Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
ord2017-026
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 2017 -152 CLEARANCES Initial Date Date Received in Council Office Agenda Date Assigned to: Originator: Cliff Strong 411912017 UR E C E B V E© APR 2 5 2017 5/1/1017 Planning & Development Division Head: Mark Personius �"� � 4/19/1017 5/2/17 Introduction Dept. Head: Sam Ran 411911017 5/16/17 Hearing Prosecutor: Royce Buckingham =- WHATCOM COUNTY Purchasasing /inglBudget: COUNCI L. Executive: Jack Louws Z lj TITLE OF DOC NT: Proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan by amending the Point Roberts Subarea Plan to delete the Point Roberts Character Plan, and amendment to WCC 20.72 Point Roberts Special District to add certain development standards and to adopt the Point Roberts Design Guidelines ATTACHMENTS: Staff report outlining the procedural criteria for processing this request Draft ordinance that would effect the request • Exhibit A to the ordinance, showing the proposed amendments to the Subarea Plan, • Exhibit B to the ordinance, showing the proposed amendments to WCC 20.72; and, • Exhibit C to the ordinance, a copy of the Character Plan converted to become the Point Roberts Design Guidelines. SEPA review required? ( X ) Yes ( ) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing? (X ) Yes ( ) NO SEPA review completed? ( X ) Yes ( ) NO Requested Date: 5116117 SUMMARY STATEMENT OR LEGAL NOTICE LANGUAGE: (If this item is an ordinance or requires a public hearing, you must provide the language for use in the required public notice. Be specific and cite RCW or WCC as appropriate. Be clear in explaining the intent of the action.) This is a proposed amendment to the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code by the Point Roberts Community Advisory Committee ( PRCAC). The amendments would remove the Point Roberts Character Plan from the Point Roberts Subarea Plan and adopt the architectural guidelines therein as an addendum to WCC 20.72 (Point Roberts Special District) as the Point Roberts Design Guidelines. Additionally, certain development standards from the Character Plan would be moved to WCC 20.72. There are no substantive changes to the Character Plan proposed by this action. It only makes procedural and formatting changes to help the PRCAC expedite the public review and update process for the architectural guidelines. COMMITTEE ACTION. COUNCIL ACTION.• 5/2/2017: Substitute discussed 5/2/2017: Introduced 7 -0 5/16/2017: Forwarded for concurrent recview 7 -0 5/16/2017: Adopted 7 -0, Ord. 2017 -026 5/16/2017: Motion carried 6 -1, Brenner opposed, to approve all Comprehensive Plan amendments concurrently Related County Contract #: Related File Numbers: Ordinance or Resolution Number: Ord. 2017 -026 Please Note: Once adopted and signed, ordinances and resolutions are available for viewing and printing on the County's website at. www.co.whatcom.wa.uslcouncil. 5 -16 -2017 PROPOSED BY: Planning INTRODUCTION DATE: 5/2/2017 ORDINANCE NO. 2017 -026 AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY AMENDING THE POINT ROBERTS SUBAREA PLAN TO DELETE THE POINT ROBERTS CHARACTER PLAN, AND AMEND WCC 20.72 POINT ROBERTS SPECIAL DISTRICT TO ADOPT THE POINT ROBERTS DESIGN GUIDELINES WHEREAS, the Point Roberts Community Advisory Committee no longer wishes the Point Roberts Character Plan to be a part of the Point Roberts Subarea Plan but rather be adopted as an addendum to WCC 20.72, Point Roberts Special District; and, WHEREAS, The Whatcom County Council reviewed and considered Planning Commission recommendations, staff recommendations, advisory committee recommendations, and public comments; and WHEREAS, The County Council hereby adopts the following findings of fact: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Point Roberts Character Plan is a set of architectural design guidelines and development standards specific to the Point Roberts Subarea. The Character Plan was referenced in and adopted through the Point Roberts Subarea Plan, which is in turn adopted as part of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan. 2. The Point Roberts Community Advisory Committee ( PRCAC) has been working on revising the Character Plan since April 2015 and has held approximately 28 public meetings on the subject. 3. On March 14, 2017, the PRCAC voted to remove the Point Roberts Character Plan from the Point Roberts Subarea Pan and petitioned the County to do so, while incorporating the PRCAC's review role and certain of the development standards into WCC 20.72, and converting the architectural design guidelines into the Point Roberts Design Guidelines. This was reconfirmed by the PRCAC at a public meeting on April 11, 2017. 4. In accordance with the PRCAC's desire, the proposed amendments delete all references to the Character Plan in the Point Roberts Subarea Plan. 5. Concurrent with the proposal to delete the Point Roberts Character Plan, the proposed amendments add new regulations to WCC 20.72 Point Roberts Special District. These regulations are consistent with those currently contained in the Character Plan. Page 1 of 3 6. Additionally, the architectural design guidelines will be adopted as an addendum to WCC 20.72, to be known as the Point Roberts Design Guidelines. 7. At this point, the intent of this action is not to amend the architectural design guidelines as expressed in the to -be- archived Character Plan, only to move where they are housed. The PRCAC intends to work on the Design Guidelines over the next several months to update them, and moving them to the County code allows the PRCAC to do so as a code amendment and not be temporally constrained by the timing of the annual docket. 8. A determination of non - significance (DNS) was issued under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) on April 12, 2017. 9. Notice of the proposed amendments was submitted to the Washington State Department of Commerce on March 27, 2017. The County received confirmation from Commerce indicating that they had received the notice and that Material ID #23529 had been assigned to the materials received. 10. The amendment conforms to the requirements of the Growth Management Act, is internally consistent with the countywide planning policies and is consistent with any interlocal planning agreements. 11. The public interest will be served by approving the amendment. 12. The amendments will have no effect upon the rate or distribution of population growth, employment growth, development, and conversion of land as envisioned in the comprehensive plan. 13. The amendments will have no effect on the ability of the County and /or other service providers, such as cities, schools, water and /or sewer purveyors, fire districts, and others as applicable, to provide adequate services and public facilities including transportation facilities. 14. The amendments will have no impact upon designated agricultural, forest and mineral resource lands. 15. The amendments do not include or facilitate spot zoning. 16. No Urban Growth Area will be affected by the amendments. 17. The Planning Commission held a public hearing regarding these amendments on April 13, 2017. Notification of the public hearing was published in the Bellingham Herald on March 31, 2017. Notice was also sent to the Point Roberts All Point Bulletin, Cascadia Weekly, the Foothills Gazette, KGMI, the Lynden Tribune, the Northern Light, and Whatcom Watch. 18. Additional findings of fact are found in the staff report for this action. CONCLUSIONS 1. The subject amendments are consistent with and implement the GMA planning goals. The amendments conform to applicable requirements of the Growth Management Act. Page 2of3 2. The subject amendments satisfy the approval criteria of WCC 2.160.080. 3. The proposed amendments to the development regulations are consistent with the comprehensive plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Whatcom County Council that: Section 1. Amendments to the Point Roberts Subarea Plan are hereby adopted as shown in Exhibit A; and, Section 2. Amendments to the Whatcom County Code Chapter 20.72, Point Roberts Special District, are hereby adopted as shown on Exhibit B; and, Section 3. Exhibit C is hereby adopted as the Point Roberts Design Guidelines. ADOPTED this 16th day of May , 2017. WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOMu4�TY, WASHINGTON ATTQS � !! fVf !! _ Q a d ! a •!d coUNTN ` �.• 4� r Dana Brd r a sl I oun al Clerk �J�11Et1111`1���\ APPROVED as to form: 1 - Civil p � _ -r�ssecutor tBauchanan, Chairperson lk Approved () Denied Jack Lo s, E4tcutije Date: —7 o2.O Page 3of3 EXHIBIT A (Point Roberts Character Plan) Whatcom County 2017 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan Cover Photo — "Point Roberts Community Quilt" Designed and quilted by the Point Roberts Quitters in 2000 to benefit the Point Roberts Historical Society Museum Project. The quilt is on display at the Point Roberts Community Center. Section ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ON Whulen 1'a+'mHourer" Point Roberts Community Quilt This Wan was or tzOnaliv developed bv: Whatcom County Council Ward Nelson, Chair Marlene Dawson, Barbara Brenner Dan McShane Bob Imhof Connie Hoag Sam Crawford Whatcom County Planning & Development Services Hal Hart, AICP, Director Sylvia Goodwin AICP, Planning Division Manager Amy d. Pederson, Planner I Whatcom County Planning Commission Danna Beech, Chair Cheryl Ferrier Robert Wiesen Richard Gilda Al Schreiber Dave Pros John Steensma Ron Roosma Greg Rustand Point Roberts Sub -Area Steering Committee Syd Wallace Michael Rosser Irene Waters Shelly Damewood Frank Ney Jim Julius Consultants Madronaa Planning & Development Services 5604 2& Avenue NW Seattle, WA 1256 Lawrence Street Port Townsend, WA TABLE OF CONTENTS Contents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................ ............................... TABLE F ONTENTS................................... ..,........................................ .....,.,..,.:.,...,............ . u... � EXECUTIVESUMMARY.. .... ............................................................................ ........................ 1 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................... ............................... 3 1.1 Purpose .............................................................................................. ..............................3 1.2 Scope ................................................................................................. ..............................3 1.3 Integration with Comprehensive Plan .............................................. ............................... 3 1.4 Relationship to Other Regulatory Documents ................................. ............................... 4 1.5 Relationship to Other Planning Documents ..................................... ............................... 4 2. PLANNING PROCESS & COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT .............. ............................... 6 2.1 Process Background ......................................................................... ............................... 6 2.2 Planning Process .............................................................................. ............................... 6 2.3 Community Involvement .... ....... .................... ......... ........ ,................ ,.......... __................ 6 2.3.1 Steering Committee...... .................................................................................... ...... _ 6 2.3.2 Workshop ...................................................................................... ..............................7 2.3.3 Public Meetings & Hearings ........................................................ ............................... 7 2.4 2017 Update ..................................................................................... ............................... 7 3 CRAFTING A VISION FOR POINT ROBERTS ................................... ............................... 8 3.1 Point Roberts History, Population & Existing Conditions .............. ............................... 8 3.1.1 Population Demographics ............................................................ ............................... 9 3.1.2 Day Visitor Population ............................................ .................................... ............... 9 3.1.3 Permanent & Seasonal Population: ........................................................................... 10 3.1.4 Population Summary & Impact on Sub -Area Plan:................... ............................... 11 3.1.5 Existing Land Use Patterns & Development Trends ................. ............................... 12 3.1.6 Adjacent Land Use Patterns — Tsawwassen B. C ...................... ............................... 13 3.1.7 Point Roberts Current Economic Profile.. ................................................................ 14 3.1.8 Point Roberts Current Build -Out Analysis ................................ ............................... 19 3.2 A Vision and Direction for the Community .................................. ............................... 22 3.3 Making the Vision a Reality — Community Focus & Direction . _ . ............................. 22 3.3.1 Point Roberts Sub -Area Vision Statement ................................. ............................... 23 Whateom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan 3.3.2 Community Planning Concepts ................................................. ............................... 23 3.3.3 A Challenge to Redefining Community Character — Pre - Existing Lots ................... 24 4 POINT ROBERTS LAND USE APPROACH ...... _ .............................. ............................... 26 4.1 Point Roberts, the Growth Management Act, and Urban Growth Areas ...................... 26 4.2 Sub -Area Plan Land Use Approach ............................................... ............................... 27 4.3 The Mixed -Use Village Center ...................................................... ............................... 28 4.3.1 Mixed -Use Historical Perspective ............................................. ............................... 28 4.3.2 Point Roberts Village Center ..................................................... ............................... 28 4.3.3 Village Center Challenges and Opportunities ............... ............ . ............................... 29 4.3.4 Village Center Economic Benefit .............................................. ............................... 29 4.3.5 Economic Development Strategy ........ ............... ......... :............................................ 30 4.4 Open Space, Trails and Connections ............................................. ............................... 30 4.5 Sustainable Development & Site Planning .................................... ............................... 31 4.6 Transitional Zoning ........................... .......... ................. ...... ........ ................................... 31 4.7 Optimum Land Use Map - Point Roberts Revised Build -Out Projections ................... 32 5 GOALS, POLICIES AND PROJECTS ................................................. ............................... 33 GOAL 1.0 — PROTECT AND ENHANCE POINT ROBERTS ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY......... ......................................................................................... ............................... 33 GOAL 2.0 — BUILD A SENSE OF COMMUNITY ................................. ............................... 36 GOAL 3.0 - PROMOTE APPROPRIATE INFRASTRUCTURE & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.. ................................................................................................ .................. 38 GOAL 4.0 — PROVIDE PARKS, TRAILS, RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES AND OPENSPACE ............................................................................................ ............................... 40 GOAL 5.0 — SUBAREA PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ........................... ............................... 41 6 OPTIMUM LAND USE MAP .............................................................. ............................... 42 6.1 Preparing the Optimum Land Use Map ......................................... ............................... 42 6.2 Proposed Land Use Designations .................................................. ............................... 43 6.3 Optimum Land Use Map ............................................................... ............................... 43 7 CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT ..................................................... ............................... 44 7.1 Introduction .................................................................................... ............................... 44 7.2 Goal .................................................................................................. .............................44 7.3 Policy ............................................................................................. ............................... 44 7.4 Growth Management Act Requirements ....................................... ............................... 44 7.5 Relationship to Whatcom County Capital Facilities Element ....... ............................... 45 7.6 Service Area Boundaries ................................................................ ............................... 