Deputy Prosecutor Bob Carmichael for clarification.
HANSEY MOVED THE ORDINANCE BE FORWARDED FOR A DO PASS
SUBJECT TO LEGAL DETERMINATION IF NEEDS A HEARING AND GO THROUGH
THE PLANNING COMMISSION PROCESS.
Laidlaw said she wished people would have asked these
questions in the two weeks since the ordinance's introduction,
rather than waiting until today. She restated the motion.
Jackson said she felt uncomfortable with making a recommendation
prior to knowing whether a public hearing was needed. Laidlaw
said if a hearing were not required, Jackson would have to take a
position; if a hearing is required, the motion has no effect.
Motion carried, with Jackson opposed.
4. REQUEST TO ADOPT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 1989 I -J AND 1990
A -C OPEN SPACE /TIMBER AND OPEN SPACE /OPEN SPACE
APPLICATIONS (AB90 -162)
Sarah Bussard of the Planning Department made the
presentation, distributing a resolution that would provide the
means for taking action on the open space recommendations.
Discussion ensued about various aspects of the proposals among
Bussard, Taylor, Laidlaw.
Laidlaw said she needed time to study the resolution.
Bussard exhibited some maps of the proposed parcels. Discussion
continued among Bussard and Committee members.
HANSEY MOVED THAT THE RESOLUTION BE RECOMMENDED FOR
APPROVAL.
Motion carried.
5. DISCUSSION.OF WHETHER TO SET A HEARING ON AN ORDINANCE
AMENDING THE ... ZONING ORDINANCE ... TO MODIFY ...
RESORT COMMERCIAL AND GATEWAY INDUSTRIAL SIGN
REGULATIONS., AND ... TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS
ON OFF - PREMISE ADVERTISING SIGNS (AB90 -164) (UNDER
INTRODUCTION)
Laidlaw said there was no need to set the hearing at this
time, that no time crunch existed; therefore, the ordinance will
only be introduced. Hansey asked Taylor for clarification of the
statement on the agenda bill.
Carmichael arrived. Laidlaw asked if the erosion ordinance
should have a hearing and /or Planning Commission review, stating
that she understood it did not. Carmichael said he may not have
made himself clear; a public hearing would be needed because it
involves a penalty or a fee, which could be considered to be a
police action, even if the Planning Commission already had a
hearing of its own. Taylor said he agreed initially with
Carmichael that as an "interim ordinance" that it did not require
Planning Commission review. Carmichael said Hansey's assertion
that it would need Planning Commission review also was correct,
and.that a Planning Commission hearing would be required.
HANSEY MOVED TO RECOMMEND THE EROSION ORDINANCE BE SENT TO
THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR RECOMMENDATION.
Motion carried.
The meeting was adjourned at 2:55 p.m.
ATTEST:
Ramona Reeves, Council Clerk
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Margar M. Laidlaw, Member