HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources March 31 20151
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Natural Resources Committee
March 31, 2015
CALL TO ORDER
Committee Chair Barry Buchanan called the meeting to order at 9:37 a.m. in the
Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
ROLL CALL
Present: Barry Buchanan, Carl Weimer, Satpal Sidhu
Absent: None
Also Present: Barbara Brenner, Rud Browne
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION
1. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE TITLE 20 AND THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REGARDING SURFACE MINE PERMITTING, THE
MINERAL RESOURCE LANDS DESIGNATION PROCESS AND MINERAL
RESOURCE LANDS DESIGNATION CRITERIA (AB2014 -344) (ORDINANCE
SCHEDULED FOR INTRODUCTION THIS EVENING)
Weimer asked why land needs to be in the overlay. The Code doesn't require a
mineral resource land (MRL) designation to get a mine permit,
Joshua Fleischman, Planning and Development Services Department, stated land
over a certain size requires an overlay. A permitted surface mine must be in the MRL
overlay to conduct surface mining, according to the Surface Mining Act.
The Committee discussed how the overlay fits into the permit process, site specific
versus area -wide MRLs, whether the Code requires that a permit be in an MRL, and why
anything over 20 acres is impractical.
Brenner stated the language of the first Whereas statement should be corrected.
Leslie Dempsey, Surface Mining Advisory Committee (SMAC) member, described the
history of the SMAC alternative option. Most important is changing the mining permit from
an administrative approval to a conditional use. There are two differences between the
SMAC version and the Brenner /Weimer version. The notification distance is one difference.
She is in favor of the 200 -foot notification area. Also, the costs of up -front environmental
review would discourage new MRL applications unless they had a mine permit. The current
system is broken. Design a process where the County does a countywide review of MRL
resources to protect MRL resources for future supply.
Larry Helm stated the County is accepting grants without any public review. These
grants have impacts on agricultural lands.
Natural Resources Committee, 3/31/2015, Page 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
'14
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
Suzanne Scholl stated she supports the option from the Surface Mining Advisory
Committee. The Hearing Examiner looks only at the staff reports, which are inaccurate. Do
environmental review at the time an MRL is designated.
Mark Personius, Planning and Development Services, answered questions.
The Committee discussed the environmental checklists that don't require much
actual environmental review, when staff does an actual environmental review, what is
included in the upfront environmental review, what is involved if the County were to review
area -wide MRLs, and whether the term "general environmental impact statement (EIS)" is
correct.
Weimer stated he agrees that the county needs to be involved in the overall
designation process, and the proposed ordinance would work in the interim.
Brenner suggested a new Whereas statement, "Whereas Whatcom County's goal is
to take the lead to create MRL designations by doing a general environmental review of
areas the County deems environmentally appropriate."
Weimer moved to amend the ordinance to add a Whereas statement, "Whereas
Whatcom County's goal is to take the lead to create MRL designations by doing a general
environmental review of areas the County deems environmentally appropriate."
The Committee discussed the level of review depending upon the cost, who benefits,
whether those costs can be reimbursed to the county in the long -term, getting the industry
involved in identifying what's available, how Skagit and Snohomish Counties conducted their
initial environmental review and identified their MRL areas, and; which areas, such as cities,
should be removed from MRL areas.
The motion to amend carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Buchanan, Weimer, and Sidhu (3)
Nays: None (0)
Rrannar ctatarl nrlrl a "RP it Fiirthar nr&;inarl" ctatamant
Weimer moved to amend to add language, "Be further ordained that Whatcom
County will work to create MRL designations by doing a general environmental review of
areas the County deems appropriate."
The motion to amend carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Buchanan, Weimer, and Sidhu (3)
Nays: None (0)
Weimer moved to amend the language in the first Whereas statement, "Whereas,
an application has been submitted to amend the Rural (R), Agriculture (AG), Rural Forestry
(RF), and Commercial Forestry (CF) zoning districts and Mineral Resource Land (MRL)
Special Fening districts to require a conditional use permit for surface mining subject to
Washington State's Surface Mining Act; and"
The motion to amend carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Buchanan, Weimer, and Sidhu (3)
Nays: None (0)
Natural Resources Committee, 3/31/2015, Page 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Weimer moved to recommend introduction as amended to the full Council.
The Committee discussed whether the 20 -acre limit is too small and should be
changed to 40 acres.
Weimer moved to amend Council packet page 19, item (7) from 20 acres to 40
acres.
Ryan Skove, Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR), answered
questions.
The Committee discussed size limits in other counties, the average sizes of mining
operations, whether the definition of a mining area includes areas used for stockpiling and
equipment storage, what the State uses the performance security for, and how the State
handles situations where land isn't reclaimed.
The motion to amend carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Buchanan, Weimer, and Sidhu (3)
Nays: None (0)
The motion to recommend approval as amended carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Buchanan, Weimer, and Sidhu (3)
Nays: None (0)
OTHER BUSINESS
Buchanan gave an update on the status of forming a Wildlife Advisory Committee.
ADJOURN
Tf- " 11uPned at 10:33 a.m.
ATc
ATTEST)Q GO `�
U
#c
.p
f
Dana Brown- C7avis, °Caen lerk
',���r << i► i i i i *1 0\
Jill Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Natural Resources Committee, 3/31/2015, Page 3