45 In Whateom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan 7.7 Concurrency ..................................................................................... .............................45 7.8 Whatcom County Capital Facilities Requirements ........................ ............................... 45 7.9 Population Basis for Analysis ........................................................ ............................... 45 7.10 Capital Facilities Analysis Matrix ................................................. ............................... 45 7.11 Whatcom County Level of Services .............................................. ............................... 46 7.12 Available Revenues and Capital Facilities to Support Land Use .. ............................... 47 7.13 Point Roberts Utilities Element ..................................................... ............................... 47 8 APPENDICES ........................................................ ............................... ........................... 5049 8.1 Build -Out Analysis ......................................... ............................... ........................... 5049 8.1.1 Analysis —Current Zoning ......................................................... ............................... 50 8.1.2 Analysis — Proposed Zoning .................................................. ............................... 5159 8.2 Population Projections .............. ..................................................... ............................... 51 8.3 Results of Workshops — Alternatives Considered ......................... ............................... 51 8.3.1 Meeting of September 21, 2000 ................................................ ...................... »........ 51 8.3.2 Meeting of October 20, 2000 ..................................................... ............................... 52 8.3.3 Meeting of October 21, 2000 ................................................. ............................... 5453 8.4 Rules of Conduct & Social Contract .............................................. ............................... 55 9 MAPS ...................................................................... ............................... ...........................5837 9.1 Topography Map ........................................................................ ............................... 5857 9.2 Sensitive Areas Map .................................................................. ............................... 585-7 9.3 Transportation Map .................................................................... ............................... 585-7 9.4 Existing Land Use Map ............................................................. ............................... 58-57 9.5 Proposed Land Use Map ............................................................ ............................... 58-57 10 SUPPORTING DATA ....................................................................... ............................... 5955 10.1 Point Roberts Border Crossings ... .......... ...... ... ... ........................ .. .......................... ... 5955 10.2 Tax Assessed Valuation — Point Roberts, City of Blaine, Birch Bay Water & Sewer District, and Whatcom County Fire District No. 13 .......................................... ...... .......... ... 60-59 Tables Table 1. Permanent and seasonal population estimates of Point Roberts ...... ............................... 10 Table 2. Tax Assessed Valuation ................ :................................................................................. 14 Table 3. Point Roberts New Construction... ..... ............ .............................................................. 15 Table 4. Point Roberts Water District New Connections.. ............... __ ....................... .............. 16 Table 5. Point Roberts Building Permits ....................................................... ............................... 17 Table 6. Point Roberts State B &O Tax Figures ............................................. ............................... 18 iv Whatcom County 201701• Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan Table 7. Point Roberts Current Build- Out ..................................................... ............................... 21 Table 8. Point Roberts Revised Build - Out .................................................... ............................... 32 Table 9. 6 -Year Capital Facilities Cost & Funding Sources.......... .................................. ............ 46 Table 10. Anticipated Impacts Based on County LOS Standards ................. ............................... 46 Table11. Current Zoning .............................................................................. ............................... 50 Table12. Proposed Zoning ........................................................................ ............................... 515-50 Table 13. Population Projection ..................................................................... ............................... 51 Table 14. Point Roberts Charrette Alternatives Report Card ........................ ............................... 54 Table 15. Tax Assessed Valuation — Point Roberts, City of Blaine, Birch Bay Water & Sewer District, and Whatcom County Fire District No. 13 .................................. ............................... 60-59 Figures Figure 1. Annual Border Crossings 1986 - 2000 ................................................ ............................... 9 Figure 2. Monthly Border Crossings 1996 - 2000 ............. _ .................... .. .................. ................ , 10 Figure 3. Point Roberts Population Growth 1980 - 2000 ................................ ............................... 11 Figure 4. Point Roberts Tax Assessed Valuation 1991 - 2000 ........................ ............................... 15 Figure 5. Point Roberts New Construction Valuation 1991- 2000 ................. .......................,....... 16 Figure 6. Point Robert New Water Connections 1991 - 2000..... .................... ............................... 17 Figure 7. Point Roberts Building Permits 1991 - 2000 .................................... ........................,...... 18 Figure 8. Point Roberts State B &O Tax 1991 - 1999 ...................................... ............................... 19 Seetion B EXECUTIVE SUMMARY "Community Center" Point Roberts Community Quilt The 2001 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan is the result of a community -wide public planning process begun in September of 2000. It included participation by citizen volunteers, county staff, and Point Roberts property owners. The Sub -Area Plan strives to balance the special nature of Point Roberts with the need to plan for future development following the guidance of the Growth Management Act. The key features of this revision to the Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan include: • Simplification and consistency in zoning classifications throughout Point Roberts. • Use of the "Small Town Commercial" zoning classification to focus commercial development into a Village Center. • Development of a new "Transitional" residential zoning classification to permit appropriate future development that preserves and enhances the unique physical qualities of Point Roberts. Point Roberts is both a geographically unique portion of Whatcom County and a place of special natural beauty. Public testimony, citizen input, and committee discussions centered on the need to preserve the natural beauty of Point Roberts while focusing commercial development and retaining the "small town" feel of the Point. Of special concern was the existence of many platted but undeveloped residential lots. These lots are underdeveloped due to their relative small size, location, and the lack of necessary public infrastructure to allow development at current densities. These existing substandard lots presented a challenge to the Committee since they represented a sizable portion of the Point's "future development inventory." The solution to this situation was to formulate a strategy to encourage better residential subdivision design. Key to encouraging appropriate development and design was the creation of a new "Transitional" residential zoning classification. This zoning classification features a two - tier density structure — the underlying zoning for parcels designated Transitional is one dwelling unit per five (5) acres. Homes can be constructed at this density following the normal permitting process. The Transitional parcels also have the added option of being developed at higher density (one unit per acre) if all of the following three (3) criteria are met: Installation of an on -site wastewater system (STEP, community drain field, etc.) that could eventually be connected to a community -wide wastewater system, Whatcom County 201704 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan Use of cluster design for structures and improvements, and Provision for open space beyond that which would normally be required. The other key feature of this Sub -Area Plan is the focusing of commercial development into a new Village Center. The "Small Town Commercial" zone has been centered on Gulf Road, linking the main arterial (Tyee Drive) to the beach. This mixed -use, pedestrian- orientated commercial zone was developed to create an identity for Point Roberts while permitting the type and scale of development considered most appropriate for the area. Together, the Village Center and the Transitional zoning classification provides a blend of uses and development densities designed to fulfill the Sub - Area's Vision of having "Point Roberts retain its small town character while promoting focused development that is sustainable and appropriate. " i Whatcom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan 1. Seefion.-CSeetiemi 1.0 INTRODUCTION "W?ed •r1's Store" Point Roberts Community Quilt 1.1 Purpose Sub -Area Plans are area - specific planning documents adopted in order to address future development in locations governed by land use regulations that, due to changing circumstances, do not fully address current development trends, challenges, and /or opportunities. Typically, a Sub -Area Plan provides finer -grain guidance than can be contained within the broader context of the countywide Comprehensive Plan. Although the overarching Sub -Area Vision, Goals, Policies and Projects are identified in this document (see Section S), subsequent specific project review will occur once individual development is proposed. The purpose of this Sub -Area Plan is to provide specific guidance on the establishment of future uses at Point Roberts consistent with the direction of the May 1997 Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan, as amended. The intent of this Sub -Area Plan is to become incorporated as an element of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan. This Sub -Area Plan is the first update of the 1990 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan. It is the result of a public planning process to engage community discussion relating to future development in Point Roberts, the community's vision of its future, economic challenges and opportunities, and the environmental issues surrounding future land uses. 1.2 Scope As reflected in RCW 36.70A, all of the Goals, Policies and Projects contained in this Sub -Area Plan must comply with the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) and be consistent with the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan. However, this Sub -Area Plan is not required to include all of the elements required in a Comprehensive Plan. This Sub -Area Plan will be subject to State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review. Identified environmental issues associated with changes in land use will be evaluated at the programmatic level. Future applicable project -level actions within the Sub -Area will be subject to subsequent environmental review. 1.3 Integration with Comprehensive Plan This Sub -Area Plan will be integrated as an element of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan so that it remains consistent with State GMA regulations and its impacts on other areas of the county are considered and mitigated. To maintain consistency between planning documents, Whatcom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan certain recommendations regarding policy alterations are included as an implementing step within this Plan. 1.4 Relationship to Other Regulatory Documents Several regulatory documents guide development in Whatcom County. These include the State Growth Management Act (GMA), the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan), the Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan, and in shoreline areas, the Whatcom County Shoreline Management Plan (SMP). This update to the Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan is generally consistent with and in compliance with these other regulatory documents. Minor amendments to the Comp Plan and SMP may be necessary to implement the revised Sub -Area Plan. From a regulatory standpoint, a hierarchy exists between GMA, the Comp Plan, the Sub -Area Plan, and the SMP. The Comp Plan is prepared in accordance with the GMA. The Sub -Area Plan is an element of the Comp Plan and provides additional and specific guidance on land uses within Point Roberts. Thus the Sub -Area Plan and the Comp Plan are, for regulatory purposes, one document that provides both general and specific guidance concerning future development. The SMP is an additional layer of development regulations administered at the local level that take the general and specific guidance found in the Comp Plan/Sub -Area Plan and define additional specific guidance for development adjacent to the shoreline. Comp Plans /Sub -Area Plan may contain development regulations that are more stringent than the SMP but cannot contain development regulations less stringent than the SMP. The Comprehensive Plan is established by state statute to be the basic source of reference for the community on land use matters. The Comp Plan promotes a community's agreed -upon vision for the future. The Comp Plan forms the basis for the County's zoning regulations. The uses designated as allowable within the Sub -Area will be incorporated into the County's implementing codes, ordinances and regulations. Consistent with the requirements of RCW 36.70A, all development regulations must implement and be subordinate to the policies and standards contained in the Comprehensive Plan. For development within 200 feet of the shoreline, the requirements of the Whatcom County Shoreline Management Plan (SMP) are to be applied as well. These requirements are in addition to the requirements contained in the Comp Plan and zoning regulations and are intended to provide specific guidance over development projects in the vicinity of the shoreline due to the unique environmental concerns related to development close to the water's edge. The Whatcom County SMP is due for revision in the year 2002. 1.5 Relationship to Other Planning Documents In addition to the documents listed in Section 1.4 that set out a regulatory framework for the Subarea Plan, other recent planning documents provide additional guidance on issues of interest to Point Roberts and additional information relating to the environmental features found in Point Roberts. These documents include the Point Roberts Strategic Economic Plan completed by the Port of Bellingham in November of 1999, ixe P64ne sCho" -Pleto ,j� #c�p4e 11iy lb e Whiltetliv1 CoumY 4 ou €lciI it +- Apri1-1994 and amended the Point Roberts Subarea Background Document dated January 1990. t Whatcom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan The Point Roberts Strategic Economic Plan summarized Point Robert's market opportunities as "further developing the residential, recreation and tourism economy as well as diversification into compatible lines of business."' The Plan included the following strategies: • Increasing retail shopping opportunities • development of arts, crafts, galleries & other specialty goods • developing more diverse eating and drinking establishments • providing better signage • developing better beach public access • improving (establishing) pedestrian and bicycle trails • increasing water- orientated activities • increase the number of camping/RV facilities, B &Bs, and small hotels • positioning Point Roberts as the US headquarters for Canadian firms • make Point Roberts an efficient place for the Canadian film business • develop high tech business opportunities for data processing & internet -based businesses In addition to these strategies, the Strategic Economic Plan included seven (7) economic development goals.2 They included: • Promote a Strong Economy • Foster a Diverse Economy • Provide for Educational Opportunities, including Job Training • Ensure an Efficient Infrastructure System • Support Effective Working Relationships • Evaluate Governance Issues • Future Planning ��I The D int D�min9tfer,F^7oiv,-- wmplefeg rr_,ugh the a ff ,ate, of !he Point 'U.,L..eAs Charaeter aoffitnerttta ! an "fi!!e- -- ter, -t.m.e development at the-Pffin- The January 1990 Point Roberts Subarea Background Document contains information relating to the physical and environmental features in Point Roberts. Specifically, Section 11 of this document contains information related to the topography, geology, soils, and flora /fauna. Please refer to this document for additional information. This revision to the Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan has attempted to carry forward many of the themes contained in these documents so as to be consistent with and complementary to these other bodies of work. T1w ign- me- t"F4he-C-haTiwter Plan are enNIsion°• id4ri -cite eltwi-gn of- dw- Vi -4aSe Center and am"°° o i;;l affts while rnMany of the strategies contained in the Strategic Economic Plan can be found in this Plan's Policies and Projects. 1 Point Roberts Strategic Economic Development Plan Final Report — page 27 2 Point Roberts Strategic Economic Development Plan Final Report — page 46 - 52 WhatcomCnpgty291]III Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan 2. Seeflon4APLANNING PROCESS & COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT I 1 "Water's Store" Point Roberts Community Quilt 2.1 Process Background The first Point Roberts Plan was completed in April of 1979. The Whatcom County Council updated this Plan in January of 1990 through the approval of the Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan. This Sub -Area Plan is a further update to these prior planning documents. 2.2 Planning Process The Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan was the product of the following public planning process. A Point Roberts Steering Committee was formed to oversee the planning process, facilitate public participation, develop goals, planning alternatives, assess the planning alternatives, and develop a preferred alternative. The Steering Committee, after reviewing community input, then submitted their work product to the Planning Commission, which held a public hearing and, following a public workshop session, formulated a recommendation to the County Council. The County Council then considered the Planning Commission recommendation, held a Public Hearing, and made a decision regarding the revised Sub -Area Plan. 2.3 Community Involvement Public participation has been integral to the preparation of this Sub -Area Plan. Opportunities for public involvement included Steering Committee Meetings, a Public Workshop, a community open house and meeting, Public Hearing and Workshop before the Whatcom County Planning Commission, and Public Hearings before the County Council. 2.3.1 Steering Committee A six - member Steering Committee was appointed by the County to oversee the Sub -Area Plan development and to formulate a recommendation to the Whatcom County Planning Commission. County Planning Division staff was also dedicated to the process to aid in facilitating a recommended Sub -Area Plan. In addition to County planning staff, the Point Roberts Water District manager also participated in the Sub -Area planning process. The Steering Committee and staff members met on seven occasions during an eight -month time period to receive community comments at the open house and to discuss and formulate a Vision Statement, Sub - Area Goals, Policies, Projects, and a Preferred Land Use Map. Whatcom County 201704 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan 2.3.2 Workshop A two -day planning workshop was held in Point Roberts to engage the public in the identification of community issues and vision. This workshop included numerous activities intended to identify and prioritize the issues and opportunities of greatest importance to the community. Using a facilitated approach, which recognized and discussed development concepts, the Steering Committee began the process of developing a preferred approach to the recommended revisions to the Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan. 2.3.3 Public Meetings & Hearings The following public meetings, workshops, and hearings were held during the Sub -Area Plan development process. September 21, 2000 — Initial meeting of the Steering Committee October 20 -21, 2000 — Two -day Steering Committee public workshop November 16, 2000 — Second meeting of the Steering Committee January 18, 2001 — Third meeting of the Steering Committee February 15, 2001 — Fourth meeting of the Steering Committee March 29, 2001 — Fifth meeting of the Steering Committee April 28, 2001 — Open House and sixth Steering Committee meeting June 14, 2001 — Public Hearing before the Planning Commission June 28, 2001 — Planning Commission Workshop Session October 9, 2001 — Planning and Development Committee Session October 23, 2001 — Planning and Development Committee Session November 27, 2001 — County Council public hearing December 11, 2001 — County Council concurrent review and adoption 2.1 2017 Update i3n April 11. 2017. 2017. the Point Roberts C:on mtinity Advisory Committee (PRCAC) voted to. • rescind the Point Roberts Character Plan; • while simultaneously transfer ail substantive, non - architectural rules from the Character Plan to WCC 2172, Point Roberts Special District, • adopt as an addendum to WCC 20.72 sections 4-006 through 01 most of the Architectural Design Criteria Mand 6-O01 { Lig_htin ) as the Point Robarls �'ommerccial 4 Institwi,onal D sign Guidelines. Thus, this }clan has been updated to delete all references to the Character Plan (though no other updates are included other than this section). Qr 1:st the�Whatcom County Planning Commission h' Fs2i, and on X ceu the County Council Yuemi. Whatcom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan Seetion -A- A CRAFTING A VISION FOR POINT ROBERTS Point Roberts Community Quilt 3.1 Point Roberts History, Population & Existing Conditions Point Roberts, the southern tip of a peninsula that extends south from the lower British Columbia mainland, is 4.9 square miles in size and is unincorporated. Land access to the rest of the United States (US) and Whatcom County is through Canada, a distance of about 25 miles. Point Roberts human history dates prior to 500 B. C., when a large aboriginal population inhabited the area. In modern times, Captain George Vancouver sighted Point Roberts in the summer of 1792 and gave the area its present name in honor of his friend, Captain Henry Roberts. In 1846 Point Roberts officially became a US territory as the result of an US /British treaty making the 49th Parallel the north -waulh dividing line. The English had come to look upon Fort Victoria as the future center of their settlements on the coast and were therefore willing to give up territory on the mainland to keep Vancouver Island. The US was willing to bend the dividing line around Vancouver Island in exchange for the remainder of the dividing line following the 491h parallel. As a result of this compromise, Point Robert's unique geo- political. situation resulted. In 1894, a colony of Icelandic families migrated from Victoria and settled in the area. In the early 1900's they were extended homestead rights by the US government who had previously considered Point Roberts a military reservation. Today, some of the larger tracts of land in Point Roberts are still owned by the descendants of these settlers. The turn of the 20th century was a boom time for Point Roberts. By 1905 there were forty-seven fishing traps operating off the shores of the Point and canneries dotted the shoreline, taking advantage of the Fraser River salmon runs. Point Roberts recent history has been tied to the US /Canadian monetary exchange rate and the Canadian recreational market. With its isolated geographical location, Point Roberts has historically been more dependent on the Canadian economy than the United States economy. Economic history has reflected how cost imbalances between US /Canadian goods and services can affect Point Robert's local economy. Recently however more US residents have chosen to move to Point Roberts, lessening the impact of the Canadian market and reflecting signs that Point Roberts is beginning to form its own internal economy. While the number of US residents in Point Roberts has increased over the last 10 years, many of the platted lots are owned by Canadians and the majority of the visitors to Point Roberts come from the greater Vancouver area. Whatcom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan 3.1.1 Population Demographics Due to the US /Canadian border, Point Roberts has experienced less development than the surrounding Canadian area to the north (City of Tsawwassen). While Tsawwassen is an urban center with a population of approximately 20,000, Point Roberts has a permanent population estimated to be closer to 1,300. With much of the development centered close to the water's edge, the interior of the peninsula has a distinct rural development character and density. Point Roberts has three different population groups; Permanent year -round residents, Seasonal residents who spend summers and /or weekends in Point Roberts, and Day visitors. 3.1.2 Day Visitor Population Day visitor information can be taken from border crossing data. While border crossings are necessary for all three segments of the population, larger fluctuations and multi -year border crossing trends can be tied more directly to the day- visitor segment of the population. As Figure 1 illustrates, the day visitor population has been steadily declining from its height in 1992 when day trips to Point Roberts were motivated by shopping trips tied to monetary exchange rate and price advantages for certain commodities. In the last three years in particular (1998 — 2000), border crossing numbers have seen less fluctuation and become more predictable. 3,000,000 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 >7u Ivvi 1998 1999 2000 Figure 1. Annual Border Crossings 1986 -2000 Source: US Customs The day visitor segment has also seen more of a consistent seasonal variation over the last five years (1996 — 2000). As reflected on Figure 2, the day visitor count increases to form a distinctive "summer hump" quite commonly found in seaside recreational communities. Whatcom Counly 20177411 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan 160,000 140,000 - -- 120,000 100,000 80,000 60,000 —TO 40,000 20,000 dv do .0 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Figure 2. Monthly Border Crossings 1996 -2000 Source: US Customs This summer - concentrated border crossing "hump" contrasts sharply with the same daily visitor information for the two previous 5 -year periods (1986 -1990 & 1991 - 1995). See Section 11.1.2, 11. 1.3 and 11. 1.4 for comparative data. 3.1.3 Permanent & Seasonal Population: The use of US Census reports, Water District information, registered voter information, and other studies, yields the following permanent and seasonal population estimates. Table 1. Permanent and seasonal. druron rslitnares o/ I mat Roberts Year Permanent I Seasonal I Total 1980 461 1,851 2,312 1990 916 2,590 3,506 2000 1,308 3,000 4,308 Source: 260_01 S Census &1999 Pntm RoherlsSfnui& Ecariomic ❑eueloptnenl Plan As Figure 3 illustrates, both segments of the population have grown steadily since 1980, with seasonal individuals representing between 70 and 80% of the total population. In the last few years however there has been a slow reversal in property ownership trends, with more Canadians selling than buying and more Americans buying property than selling property in Point Roberts. 10 Whatcom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan 4,500 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 50( 2000 4Permanent Residents •Seasonal Residents OTolal Residents Figure 3. Point Roberts Population Growth 1980 -2000 3.1.4 Population Summary & Impact on Sub -Area Plan: Over the last five years, Point Roberts has seen moderate growth in both its seasonal and permanent population. This coupled with the decrease in large day visitor influxes, has promoted a slower -paced small town atmosphere. With both a growing permanent and semi - permanent population, Point Roberts economy experiences seasonal demands for services but currently lacks the year -round resident base to support a diverse economy. As population continues to steadily grow however, commercial and service sector development will follow to support and sustain the increase in permanent and semi- permanent residents. As has been seen recently, Point Roberts will continue the process of developing its own economy and will be less subject to exterior economic forces. For the time being however Point Roberts is still somewhat sensitive to changes in the Canadian economy and the community desires to promote sustainable development while enabling appropriate population growth. The type, scale, and pace of future development and population changes will be influenced by the Vision, Goals, Policies, Projects and Optimum Land Use Map adopted through this Sub -Area Plan. The Growth Management Act also has an impact on this Sub -Area Plan in so far as Counties are required to plan for anticipated increases in population to ensure that adequate infrastructure and services are available within the planning horizon. The impact of the Growth Management Act 11 Whatcom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan (GMA) on Whatcom County and Point Roberts is further discussed in Section 4.1 of this Sub - Area Plan. For population allocation purposes however, the GMA provides guidance by providing for population allocations in three related areas. Anticipated population increases are assigned to all cities within the County. Secondly, all Urban Growth Areas are allocated a share of the anticipated population increase and finally, all other areas of the county are allocated the remainder of the anticipated population increases. With Point Roberts being designated neither a City nor an Urban Growth Area, its share of future population increases is not specifically called -out in the Comprehensive Plan. Point Roberts is grouped in the Unincorporated Whatcom County category of the Comprehensive Plan (see Section 1 -8, Table 3 of the 1997 Comprehensive Plan). Even without a specific future population allocation for Point Roberts, an estimation can be made by reviewing the data from the 1997 Comprehensive Plan. 1995 County Population 148,300 1995 Unincorporated County Population 54,000 1995 Estimated Point Roberts Population 1,050 Thus of the 54,000 assigned Unincorporated County Population, Point Roberts represented 1.9% of this total (1,050 /54,000). For GMA purposes, the 1997 Comprehensive Plan anticipates that by 2015, the entire County population will increase by 72,066. Of this increase, 14,176 have been assigned to the "unincorporated" areas. Using the ratio from above, Point Roberts share of the 14,176 is 269 (14,176 x 1.9 %). While this is a simplified method of extrapolating Point Roberts anticipated population increase share, it does provide for a rough estimation of the minimum build -out potential for planning purposes. The Growth Management Act permits communities to plan for up to 125% of the anticipated growth within the planning horizon. It is this growth that is the basis for the revised Sub -Area Plan. This yields a total increase in population over the 20 -year horizon of 336 (269 x 125 %). See Sections 4.7 & 8.2 for further information. 3.1.5 Existing Land Use Patterns & Development Trends Point Roberts is a community whose existing land uses and development patterns reflect the speculative nature of the area. Existing zoning in Point Roberts is a confusing patchwork of varying development densities (See map at Section 9.4). A complete build -out given current zoning is impractical given the current limitation on the water supply and the lack of a wastewater system. Historically however no such limitations on development were envisioned. With the opening of the Massey Tunnel in 1959, many subdivisions were platted containing small lots catering to the anticipated market. In addition an extensive road system was constructed using the traditional grid system and dead -end cul -de -sacs. Much of the anticipated home construction activity never occurred and, even with the signing of a water supply contract in 1988, certain sections of the Point still have the feel of a grid -iron plat subdivision. There are approximately 3,400 platted lots in Point Roberts. Of these, fully 40% remain undeveloped due to their small size, undesirable location and the lack of adequate infrastructure to facilitate their development. 12 I Whateom County 20170 1 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan The pace of current home development has tended to be modest and clustered around the more desirable waterfront lots. This "cherry- picking" development scheme has meant that much of the Point's interior remains undeveloped and —with the exception of Lily Point —the waterfront has been developed at suburban residential densities. Recent construction activity has been for more expensive homes on lots that are larger and therefore more desirable. A small portion of Point Roberts has been included within the Agricultural Protection Overlay (Chapter 20.38). Areas in Point Roberts that are so designated are not in current agricultural use and were included within the overlay district primarily due to the presence of a qualifying soil type. It is highly unlikely that these designated areas could support agricultural uses in the future. The Point has seen an increase in US retirees who have chosen to become full -time residents and Canadian retirees who have chosen to live in Point Roberts most of the year. This has been reflected in recent home construction trends. Over the last five years, full -time residents have been the principal construction market over the construction of summer homes and cottages. This has also meant that the larger -sized lots and parcels have seen some development activity while lots in the smaller subdivisions remain vacant. The most striking result of this limited development is the dramatic difference between Point Robert's small town feel and the urban density found across the border in Tsawwassen B. C. As noted above, certain portions of Point Roberts are not served by adequate infrastructure to accommodate more intense residential development. In general, the identified areas lack adequate transportation (including multi - modal), stormwater, domestic water or fire flow, and /or wastewater facilities. These areas however are adequately served by existing services to accommodate less intensive development. As it is likely that these areas could be served by new and /or expanded facilities in the future, they have been evaluated to determine the effect of greater density per acre on existing infrastructure. This evaluation has indicated that these areas will be required to provide fair -share contributions towards the establishment of needed infrastructure through the construction of the absent facilities or the upgrading of existing facilities. These areas have been identified on the Optimum Land Use Map (see Section 6.3) as "Transitional Zones." With the adoption of this Sub -Area Plan and the subsequently required development regulations, the base land use designations for these areas will be one single - family residential unit per 5 acres. Under this concept, as additional services are provided, these parcels declared to be Transitional may apply for higher density development. Please also refer to Section 4.6 for additional information related to Transitional Zoning. As more adequate levels of service are provided to properties located within a particular Transition Zone (consistent with the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan and the Capital Facilities Section of this Plan), property owners will be able to apply for an administrative ruling permitting a higher density land use designation 3.1.6 Adjacent Land Use Patterns – Tsawwassen B. C. Tsawwassen is a sprawling suburban center of 20,000 with high- density commercial strip malls and traditional single- family residential areas. With such extensive development up to the border, Point Roberts represents a contrast in development patterns and community character. Even though Point Roberts and Tsawwassen are geographical neighbors, the overall development pressures in these communities differ. While Tsawwassen's development density and land use 13 Whatcom County 201791 Point Roberts Sub -Area patterns are a result of its proximity to Vancouver BC, Point Roberts community character is not driven by this metropolitan spillover effect. All products and services traditionally available in a large city are available in Tsawwassen. Point Roberts residents can obtain many goods and services in Tsawwassen but the border provides a distinctive disincentive. Community input has reflected that Point Roberts does not desire to be developed at densities found in Tsawwassen and does not desire the same land use patterns as Tsawwassen, be it in commercial or residential areas. Point Roberts distinctively small town feel is its greatest asset. The desire of the Sub -Area Plan is to focus community direction so the needs of residents and visitors can be met without impairing the natural environment that makes Point Roberts such a dramatic contrast to its neighbor. 3.1.7 Point Roberts Current Economic Profile Economic information related to development activity can be gauged by reviewing Point Roberts Tax Assessed Valuation, New Construction Valuations, Water District New Connections, Building Permit Valuations, and State B &O Tax Figures. While these are not the only sources of economic data, they provide a picture of a community's economy. This data will provide two different but related pieces of information for Point Roberts — changes in development trends within Point Roberts (how has the Point changed over the last 5 to 10 years) and a comparison with other areas of Whatcom County (is Point Roberts experiencing economic expansion comparable to other communities). For comparison purposes, the development information for Point Roberts will be reviewed against the same information for the City of Blaine, the Birch Bay Water & Sewer District, and Whatcom County Fire District No. 13. (See Section 10.2 for detailed data). Table 2. Tax Assessed Valualion Year Tax Assessed Valuation 1991 1992 $178.679.438 _ $181,034,177 1993 $185,592,504 1994 $277,639,303 1995 $279,316,206 1996 $281,011,580 1997 $279,834,824 1998 $245,134,010 1999 $246,703,274 2000 $248,091,883 Tax assessed valuation for Point Roberts has increased from $178,679,438 in 1991 to $248,091,883 in 2000, reflecting a $69,412,445 or 38.8% increase over a 9 -year period. This equals an annual rate of 4.3% over the same time period. The changes in tax - assessed valuations are reflected in Figure 4. 14 Whatcom County 20jJ01 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan $300,000,000 $250,000,000 $200,000,000 $150,000,000 $100,000,000 $50,000,000 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Year Figure 4. Point Roberts Tax Assessed Valuation 1991 -2000 Source: Whatcom County Assessor Table 3. Point Roberts New Construction Year New Construction Valuation 1991 $4,341,420 1992 $1,993,130 1993 $22,743,490 1994 511,389,855 1995 $1,789,835 1996 $1,685,110 1997 $1,912,020 1998 S2,335,540 1999 $2,570,895 2000 $2,328,080 New Construction Valuation for Point Roberts has been steady for the last three years, reflecting the continued moderate development pace seen for most of the last 10 years. The 10 -year average of New Construction for Point Roberts is $3,308,938. New Construction for Point Roberts from 1991 to 2000 is shown on Figure 5. 15 Whatcom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan $12,000,000 $10,000,000 $8,000,000 $6,000,000 $4,000,000 $2,000,000 $0 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Year Figure 5. Point Roberts New Construction Valuation 1991 -2000 Source: Whatcom County Assessor Table 4. Pnint Rnhert.c Wnter INstriN New C:nnnorririn:e Year New Water Service Connections 1991 52 1992 55 1993 50 1994 1995 27 24 1996 18 ^� 23 1997 1998 21 25 28 1999 2000 As reflected above and in Figure 6, Point Roberts continues to show moderate growth via new water connections. These numbers however do not distinguish between full time and recreational customers. Even with the growth in connections, discussions with Water District officials have reflected that the Point Roberts seasonal and peak water demand over the last three to four years has shown little if any annual variation. 16 60 50 40 30 Paint Rabtrta Sub -Area Plan e•rr 2000 Figure 6 Point Robert New Water Connections 1991 -2000 Source: Point Robert Water District Table 5. Point Roberts Atildhm Permits Year Number of Permits Permits Valuation 1991 28 $1,579,405 1992 30 $2,487,380 1993 15 $1,257,980 1994 22 $1,499,765 1995 6 $858;080 1996 19 $1,612,830 $1,693,620 1997 19 2000 27 $2,513,713 Point Roberts has seen fluctuations in both the number and value of building permits. In those years where development has occurred, the number of permits and their respective value has reflected a proportional relationship. Even though both the number and value of new construction in 1998 and 1999 is unavailable, the year 2000 reflected a renewed interest in Point Roberts. In the year 2000/2001 the Point has seen the construction of a new golf course that may spur adjacent and related development. Figure 7 reflects the historical trends in building permit issuance. 17 Whatcom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan a, A a $3,000;000 $2,600,000 $2,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,000.000 $500,000 $0 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 2000 Year Figure 7. Point Roberts Building Permits 1991 -2000 Source: Whatcom County Planning & Development Services Tahle h Pnint Rnherts .State R&O Tar 1 'iurrrrr 35 30 26 ;a 20 a 15 ° Z5 117 7 i 5 c Year Number of Businesses Taxable Income 1991 69 $38,202,639 1992 83 $35,994,125 1993 92 $25,974,473 1994 92 $18,567,199 1995 95 $16,586,752 1996 82 $16218,996 1997 81 $15,012,280 1998 90 $12,684,735 1999 94 $14,245,578 From 1991 to 1999 (year 2000 figures not available) the number of businesses in Point Roberts paying State B &O Tax has remained stable while the value of the business conducted has dropped. This is illustrated on Figure 8. 18 Whatcom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan S ii b m $45,000,000 $40,000,000 $35,000,000 $30,000,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $15,000,000 $10,000,000 $5,000,000 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 Veer 1= B&O Tax --*--Number of Businesses Figure 8. Point Roberts State B &O Tax 1991 -1999 Source: Washington State Department of Revenue 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1999 E m 8 Z Z �c8- -1�liiFft�lfii #lil�'h �..'lklk�"R+IBI� t +-r-r"I - R&K'm tf? lfd-M# iir' m--s7--r,F.s+w*rricln4,'j/ McFM -begil•• Lhe raring RoNF� R�elit�r de ntalunity drat' ff in m `4y r-Lwi -,ie4i -to3~ fie -cS*b- Plan 3•a-fiat#1Rrai ouigrewih n ttt-.4wttad Btkl►+a -tom tiis-doGkll•1�r~4}t: As �pke�l-- fn- lkte-! �ltarsc�k ,Br•- Pltst�{�ee�eettiEn�B: k.•# } -.tt• brtl�td- 1'�caFll�weat- kleriurge Chareeter des*4t4henw—wos envisioned c:.. 4he t Ro4en' 1't r r i le ttr eial buildings, mini rnuffi set eel afel` ti# I- deg igir ;- feel. Thi de Sir. — 1 �3 r - a•- eah- -..vef ,- vibmntT--V+4age- CeitW' wao- ize-Pea -1 the Wo&Aej r awl -plti +neefingp,-�by4he & i g L nar�ritfea ,�,wa�eri to revise lire . - C,ti e.., b. . t 7.heit T-o-eamplement lhi k4inaive -eomm a1 .". - ie;:r-.ieti*ily- fesid"ai de,Y °eknwica :r'i"cr•CT]wtl �^°c a,�; 4�k► ik .t�ilH Sifii nk has emerged as tv-ff-aferred alterative: Much puhlic—eorr mertvand .4eering Cortunitt+ee di ±l;ii has lhcused on the- desire4a- preserve and enhance l irrt €li i Wren- urban dev,eleprrrent- &Ker -t►r: 393.1.8 Point Roberts Current Build -Out Analysis A Build -Out or Land Capacity Analysis is used to determine how much additional population growth can be accommodated under a stated set of zoning and environmental regulations. 19 Whatcom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan Different factors are used to account for physical, social and economic influences in the land supply market. For Point Roberts, it is important to the planning process to establish how much growth can be accommodated based on current regulations Although there are many different models for conducting a build -out analysis, they all follow the same basic outline: (1) Vacant and underutilized residential land is tabulated. Other non - residential land, such as commercial land, industrial land, publicly owned land, schools and county parks are not included. Vacant land does not contain any structures. Underutilized land is land that is zoned at a higher density than its current use (e.g. a house on 5 acres that is zoned at 5 dwelling units (DU) per acre) and that would permit further development. Future growth is generally assumed to occur on vacant and underutilized lands. (2) Reduction factors are applied to account for non - residential development (public facilities), unavailable land, critical areas and street rights -of -ways. (3) Market factors are applied to account for the fact that not all properties will be available for redevelopment within the study period. (4) The remaining net acreage is assessed to determine the number of dwelling units possible. Dwelling units can be converted to population using the average number of people per dwelling unit for the study area or jurisdiction. Reduction Factors — Background Residential development takes place in a complex and dynamic market whose functions are not fully understood. Factors that influence residential development include local and regional land supply and demand, as well as economic and regulatory forces. In addition to these complexities, Point Roberts is also subject to international forces. In an attempt to account for the realities affecting land supply and demand, reduction or "discount" factors are applied to more accurately estimate developable land. Discounts are typically made for critical areas, roads, public facilities, and land estimated to be unavailable during the planning period. It is almost impossible to predict how a market will act over a 20- year period; discount and market factors are intended to help estimate the amount of land that will be available to accommodate growth and achieve a community's land use objectives. Point Roberts Current Build -Out: Methodology The following methodology was used to determine the current Point Roberts build -out population projections. Please refer to Appendix 9.1 for more detailed calculations. 1. Whatcom County's Geographic Information System (GIS) assembled information from the Assessor records for all of Point Roberts. 2. It was assumed that any improvement (building) valued at $5,000 or greater would be considered a dwelling and as such would also be considered to have a development right. Lots with improvements valued at less than $5,000 were not considered developed unless they were classified as a cabin or vacation home by the County Assessor. 3. Whatcom County Assessor Land Use Codes (1000s residential, 8000s agriculture, and 9000s undeveloped) were the only parcels considered. 20 Whatcom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan 4. The number of development rights was determined by dividing the parcel by the maximum allowable density of the zone. If the parcel already had an improvement (with a value of $5,000 or greater), one development right was subtracted from the total. 5. The maximum allowable density and minimum allowable lot size for the Resort Commercial Zone were used to calculate development densities in the General Commercial Zone since there are no such specifications in the General Commercial Zone. 6. The Assessor's acreage figures were used unless they were not available, in which case the GIS calculated acreage was used. 7. A reduction factor for critical areas, roads, utilities and infrastructure of 15% was used. 8. An overall market factor of 125% was used. 9. Vacant lots that were less than 9,000 sq. ft. (less than .20 acres) were omitted from Scenario B on Table 7 because they were assumed to be undeveloped due to lack of septic system capability. (It is assumed that, based on local soil conditions and water table levels, it is "unlikely" that a lot less than 9,000 sq. ft. would be approved for on -site septic). These assumptions can be considered to be the "worst case scenario ". 10. Available density was determined for two scenarios: Scenario A — Assuming that public water /sewer was available, and Scenario B — Assuming that water was available and sewer was not available. See Table 7 for these resulting calculations. Current Build -Out Analysis: Summary Using the methodology described above, a Build -Out Analysis was prepared for Point Roberts. The results of that analysis are summarized in Table 7. Table 7 Faint Roberts Current Budd-Ow Scenario A Scenario B Zoning Designations Dwelling Units Dwelling Units Assumes that public water and Assumes that public water is sewer is available available and ublic sewer is not GC 803 152 RC 3,021 224 238 R l0A - 17 R5A 1,209 2,454 99 259 460 UR3 UR4 96 URM6 54 53 Sub -total Dwelling Units 7,864 1,275 -191 Less Reductions (critical areas, utilities, roads, etc.) _@ 15% -1,180 6,684 _ -1,671 5,013 Sub -total Dwelling Units 1,084 Plus Market Factor (iQ5% -271 Net Dwelling Units 813 Average Po ulation er DU 2.21 2.21 21 Whatcom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan Total Additional Population @ Build -out 11,079 1,796 3.2 A Vision and Direction for the Community Rather than being subjected to the historical boom/bust nature of speculative development and rather than allowing development to occur randomly given the current zoning, the desire for a revision to the Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan was identified. The need to focus community vision and provide preferred future development alternatives was a desired outcome. Development sustainability was identified as a desired theme. Sustainable development in Point Roberts was defined to mean maximizing opportunities for appropriate development without destroying the natural environment. In addition, sustainability has been defined as development that incorporates long -term viability. With a focused community vision and policies guiding future development, it is hoped that as Point Roberts continues to mature, development will follow that is focused on the needs of the community and is flexible enough to provide long -term benefit to the community. An example of recent development in Point Roberts that was not sustainable is the over construction of gas stations along Tyee. With many of these structures underutilized, in disrepair, or torn down, it is evident that selling gas to Canadians due to price imbalances was not sustainable — it was the product of temporary and fleeting economics. Public input has focused on future development that will foster a sustainable economy for Point Roberts. Many of the policies and projects contained in this Sub -Area Plan have their root in development sustainability. Much community comment was received noting that the urban development densities in Tsawwassen were not desired in Point Roberts. Additional public comments were centered in the need for a focused community vision. With the knowledge that a new direction for Point Roberts was to be achieved, the community began the process of re- defining a Vision for Point Roberts. 3.3 Making the Vision a Reality — Community Focus & Direction The initial meeting of the Steering Committee was held on September 21, 2000. The purpose of this meeting was to establish the role of the Steering Committee, describe the Sub -Area planning process and the identification of key issues. On the evening of Friday, October 20th and in the morning of Saturday, October 21, 2000, a two - day community workshop was held by the Steering Committee. The purpose of the workshop was to obtain community input regarding future potential land uses in Point Roberts and to identify issues surrounding future development. The first day of the workshop featured various facilitated exercises conducted to gain insight into the community's current vision of itself and the issues facing the area. On the second day a draft Vision Statement was reviewed and discussed. A vision statement provides the fundamental framework for the specific goals, policies, projects and recommendations of the Sub -Area Plan. Five (5) development alternatives were also presented and discussed during this workshop. Through the use of several facilitated activities, participants were broken into groups and asked to review and "grade" each of the alternatives. The groups rya Whatcom County 201703 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan then presented their findings and discussed their evaluation standards used to determine the most "appropriate" uses in the Sub -Area. The last portion of the workshop focused discussion on the attributes a preferred alternative might possess, with the groups using site maps and designing their own conceptual future land use maps. The tabulated results of the facilitated exercises held at the two -day workshop can be found in Appendix 9.4 of this Plan. The Steering Committee next met on November 16, 2000. The purpose of the meeting was to review the results of the two -day charrette, define common development themes, discuss and refine the draft Vision Statement and begin developing Plan Goals. The next meeting of the Steering Committee was held on January 18, 2001. At this meeting Draft 1.00 of the revised Sub -Area Plan was presented and discussed. Following Committee discussion on the elements of Draft 1.00, members of the community were asked to comment on the document. From February 2001 through April 2001, the Committee met on four occasions to refine the Sub - Area Plan. In May of 2001 Draft 4.0 of the Sub -Area Plan was completed and forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and consideration. 3.3.1 Point Roberts Sub -Area Vision Statement As a result of the public participation process, the Sub -Area Vision Statement was adopted by the Steering Committee. A community Vision Statement is intended to be the most generalized component of the Plan. It summarizes the community principles and values upon which the Plan is based. In the case of Point Roberts it reflects the desire to keep and enhance the unique community character of the Point while simultaneously promoting appropriate development. Sub -Area Vision Statement: Point Roberts is a small, quiet, diverse and geographically unique American community located in a magnificent natural setting in close proximity to a major Canadian metropolitan area. The Point's unique maritime location and natural environment is its greatest asset and is integral to community character. Point Roberts strives to retain its small town character while promoting focused development that is sustainable and appropriate. 3.3.2 Community Planning Concepts As a result of the public meetings, workshops, and community input, the following Sub -Area planning concepts were identified by the community as appropriate for inclusion in the revised Sub -Area Plan. • A focused town center on Gulf Road extending from Tyee Drive to the beach • Additional facilities /services at Lighthouse Park • Community events to draw day time and overnight visitors • Trails, bicycle paths and open space • Protection of tree cover and wildlife habitat 23 Whatcom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan • Additional recreational facilities and support services near Lighthouse Park, Maple Beach, the Point Roberts Golf & Country Club, Monument Park, Lily Point and the Marina. • Maintaining a vegetated corridor and discouraging new commercial development along Tyee Drive near the US /Canadian border • Encourage infill of automobile - orientated businesses (grocery stores, gas stations, lumber stores, etc.) along Tyee Drive near Gulf Road • Encourage infill of pedestrian- orientated businesses (retail shops, restaurants, galleries, etc.) on Gulf Road near the Community Center • Develop parking areas on Gulf Road for shoppers and community events • Encourage non - retail (offices, light assembly, etc.) businesses to locate on the edge of the new pedestrian - orientated mixed -use focused town center • Encourage bed and breakfast and small lodges for overnight guests • Cluster new residential development in areas where services can be provided 3.3.3 A Challenge to Redefining Community Character— Pre - Existing Lots The challenge for Point Robert's land use designations is the significant number of platted but undeveloped lots located within the community. The vast majority of these lots are legal, "substandard" lots -of- record approved prior to the adoption of current subdivision regulations. In most cases, these lots were created without the provision of adequate infrastructure, which is largely responsible for their currently undeveloped status. In general, market and economic considerations (i.e. the cost of providing needed infrastructure — specifically sanitary wastewater facilities) have prevented the development of the lots to date. The establishment of a sewer system in areas where existing lot size or zoning densities would support sewers could allow development of many of these lots at platted densities. This potentiality effectively preserves the validity of the lots. Although the timing and financial feasibility of establishing a sewer system is not certain, these lots are considered to be potentially developable in evaluating the theoretical build out capacity (and population) of the community. The existing, predominately poorly designed, lots present many challenges to the community as it moves to define the future of Point Roberts. These existing plats were often designed without regard to topography or natural systems. They are platted at urban densities, which is contrary to current community desire, and since these lots could feasibly be developed in the future with infrastructure improvements (sewer), they must be counted toward calculating a build -out population for the community. This build -out effect is significant due to the requirements of Growth Management. As mentioned previously, the GMA places strict limitations on build -out potential for areas outside of established UGAs. Thus this "existing lot inventory" impacts the land use designations throughout Point Roberts. Three potential strategies have been identified to address this situation. • Mandatory Replats with Reduced Density — If five or more contiguous lots have common ownership and more than one building site is anticipated on these lots, it would be a requirement to replat the lots into larger better designed building lots. • Limitation of Sewer Service Area — By specifically not providing for the sewering of the interior sections of the Point, these existing smaller lots would not be built upon. This 24 Whatcom County 201704 Point Roberta Sub -Area Plan would naturally encourage the replatting of these existing lots into larger lots with on -site wastewater systems. Development Standards and Concurrency — While this alternative would not serve to decrease the number of existing sub - standard lots, it would facilitate the allocation of infrastructure costs to these lots. Techniques may include using one or more of the following; Developer Contributions, Impact Fees, Local Improvement Districts, and/or Latecomer Agreements. 25 EWhatcom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan 4 Section -4 t1 POINT ROBERTS LAND USE APPROACH "Old Townsite Pier" Point Roberts Community Quilt 4.1 Point Roberts, the Growth Management Act, and Urban Growth Areas Prior planning documents for Point Roberts have suggested that eventual incorporation of Point Roberts was a possibility. With this underpinning, the existing zoning included land use designation and development densities commonly found in urban areas. The common notion was that given enough time, development within Point Roberts would enable it to become a city. With the advent of the Growth Management Act, leaving the evolution of new cities to the uncertainty of time was abandoned. In its place was a responsibility to channel new development into existing cities. In addition, potential new cities were identified as Urban Growth Areas (UGA). It is these existing cities and UGAs into which higher density development was to be channeled. Whatcom County did not designate Point Roberts as a UGA in the 1997 Comprehensive Plan. This desire to limit urban sprawl by focusing development has meant that areas outside of UGA's were envisioned to develop at much less density. In a planning sense the Growth Management Act has meant "drawing a line in the sand ". The "growing" of new cities (in areas not designated a UGA) would go against the basic context of growth management, that is, it would allow time and sprawl, not prior planning, to determine areas of urban development. Given the limitations imposed by the GMA, two basic planning options are possible for the future of Point Roberts. The first is to move forward and propose UGA status for Point Roberts. The second option is to plan future land uses within Point Roberts that are not tied to urban densities and eventual incorporation. Analysis has reflected that designating Point Roberts as a new UGA would be very difficult. Given the framework of Growth Management, adding additional UGAs goes contrary to "managing growth" as it would be difficult to demonstrate the need for an additional UGA in Whatcom County. The legal standards for new UGA creation are extremely high. Legal challenges to a new UGA designation before the Growth Management Hearings Board (GMHB) would likely ensue and could be successful. The factors that might lead to a successful challenge before the GMHB could include: a There is not an identified need for additional UGA's in Whatcom County to accommodate urban growth. 26 Whatcom County 20170 -t Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan • The projected population for Whatcom County is already accommodated in existing UGA's. • Point Roberts is not characterized by Urban Growth — existing density is less than one unit per acre. • The GMA does not facilitate "growing" rural areas into UGA's unless growth cannot be accommodated in existing cities and UGA's. • A UGA designation for Point Roberts would require all land within the Point to be zoned at urban densities. This would mean that, in all likelihood, 4 units per acre would be the minimum density with higher development densities a distinct possibility. • Such urban densities would impact the community character in Point Roberts to such an extent that there would be little visual difference between Point Roberts and Tsawwassen, a notion that has received significant negative public input • Public services and facilities, particularly water supply, sewer, and schools are not available to serve urban density development in Point Roberts. It should be noted that the future of Point Roberts is far from certain. With the current pace of development, it is possible that, given sufficient time, development within Point Roberts could lead to the area becoming incorporated. For the current planning horizon however, this Sub -Area Plan envisions a non -UGA approach to development in Point Roberts. Public input and Steering Committee direction has stated that Point Roberts should not be developed at the densities found in Tsawwassen. Under this framework of community input, the following land use approach for Point Roberts was defined. 4.2 Sub -Area Plan Land Use Approach Given Point Roberts topography, existing land use patterns, and in response to public input, the land use designations within Point Roberts were broken into five separate but inter - related planning areas. Central to the revised Sub -Area Plan is the establishment of a Village Center in the vicinity of Gulf Road, extending to portions of Tyee. This area will be a high- density mixed - use zone with commercial and office development supported by upper floor residential uses. At the eastern edge of the Village Center will be the second land use area that includes the areas on Tyee and the areas surrounding the Marina. The development of higher- density professional office, recreational /conference facilities and high -tech uses are envisioned for this section of Point Roberts. The third area is the recreational and residential uses at Maple Beach, Lighthouse Park and Monument Park. Increased public access, recreational use and support of local identity have been the focus here. The forth area is the interior, predominately residential, section of the peninsula. These areas are predominately zoned residential but have seen less development than the coastal areas of Point Roberts. The final area is the medium density residential areas along the shoreline. Infill development is envisioned for these areas. 27 Whatcom Countv 20170t Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan 4.3 The Mixed -Use Village Center As noted before, one central theme to emerge from the meetings and workshop was the desire for a focused, mixed -use village center. The concept of mixed -use zoning and the creation of a Village Center on Gulf Road emerged as the most desirable development alternative developed by the public. 4.3.1 Mixed -Use Historical Perspective In the context of a Village Center, mixed -use zoning is associated with a mixture of land uses that creates intertwined economic and social activity within a well - defined and recognizable place. This is most commonly achieved through ground -floor commercial uses combined with upper -floor residential use. This mixture of uses generates around the clock human activity, lending to a cohesiveness and liveliness not found in sole -use zoning schemes. Mixed -Use Village Centers are designed to promote pedestrian traffic and social interaction. In fact, mixed - use is the traditional urban form in medieval villages and towns. The traditional town squares in Europe reflect this mixture of institutional (both government and religious), commercial, and residential uses. American cities and towns however have traditionally been zoned using a rigid separation of land uses. This combined with the ascendancy of the automobile as the dominant form of transportation has broken down the traditional mixed -use form of zoning. The result has been the evolution of the strip commercial development and entire communities exclusively developed for low density residential uses. The heightened sense of human activity and enriched sense of place that mixed use provides is not possible within these development patterns. 4.3.2 Point Roberts Village Center The development of a Village Center in Point Roberts has been identified as most appropriate on Gulf Road, from Tyee to the beach. For initial consideration, the area in the vicinity of the Community Center has been identified as the heart of the Village Center. Due to the length of Gulf Road and the desire for a focused mixed -use Village Center, future development may consist of clustered mixed -use structures linked together through the use of transitional areas. The Policies and Projects identified in this document related to the Village Center are intended to promote the development of community character. Initial development may be modest but in time it is anticipated that additional development will occur which will add to community identity and character. To enable a vibrant mixed -use village center to exist, there must be a mixture of activities that support and encourage human activity. Three (3) common conditions have been cited as essential to ensure this vitality in Point Roberts: • The Village Center must serve more than one primary function, and preferably three, so that there will be people on different schedules using common facilities. • A mixture of buildings of varying age and condition, so that there are inexpensive rents for enterprises just starting out as well as high quality space to keep successful enterprises from leaving the area. • Dense residential concentrations of people to support diverse activities within a compact area. 28 ' Whateom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan Mixed -use at a smaller scale has proven successful as infill in existing commercial areas, serving as magnets to stimulate neighboring development. Many of the Goals, Policies and Projects in the Sub -Area Plan have been developed to facilitate the growth of a mixed -use village center in Point Roberts. 4.3.3 Village Center Challenges and Opportunities The development of a mixed -use Village Center will not occur quickly. A certain minimum level of human activity is necessary and given the relatively undeveloped nature of Gulf Road, many smaller - scaled developments will need to occur before a cohesive Village Center is to exist. Many strategies exist for promoting the development of a Village Center and certain Sub -Area Policies and Projects are targeted at this goal. The development of a vibrant mixed -use Village Center will take the cooperative effort of the community and government officials. Central to this concept is the development of a wastewater collection and treatment system serving the Village Center and the entire southwestern portion of the peninsula. The community has many options related to the type and scale of a wastewater system including conventional wastewater treatment, community drain fields, STEP systems, or other alternative designs. The design and installation of a wastewater system is considered crucial to the success of the Village Center. Without such a system, higher- density development along Gulf Road is not possible. 4.3.4 Village Center Economic Benefit The economics of mixed -use derive from the notion that mutually supporting activities will have a synergistic effect on each other, that is, the total revenue generated will be greater than the sum of the parts. If housing and office uses are combined, for example, a market is created for shops and services which could not be supported by either alone. This does not have to occur in one building, but the uses must be physically integrated in a way that permits pedestrian circulation between them. The intent behind allowing a mix of uses in the Village Center is that the residential uses will support and contribute to the economic development of the local economy. Businesses choosing to locate in the new Village Center will have a ready labor pool and future residents will have potential employers. In addition, new shopping opportunities and the availability of needed services will attract additional visitors and residents, providing a multiplying effect. Encouraging mixed -use development that includes residential components will increase the likelihood that projects will be completed in a relatively short time horizon. Traditionally, developments that are exclusively commercial have longer build -out periods than projects containing both residential and commercial components. A mix of land uses within the Village Center will foster economic development in three primary ways. First, mixed -use development increases the chances of attracting high quality jobs to the area because the convenience and range of services offered are desirable to firms looking to relocate. Business relocation decisions are often based on criteria which includes quality of life characteristics including the opportunity to live close to work. Secondly, mixed -use development increases the types of commercial businesses attracted to the area because of the complimentary services available. Thirdly, mixed -use can serve to enhance 29 Whatcom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan an entire community as the synergy between commercial and residential uses encourage further development activity outside of the Village Center. The Resort Commercial, Recreational, and Residential areas outside of the Village Center are designed to complement the Village Center by providing recreational activities for residents and visitors, conference facilities, and residential areas for future residents of Point Roberts. 4.3.5 Economic Development Strategy The economic development strategy inherent in the Sub -Area Plan is multi- tiered and is reflected in the land use changes detailed in the Optimum Land Use Map (see Section 6.3). Realizing that the risk in economic development is to spread oneself too thin and simultaneously target many diverse markets, the central economic themes in the Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan are: • Sustainable Tourism — Centered in the promotion of annual festivals and the development of smaller hotels and lodges catering to the multi -day visitor and conventions /conferences. • Focused Mixed -Use Village Center — Centered in higher- density "village- scale" (two to three story) residential and pedestrian- orientated commercial uses. • High Tech & Office Development — Centered in international and professional needs and located adjacent to the Village Center. • Redirected & Focused Residential Uses — Centered in higher- density Village Center uses and low density residential uses in other sections of the Point. 4.4 Open Space, Trails and Connections Another theme to emerge from the Planning Process was the desire to preserve and protect the Point's unique wildlife habitat and create open space with trails linking the Village Center with the various recreational areas, parks, and residential areas. In the commercial development arena, open space can be facilitated through thoughtful site planning and building design features that serves to create visual vistas. In addition to height limitations to facilitate a pedestrian scale, the placement of parking and utilities within or beneath the structure, enable additional areas to be devoted to active public open space. Public /private partnerships to maximize commercial public open space can also be employed. In many instances the particular location and design configuration of commercial open space can be combined with public rights -of -way and other parcels of public property to create open space of a scale not otherwise possible. In residential development, open space can be achieved using similar strategies. Since traditional residential development is many times centered on the one -house one -lot concept, open space is segmented and lacks connectivity. By clustering residential units, shared open space can be created. The clustering of residential units also has the benefit of utility consolidation. When population critical mass is necessary for new infrastructure development, the clustering of residential development offers lowered incremental capital costs and promotes the likelihood of project initiation. 30 Whatcom County 2017W Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan The Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan promotes this residential clustering strategy combined with public right -of -way trail development. Clustering residential development, creating both commercial and residential open space, and linking these areas with a series of trails and pathways will promote the following community benefits: • A sense of community linkage and connectivity will be achieved. • The development of necessary infrastructure will be facilitated. • Open space and unique wildlife habitat can be maintained. 4.5 Sustainable Development & Site Planning A unifying theme to emerge from the Planning Process was the desire for development within Point Roberts to be sustainable by nature and thus less reliant on exterior economic and political forces. The concept of sustainable development is based on principles which include: the restoration and preservation of key ecosystems, a cleaner and healthier environment, the limitation of urban sprawl, the protection of wildlife and natural areas, and the advancement of the efficient use of land and other resources. The result of sustainable development is the creation of quality communities and jobs. The key to sustainable development is the establishment a framework to enable a community to have economic security, ecological security, and quality of life. The Optimum Land Use Map is the product of this desire to promote an atmosphere of sustainability and predictability in Point Roberts. The natural development limitations associated with the existing water supply contract and the needs for a future wastewater system helped focus community attention to the possibility of developing a focused mixed -use village center together with lower density residential zoning. To complement these activities, resort and recreational activities are included in selected areas of the Point. By providing sufficient land areas for office development, recreational activities, convention facilities, and low- density residential development, a sustainable economy tied to a diverse economy is envisioned. By completing this multi - tiered sustainable development strategy, it is hoped that the small town qualities of Point Roberts can be preserved and enhanced while simultaneously creating a development atmosphere that is predictable. 4.6 Transitional Zoning As noted previously, the lack of necessary infrastructure (particularly wastewater treatment) has meant that some of the previously platted subdivisions have remained under developed. In addition much of the interior portions of Point Roberts remain unplatted for much of the same reason. The need for adequate infrastructure to support higher density development and the desire to preserve Point Roberts open space lead the Steering Committee to consider Transitional Zoning. Under this concept, parcels designated Transitional would have two different development density opportunities. The parcels would have an underlying zoning (one unit per 5 acres) upon which development could occur at any time. Provisions for septic, setback, open space, and other development criteria would be governed by current County requirements. 31 Whateom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan These parcels however would also be able to be developed to higher density (one unit per acre) if the following three conditions were present: • Provision for off -site community wastewater treatment, on -site STEP, or community drainfield establishment. (i.e. supply of necessary infrastructure) • Use of cluster design for structures /improvements (i.e. — consolidation of utilities and development impact) • Provision of open space beyond that which is currently required (i.e. — contribution to community character) 4.7 Optimum Land Use Map - Point Roberts Revised Build -Out Projections Using the methodology detailed in Section 3.1.8 and the revised land use designations contained in Section 6.3, the following revised population build -out projections result: Table 8. Point Roberts Revised Build -Out Zoning Designations Scenario A Dwelling Units Assumes that public water and sewer /STEP is available Scenario B Dwelling Units Assumes that public water is available and public sewer is not GC 22 3 RC 3,275 271 STC 812 129 _ RR2 464 200 RRl 1,004 662 TZ 895 265 R5A 132 129 Sub -total Dwelling Units 6,604 1659 Less Reductions (critical areas, utilities, roads, etc.) @ 15% -991 -249 Sub -total Dwelling Units 5,613 1,410 Plus Market Factor ,25% Net Dwelling Units -1,430 -353 4,201 2.21 1,058 2.21 Average Population er DU Total Additional Population @ Build -out 9,304 2,337 32 Whatcom County 201704 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan 5 Section 5.0 GOALS, POLICIES AND PROJECTS s "Trinity Lutheran Church " Point Roberts Community Quilt The following Section provides Goals, Policies, and Projects for Point Roberts. The Goals state the broad conceptual objectives of the particular land use within the context of this particular Sub -Area. The Policies are statements controlled according to legal regulations. The Projects are included to implement the stated Goal and Policy. All Goals, Policies, and Projects contained in this Sub -Area Plan have been reviewed for consistency with and found to be compliant with the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan and the goals of the Growth Management Act. GOAL 1.0 — PROTECT AND ENHANCE POINT ROBERTS ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Goal 1.1 Enhance and protect shoreline public resources and access while protecting the marine environment. Policy 1.1.1 Ensure that shoreline development does not significantly impact longshore transport and other existing natural shoreline processes. Policy 1.1.2 Ensure that public park facilities are in appropriate scale with site's physical limitations. Facilities should be located and scaled so as to not overwhelm the site or promote uses that adversely affect the natural environment. Project 1.1.1 Concurrent with the planned 2002 revisions to the Whatcom County Shoreline Management Plan, the shoreline designations for Point Roberts will be reviewed for consistency with the goals of this Sub -Area Plan. Goal 1.2 Conserve, protect and enhance witdlifi habitat and sensitive%ritical areas that are unique to Point Roberts. Policy 1.2.1 Encourage public purchase or dedication of unique and sensitive natural areas. Policy 1.2.2 Encourage the clustering of development as a means of enhancing the effectiveness of required wildlife/habitat buffers and providing open space. Project 1.2.1 — In order to enhance the protection of existing unique environments in Point Roberts, identify all areas that have high conservation values but are not protected by existing critical area and /or environmental regulations. Prioritize the relative importance of these identified areas and seek to protect them through the establishment of conservation easements and /or acquisition. Goal 1.3 Preserve tree cover and natural vegetation. 33 I Whatcom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan Policy 1.3.1 Retain native vegetation whenever possible in public projects and promote their retention in private developments. Policy 1.3.2 Encourage the provision of street trees in public road improvement projects. Project 1.3.1— Develop and adopt a tree preservation and retention ordinance to be incorporated into the zoning code. The ordinance should include specific guidance on methods to be used to identify and preserve significant individual trees and groups of trees. Project 1.3.2 — Incorporate requirements and standards into the zoning code for the provision of street trees concurrent with the establishment of new or redeveloped commercial uses in the Village Center. Goal 1.4 Encourage private development design that serves to maintain open space and habitat preservation. Policy 1.4.1 Encourage the development of parking designs that maximize natural open space. Policy 1.4.2 Allow clustered residential development, revised setbacks, alterations in minimum lot sizes, deviations in required on -site parking, and rights -of -way flexibility as an incentive for the provision of additional open space areas. Policy 1.4.3 Promote public /private partnerships to jointly create public open space. Project 1.4.1— Evaluate and if feasible, incorporate an open space incentive program into zoning and subdivision codes. The purpose of the incentive program should be to encourage the provision of additional open space that exceeds the existing requirements contained in the zoning, subdivision, critical area and shoreline development regulations. Project 1.4.2 — In order to address problems associated with the configuration and orientation of the large number of undeveloped and antiquated subdivision plats in the community, evaluate and if feasible, develop an incentive program that encourages the vacation and re- platting of existing undeveloped lots and /or subdivisions. Goal 1.5 Encourage lower - density development, open space buffers and green belts along the US /Canadian border. Policy 1.5.1 Establish zoning that maintains lower- density residential development patterns for parcels in the immediate vicinity of the border. Permit current commercial uses in the vicinity of the border but do not allow new commercial uses in this area. Project 1.5.1— Through the use of innovative land use techniques such as conservation easements, open space requirements, setbacks, lot coverage limitations, selective acquisition and/or density restrictions, develop a comprehensive strategy that will preserve the existing greenbelt along the US /Canadian border. Goal 1.6 Promote public infrastructure development that incorporates natural design features such as wetland creation /enhancement, reuse /recycling, and open space preservation. Policy 1.6.1 Integrate open space and trail creation with planned public sewer and drainage projects. 34 Wbatcom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan Policy 1.6.2 Promote public sewer projects that use wetland treatment technology and/or effluent reuse and reclamation processes. Policy 1.6.3 Promote the development of a right -of- way -based trail system in conjunction with the establishment of storm water management facilities and habitat enhancement projects. Project 1.6.1 — Analyze options available for the provision of a wastewater system to serve the Village Center. Identify alternatives to expand the service area beyond the Village Center and evaluate the relative benefits to the community. Goal 1.7 Encourage development which incorporates the principles of sustain ability into project design and construction. Policy 1.7.1 Seek to encourage development, which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Project 1.7.1— Revise applicable sections of the zoning and subdivision codes to include requirements that implement the following principles of sustainable site planning: 1. Proposed projects should follow the "lay of the land" and respect natural systems and historic landscapes. 2. Proposed projects should acknowledge the environmental "clues" inherent in a site, and develop in a manner that provides environmental protection and enhancement of ecological systems. 3. Proposed projects should take into account social and cultural issues and provide community amenities. 4. Proposed projects should include physical elements (structures, infrastructure, open space, etc.) that allows for "layering ". Layering is characterized by the inherent flexibility of a site plan and its potential for adaptive reuse and density changes over time without compromising the principles of sustainability. For example, a structure might initially be designed for lower density use driven by the need for on -site septic. When changes in wastewater treatment allows the structure to accommodate higher density uses, a site using the concept of sustainability would only need building modifications while a structure not employing such design flexibility would be torn down and completely rebuilt. This build, use, tear down, and rebuild cycle is the exact mentality that sustainable development and site planning is meant to alter. 5. Proposed projects should strive to ensure the reduction of energy and resource use as compared to conventional development patterns. 6. Proposed projects should encourage a sustainable and diverse economy. Goal 1.8 Residential densities should be based on the lands natural capacity for development, the ability to provide required public facilities /.services and the preservation of Point Robert's community character. Policy 1.8.1 Zoning and development regulations should be flexible to respond to changes in infrastructure capacities. Regulations should anticipate infrastructure improvements and respond when new services are available. 35 Whatcom County 201704 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan Policy 1.8.2 Design standards shall be used to enhance community character, preserve open space, and maximize development opportunities. Policy 1.8.3 In areas designated Transitional, provision shall be made for sanitary sewer (community drain fields, STEP systems, etc.), cluster design for utility consolidation, open space retention, and (where feasible) pedestrian trail development. Project 1.8.1— Whatcom County shall develop a Transitional Zoning designation (TZ), to be included in the development regulations required to implement this Sub -Area Plan. The TZ regulations will summarize the identified Levels of Service and other standards required for higher density residential development within areas zoned Transitional. These standards shall specifically address the requirements associated with water service, sewer /STEP service, street standards, emergency, fire, medical, and police standards, transportation capacity and the provision (if necessary) for park and recreational facilities. Residential development at the Transitional higher density shall be processed administratively as a "site specific reclassification" concurrent with project approval when the specified standards are met. Project 1.8.2 — The subdivision code should be revised to encourage residential development that maximizes the provision of open space, clusters development to consolidate utility placement, and enhances community character. Project 1.8.3 — To allocate needed infrastructure improvement costs, Whatcom County should use, and where necessary create, methods of cost recovery including, but not limited to; Developer Contributions, Impact Fees, Local Improvement Districts, and Latecomer Agreements. Project 1.8.4 — The Point Roberts Overlay District shall be revised to conditionally allow residential Air Parks at maximum residential density of one dwelling unit per acre. Projects 1.8.5 — Several properties located within Point Roberts are included within the County's Agricultural Protection Overlay (Chapter 20.38). Due to the lack of continuing or likely agricultural activity at these locations, properties located within Point Roberts shall not be subject to the provisions of this Overlay. The County shall, upon adoption of this Plan, revise all text of the APO to exclude the Point Roberts area. GOAL 2.0 — BUILD A SENSE OF COMMUNITY Goal 2.1 Seek to create a focused pedestrian- orientated, mixed- -use l'illn{e Center on Gulf Road linking the beach to Tyee Drive. Policy 2.1.1 Allow new residential development in the Village Center to incorporate commercial uses on the ground floor. Policy 2.1.2 Promote retail, restaurant, office and other commercial uses that are pedestrian orientated and provide a high level of street activity. Policy 2.1.3 Promote zero lot -line clustered development with public parking to the rear or on the side, utility consolidation, and the establishment of public open space. Policy 2.1.4 Encourage the development of public gathering spaces and interconnected pedestrian trails within the Village Center. 36 I WhatcomCounly 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan Project 2.1.1- Investigate the creation of a Public Benefit Parking Area or other similar consolidated parking concept as a means of possibly eliminating on -site parking requirements in the Village Center. Project 2.1.2 - In order to promote and facilitate coordinated development and integration in the Village Center, develop a streetscape plan that specifically identifies the following: 1. Street standards including the provision and location of pedestrian amenities such as sidewalk and/or pathway configurations, street furniture and street tree species and placement. 2. Parking locations, types and signage. Rrsj,eel -2:-1 i—" �".=+ �; �, q- �r- eei�;- ms�td�r�al�ig�pr+ogeat�z: emt►tgis�teoE- yvsElt -�� prfi�v it rz Lnrrreeter f H tta et lser�ee utxyfiricii lgfc+r !a 'he eeffirne"i,., The tkrft--t i al nage� hould- k&4oe &ted- witkl4-pu44e rig y- slFieul ifeet vim. fors lo4xliiimNii4y-- fHei!!i!ie;. atirr':"aeiion. , an . Project 2.1.43 - Revise zoning code pertaining to height limitations to allow for three -story mixed -use structures within the Village Center Zone. Goal 2.2 Preserve and enhance a vegetated and treed entryway on Tyee Drive from the border to Benson Road. Focus automobile - orientated development on Tyee from Benson to Gulf. Policy 2.2.1 Maintain and enhance setback requirements on Tyee from border to Benson. Policy 2.2.2 Encourage the location of public parking facilities on Tyee from Benson to Gulf with pedestrian linkages to the Village Center. Policy 2.2.3 Promote traffic - calming techniques on Tyee in the vicinity of Gulf. Project 2.2.1- Develop and implement a streetscape improvement plan for Tyee Drive, from the border to Gulf. Goal 2.3 Ensure that new development is established consistent with community vision and Marl. 1? ^'t ^3 ' '.' c :'i {at it -4a- ratticirpale -in #acaJe-imprtwement prt�gr ; c rtaiklettt- wkti�tlie C4,.:m„� .,,. or Plan Policy 2.3.12 Encourage new development consistent with densities included in the Optimum Land Use Map. Project 2.3.24 - Investigate grant funding and/or the availability of low interest loans as a means of assisting in facilitating commercial facade improvements. Project 2.3.32 - Conduct a subdivision plat review and where feasible, encourage the replats where contiguous ownership, small /substandard lots and underdevelopment exists. Goal 2.4 Seek to create a variety of opportunities for community interaction and involvement through festivals and events. Policy 2.4.1 Seek to promote the development of public gathering areas in Village Center commercial design. 37 Whatcom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan Policy 2.4.2 Promote the development of shared public parking facilities. Policy 2.4.3 Seek to work cooperatively with US /Canadian border officials on event/festival coordination. Project 2.4.1— In association with community festival planning, develop a plan for the cooperation and involvement of US and Canadian border officials related to border staffing and community event coordination. Goal 2.5 Encourage the development of foot and bicycle paths linking the Pillage Center with recreational and residential areas. Policy 2.5.1 Promote pedestrian improvements in the Gulf Road and Marine Drive rights -of- way. Policy 2.5.2 Incorporate pathway design and connectivity in future Park improvements. Policy 2.5.3 Encourage new residential subdivisions to provide on -site pedestrian pathways and open space corridors, which connect with existing and /or proposed community -wide corridors and pathways. GOAL 3.0 - PROMOTE APPROPRIATE INFRASTRUCTURE & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Goal 3.1 Encourage public infrastructure development that serves to focus commercial development and utilizes current and emerging technology. Policy 3.1.1 To facilitate higher- density mixed -use development in the Village Center and infill within surrounding residential areas, encourage the development of a wastewater and drainage system, which serves the Village Center and other residential areas. Policy 3.1.2 To support lower - density development outside of the Village Center and established residential areas, encourage uniformity in residential zoning classifications that promote rural density or cluster development which can be more efficiently served by wastewater and drainage systems. Project 3.1.1— Evaluate the feasibility of establishing a centralized wastewater system through the preparation of Sewer Comprehensive Plan. Emphasis should be placed on innovative designs that maximize natural systems and lowers overall cost. This Plan will evaluate the costs, challenges, and relative merits associated with the construction of varying wastewater designs. The installation of a wastewater system, if deemed feasible, is estimated to take approximately two years and should include the following steps: • Completion of a Sewer Comprehensive Plan • Review by Department of Ecology • Project Permitting (SEPA, Shorelines, etc.) • Application for grant /loan funding. • Administrative, legal, and public agency acceptance. • Final design, bidding and construction Project 3.1.2 - To encourage the replatting of existing substandard lots and subdivisions, evaluate the feasibility of limiting the initial wastewater service area to those areas with 38 Whatcom County 20170 -1 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan existing higher density development and the promotion of on -site and community septic systems for those areas not initially included in the wastewater service area. Project 3.1.3 - Evaluate the feasibility of establishing a centralized and /or decentralized storm drainage system through the preparation of a Stormwater Comprehensive Plan. This Plan will evaluate the costs, challenges, and relative merits associated with varying storm water management strategies. Goal 3.2 Support commercial development that provides recreational opportunities for residents and visitors. Policy 3.2.1 Encourage passive recreational development in areas with identified unique wildlife habitat to ensure that the provision of these recreational opportunities do not adversely impact the habitat areas. Policy 3.2.2 Encourage recreational development that takes advantage of Point Roberts maritime setting and natural environment. Project 3.2.1 - Through WACERT, CERB or other financing or grant sources, design and construct a public pier. The pier should be located at the foot of Gulf, so as to provide an anchor recreational use for the Village Center. Goal 3.3 Encourage the creation of bed & breakfasts, smaller hotels and lodges as a means of providing transient accommodations. Policy 3.3.1 Ensure that land use zoning permits Beds & Breakfasts in residential areas. Policy 3.3.2 Promote mixed -use commercial development that incorporates hotel /lodges as supportive uses. Policy 3.3.3 Encourage live -work residential development in the Village Center. Goal 3.4 Encourage the establishment of conference and convention facilirie,s in areas where services can be provided. Policy 3.4.1 Support the design of conference facilities as supporting uses at current and future recreational developments. Policy 3.4.2 Support the establishment of combined conference /lodging facilities. Goal 3.5 Maintain and enhance community identity (Maple Beach, Marina, Golf Course, etc.) by promoting neighborhood commercial development that provides for local goods and services. Policy 3.5.1 Encourage well designed residential infill development to augment the housing supply. Policy 3.5.2 Support appropriately scaled mixed -use development to provide neighborhood goods and services. Goal 3.6 Establish concurrency provisions for infrastructure and development. Policy 3.6.1 New residential subdivision development shall address the following minimum requirements consistent with existing regulations — paved streets, sidewalks and/or pedestrian 39 Whatcom County 201 01 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan pathways, stormwater drainage control, public water supply and fire flow, traffic circulation, and recreational needs. Policy 3.6.2 New development and redevelopment shall provide for and/or contribute to its proportionate share of expenses associated with the establishment or maintenance of adopted Levels of Service (LOS). Adopted LOS includes streets, pedestrian circulation systems, parks, emergency services (police and {ire), schools, stormwater, wastewater, and domestic water. Policy 3.6.3 Provision of off -site improvements shall be provided concurrent with the development of proposed projects, In the case of an approved phased development, off -site improvements and /or fair share contributions may be provided concurrent with each phase, provided that for each phase adopted Levels of Service are maintained. Policy 3.6.4 Development of a wastewater treatment system to serve the needs of the Small Town Commercial and Resort Commercial zones in Point Roberts shall be encouraged. In addition, extension of these services to other zones, including the Transitional Zone, shall be permitted. GOAL 4.0 — PROVIDE PARKS, TRAILS, RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES AND OPENSPACE Goal 4.1 Create an integrated network of multi -use trails and pathways to link public facilities, businesses, recreational opportunities, and residential areas and to provide an enhanced sense of community. Policy 4.1.1 Seek to incorporate non - motorized facilities into the public rights -of -way Policy 4.1.2 Encourage the creation and linkage of pedestrian trails in future commercial and residential development. Project 4.1.1— Prepare a Non - Motorized Transportation Plan (NMTP) that provides guidance on the establishment of an integrated multi -use trail system to serve the community. The Plan should address specific trail routes both within existing rights -of -way and through open space areas. An ad hoc committee comprised of representatives from the Park Board, property owners, Whatcom County Parks, County Planning & Public Works staff and existing citizen groups, should guide the preparation of the NMTP. The NMTP should include a specific prioritization of trail and/or path segments to be established as well as a detailed funding strategy. Goal 4.2 Provide improvements to Lighthouse, Monument, and Maple Beach Parks that balance opportunities for shoreline access with the protection of sensitive areas. Policy 4.2.1 Ensure that improvements are properly scaled for each site and use environmentally friendly materials and construction techniques. Goal 4.3 Ensure that future shoreline development incorporates open space preservation, public waterfront access, and pathway integration. Policy 4.3.1 Seek to establish appropriate and consistent setback requirements and public access connectivity. 40 Whatcom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan Goal 4.4 Seek to establish an integrated open space network through public acquisition, conservation easements and voluntary donations. Policy 4.4.1 Encourage public infrastructure projects to incorporate open space into project design. Policy 4.4.2 Promote future open space acquisition that link and connect existing open space. Policy 4.4.3 Promote the voluntary donation of open space and unique wildlife habitat. GOAL 5.0 — SUBAREA PLAN IMPLEMENTATION Goal S.1 Revise applicable County Codes to reflect the Goals, Policies, and Projects contained in this Plan. Revise Capital Improvement documents as applicable. Policy 5.1.1 Review proposed development projects for adherence to the Goals and Policies of the Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan. Project 5.1.1 — To the greatest extent possible and practicable, integrate the requirements and standards of the Point Roberts Character Plan into zoning codes. Project 5.1.2 — Review Chapter 20.72 of the Whatcom County Zoning Code for consistency with the provisions of the revised Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan Project 5.1.3 — Revise Chapter 20.72 of the Whatcom County Zoning Code to permit the development of an Air Park as a conditional use at the Airport. Project 5.1.4 — Revise the Small Town Commercial (STC) zoning classification to include the following provisions: Design M1 e in the Point Robwu Ctiaffle 'r P1 ...... • Density within the STC a maximum of 10 units per acre. • Height limitations 4wvoR.7., ,,,, -�.rt. 41 Whatcom County ,201704 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan SSE!Ct!(lfi. 6 OPTIMUM LAND USE MAP "Marina " Point Roberts Community Quill 6.1 Preparing the Optimum Land Use Map Interpretive maps and studies were prepared to assist in identifying land use opportunities that met the vision statement identified earlier in the planning process. Through the use of map overlays existing land use patterns were discerned. Areas that were undeveloped or underdeveloped were identified, critical areas and other environmental constraints were noted, existing circulation access was established and the portions of the community which are unable to accommodate on -site septic systems were identified. In addition, land ownership and platting patterns were identified and analyzed. An overlay analysis was performed which graphically depicted the afore - mentioned information. This information was then superimposed as a series of discrete layers. Through an analysis of areas that were characterized by the overlapping of layers of information, the relative development potential of the community could be discerned. The results of the overlay analysis indicated those portions of Point Roberts that were best suited to development. Those areas that may be less suited for development due to the presence of critical areas, lack of existing transportation infrastructure or the inability to accommodate on- site septic systems were also noted. In addition, the overlay analysis identified opportunities to address the mosaic patterns of zoning designations through consolidation and simplification. In preparing the overlay analysis, it became evident that prior zoning patterns responded more towards what was currently constructed and /or platted than what was in the community's best interest. This "spot zoning" established more zoning designations than typically found in communities many times the size of Point Roberts. It became evident that a consolidation of existing designations was warranted. The results of the overlay analysis were used to craft an Optimum Land Use Map (OLUM) for Point Roberts. The OLUM was crafted based on community involvement, environmental analysis, the goals and policies contained in this Plan and the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan, and on a synthesis between identified land use demands, and the opportunities and restrictions identified in the overlay analysis. The purpose of the OLUM is to provide guidance for the community on not only were to grow, but how to grow. The OLUM is a visual representation of the goals, policies and projects found in this Sub -Area Plan. In keeping with the 42 Whatcom County 201791 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan identified vision for the community, proposed zoning includes the following eight (8) zoning designations. 6.2 Proposed Land Use Designations 6.2.1 R5A - Chapter 20.36 of the Whatcom County Zoning Code (Code). The purpose of this classification is to provide for low - density residential character. Density allocation is one dwelling unit per five acres. 6.2.2 Resort Commercial — Chapter 20.64 of the Code. The purpose of this classification is to provide land areas which through their natural and manmade attributes attract resort activities. 6.2.3 Small Town Commercial — Chapter 20.61 of the Code. The purpose of this classification is to provide limited areas for a broad range of commercial uses serving the surrounding rural trade area and out -of -area tourists. 6.2.4 Recreation Open Space — Chapter 20.44 of the Code. The purpose of this classification is to ensure the continued public provision of a variety of services, optimizing public investments, conserving recreation and open space resources, and promoting compatibility between public functions and surrounding land uses. 6.2.5 Light Impact Industrial — Chapter 20.66 of the Code. The purpose of this classification is to provide areas primarily for industrial and subordinate uses which provide support services to the area. 6.2.6 RR2 - Chapter 20.32 of the Code. The purpose of this classification is to provide for low density residential character. Density allocation is two dwelling unit per acre. 6.2.7 RR1— Chapter 20.32 of the Code. The purpose of this classification is to provide for low density residential character. Density allocation is one dwelling unit per acre. 6.2.8 Transitional — The purpose of this classification is to provide for low density residential development in areas lacking necessary infrastructure while permitting increased development density through the provision of infrastructure, cluster design, and open space allocation. 6.3 Optimum Land Use Map See following page. 43 Whatcom County 2017" Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan ��o 7 CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT "Canadian Customs House" Point Roberts Community Quilt 7.1 Introduction This Capital Facilities Element (CFE) for the Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan identifies the capital improvements and services necessary to meet the goals of the Sub -Area Plan, while identifying funding to implement the planned facilities. The CFE evaluates the financial capacity of the community to provide adequate public facilities and services that have been identified to handle expected growth. Capital facilities include county administrative facilities, parks, transportation facilities, water, sewer and solid waste, fire and emergency services, and schools. As part of the Sub -Area Plan adoption, the Capital Facilities Element of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan is supplemented by the analysis and data contained within this element. 7.2 Goal Capital facilities and services should be available when needed as properties within Point Roberts develop (and redevelop) consistent with the requirements of the Growth Management Act and the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan. 7.3 Policy Describe the services and facilities necessary to serve developable properties in Point Roberts consistent with the Levels Of Service (LOS) already established by the County in the Comprehensive Plan and identify the sources of funding and responsibility. 7.4 Growth Management Act Requirements The Capital Facilities Plan is a mandatory component of the Comprehensive Plan. As required by the Growth Management Act, the Capital Facilities Plan must include: • An inventory of existing public facilities; • An identification of the public facilities that will be required during the six years following the adoption of the plan; • The proposed location and cost of the facilities; • A 6 -year plan to finance the capital facilities that is financially feasible and identifies the expected sources of revenue; and 44 Whatcom County 201704 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan • A requirement to modify the land use element, reduce the level of service, or reduce costs if costs exceed revenue in order to balance development with affordable facilities. See Section 7.12 for the requirement to achieve a balance between available and needed Capital Facilities consistent with RCW 36.70A.070(3)(e). 7.5 Relationship to Whatcom County Capital Facilities Element Upon Sub -Area Plan adoption, this Capital Facilities Element is to be integrated into and become a supplement of the Whatcom County Capital Facilities Plan. In addition, this element is intended to supplement the analysis contained in the Whatcom County Capital Facilities Element. It is the intent of this element to provide greater specificity (as required) regarding the potential establishment of capital facilities in the Point Roberts Sub -Area. This Capital Facilities Element is not intended to replace the Whatcom County Capital Facilities Element, nor is it intended to alter adopted County levels of service 7.6 Service Area Boundaries This CFE examines the capital facility and service needs of development in the Point Roberts Sub -Area, the boundaries of which are shown on Map 10.5 7.7 Concurrency One of the goals of the Growth Management Act is that Capital facilities be provided concurrent with new development so that sufficient capacity is available for handling the increased population. The principle of concurrency requires that facilities to serve a development must be in place at the time of development or that there is a financial commitment to provide services in a timely manner. These public facilities must have sufficient capacity to serve growth while maintaining the established level of service for existing development. 7.8 Whatcom County Capital Facilities Requirements Whatcom County has established levels of service for: • Transportation facilities; • Park facilities; • Correction facilities; and • Administrative facilities. Regional facilities such as courthouses, correctional facilities and parks are a component of the County's planned population increase and are addressed accordingly. Please see Section 7.11 for an analysis of established Whatcom County levels of service. 7.9 Population Basis for Analysis The Sub -Area Plan's population assumption is based upon Point Roberts accommodating its proportionate share of the allocated Whatcom County rural population growth. As discussed in Section 3.1.4, this anticipated increase in permanent population equals 336. 7.10 Capital Facilities Analysis Matrix The following table (Table 9) summarizes the anticipated capital facility requirements necessary to serve anticipated growth within the Sub -Area during the next 6 years. Improvements to be 45 Whatcom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan located in the Sub -Area that are already included in the County's Capital Facilities Element and/or Capital Improvement Program which are still applicable are not repeated in this Element. In addition, Whatcom County will continue to provide services countywide based on anticipated population growth as analyzed in the Comprehensive Plan. Tahle 9. h- Year %rniml Fnrititiac C'a Ct A Fvnati rra .S.siirran Capital Facilities Anticipated Cost Funding Sources Project Description Year 1,000 additional ROADS Village Center Streetscape 2002 $250,000 Developer contributions; Improvements (Phase I) Street 1,000 per 1,000 LID or Latecomer Fees; trees; Pedestrian facilities population impact State and Federal Grants; ((sidewalks, trails, street furniture, are calculated County funding per TIP. etc.); Street lighting. See CIP page F -7 through F -8 None population; no WASTEWATER Prepare Feasibility Study 2001 $50,000 DOE Grant; Point Roberts Water District See CIP page F -17 through F- See population; no No. 4; Developer CIP additional impacts contributions. WATER None OTHER None 7.11 Whatcom County Level of Services Whatcom County will continue to provide regional services to Point Roberts based on the Level of Service described in the Comprehensive Plan. Required capital facilities due to anticipated growth in the Sub -Area are analyzed in Table 10. Table 10. Anticipated Impacts Based on C'artnty LOS Standards Capital Facility LOS Standard Residential I Non Funding Cost Type Im p act' Residential I Source PARK FACILITIES Six centers per Developed 9.6 acres per No Parks 1,000 additional impact population Impact Trails 0.75 of a mile No 1,000 per 1,000 additional population population impact Activity Centers Six centers per No See 100,000 additional CIP population impact CORRECTION FACILITIES Jails 1.42 beds per No LOS based on 1,000 additional population; no population impact 46 LOS based on See County Comprehensive See population; no Plan Six Year Capital CIP additional impacts Improvement Program (CIP) page F- are calculated page F -3 through F -4 4 LOS based on See CIP page F -5 through F -6 See population; no CIP additional impacts page F- are calculated 6 LOS based on See CIP page F -7 through F -8 None population; no additional impacts are calculated LOS based on See CIP page F -17 through F- See population; no 18 CIP additional impacts page F- are calculated 18 46 Whatcom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan Capital Facility LOS Standard Residential Non Funding Cost Type Impact' Residential Source Impact LOS based on Juvenile 0.165 beds per No See CIP page F -19 None Detention 1,000 additional population; no population impacts additional impacts are calculated ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITIES Office Space 0.51 sq. ft. per No LOS based on See CIP page F -9 through F- See capita additional population; no 11 CIP impacts additional impacts page F- are calculated 10 Maintenance 0.41 sq. ft. per No LOS based on See CIP page F -13 None and Operations capita additional population; no impacts additional impacts are calculated Sheriff's Office 0.26 sq. ft. per No LOS based on See CIP page F -14 See capita additional population; no CIP impacts additional impacts page F- No are calculated LOS based on See CIP page F -9 through F- 14 See Office Space 0.71 sq. ft. per (serves entire capita additional population; no 10 CIP County) impacts additional impacts page F- are calculated See CIP page F -15 through F- 10 See Sheriff 0.011 sq. ft. No LOS based on Emergency per capita additional population; no 16 CIP Operations impacts additional impacts page F- are calculated 16 .............. The residential impact that is assasscd in this Capital Facilities Element (CFE) is bused on die net increusc over the population previously analyzed in the Whatcom County Compreltcnsivc Plan. The total population anticipated in the twenty year planning horizon has been reduced to a per -year (straight line) basis for the purposes of this CFE. Should growth occur more rapidly than anticipated, this CFE shall be revised and amended during the annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment Process. 7.12 Available Revenues and Capital Facilities to Support Land Use If the projected revenue sources and funding turn out to be inadequate to finance the needed Capital Facilities for the Sub -Area Plan, based upon adopted levels of service, then the County will make adjustments to the level of service, the land use element, the source of revenue or any combination thereof, to achieve a balance between available revenue and needed Capital Facilities consistent with the requirements of RCW 36.70A.070(3)(e). 7.13 Point Roberts Utilities Element The Growth Management Act requires a Utilities Element which outlines the general location and capacities of existing utilities, including electrical lines, telecommunications lines and natural gas lines. The existing facilities in Point Roberts are described in the County Comprehensive Plan. Electricity Electrical power is provided by Puget Sound Energy who in turn purchases electricity from BC Hydro. 47 Whatcom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan Natural Gas Natural gas is not available in Point Roberts. Telephone Telephone service (land lines) is provided by Whidbey Telephone via underground cables. Water Points Roberts Water District No. 4 is the primary supplier for drinking water in Point Roberts. The District purchases its water from the greater Vancouver Water District (GVWD), which draws its water from three protected source lakes: Lakes Seymour, Capilano and Coquitlam. Point Roberts main supply comes from the Lake Seymour facility. The water is drawn from the Pebble hill Reservoir located in Tsawwassen, BC and distributed through the districts system to consumers. The GVWD water contract allows a maximum usage of 840,000 gallons per day for Point Roberts. Through the Point Roberts Comprehensive Water System Plan (completed in September of 1999) the Washington State Department of Health has approved up to 2,048 connections to the system (based on an approved 410 gallons per day per connection). There are presently approximately 1,825 connections, leaving approximately 223 new available connections. The Point Roberts Water District has been installing 20 to 25 new water connections per year over the last several years (see Table 4). The District, therefore, believes that it has sufficient near -term capacity to service anticipated development. Additional capacity outside of the current planning horizon has been identified as either requiring a modification of the design and operation of the existing 2.5 million gallon reservoir to modulate peak demand or a revision to the GVWD contract. The Point Roberts Water District has no plans for modification to the reservoir or an amendment to the water supply contract. Wastewater Treatment Individual septic systems serve much of Point Roberts. The exception is the community septic system, managed by the Water District, for the Marina. Stormwater Management Surface drainage occurs through natural gullies and open drainage ditches in the upland areas and through a ditch network in the lowlands. Solid Waste Curbside solid waste and recycling services are provided by Point Roberts Recycling and Refuse. Television Cable TV and internet service is provided by Delta Cable. 48 Whateom County 20JI11 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan Km hl! r r a Ud Nafiaaa— Xar�+t +ras L.�afatareafata €ar(laaf{t 8.1 Design ;uMeHno 8.1.1 P&1ftUV,&hert*-Gh*r-setep44a* The44)'lmt Rob n�r$Y{iM 'r sr 4d "te yy tl t tr'aar i 43r establishes pPeterfe -a rtes(ffral des n e3et r Ier ea raial l tat within -E'vi t f a rt: l "dditian; it estfiNisi es-C- dge*agr lightin 5(ft dares: The E =h ot �� e,- � ., 4weby mia et a ; , ki9•revis9on ofthe4loint i c�herta Std- Planr-= 1l�e�esigia trlet ter+t 4einc�rl iw.the ae 'aR are intendtA Ec� a�1y Ee ititrtiet witleiel end- itituticaet �r °° c +tota #em oNhe Chaff e�� �; rTTZe �eilew� 49 Whateom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan Seel on " 98 APPENDICES "Monument" Point Roberts Community Quilt 9:18.1 Build -Out Analysis Population build -out was calculated given two parameters — current zoning (See map Section 9.4) and proposed zoning (See map Section 9.5). Additionally both current and proposed zoning build -out was estimated with and without infrastructure necessary to support higher density. Given current zoning, build -out totals either 13,100 people (assuming public water and sewer was available) or 3,332 people (assuming water is available but public sewer is not). See Table 11 for calculations. Section 8.1.1 details the parcel- specific information used to calculate these two different development densities. Given proposed zoning, build -out totals either 9,304 people (assuming public water and sewer /STEP was available) or 2,337 people (assuming water is available but public sewer is not). See Table 12 for calculations. Section 8.1.2 details the parcel - specific information used to calculate these two different development densities. 9448.1.1 Analysis — Current Zoning Table /l. Currentlnninv 50 Scenario A Scenario B Zoning Designations Assumes Public Water & Sewer Assumes Public Water with No Sewer GC 803 152 RC 3,021 238 URM6 224 17 UR4 1,209 259 UR3 2,454 460 R5A 99 96 R10A 54 53 Sub -total Dwelling Units 7,864 1,275 Less Reductions @ 15% -1,180 -191 Subtotal Dwelling Units 6,684 1,084 Less Market Factor @ 25% -1,671 -271 iNet Dwelling Units 5,013 813 Average Population per DU 2.21 2.21 'Total Additional Population @ Buildoutl 11,079 1 1,796 50 I Whatcom County 2017(4 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan 91.28.1.2 Analysis — Proposed Zoning Table 12. Pror, o. €et17r.71 {rrg Zoning Designations Scenario A Assumes Public Water 8 SewerISTEP'Assumes Scenario B Public Water with No Sewer GC 22 3 RC 3,275 271 STC 812 129 RR1 1,004 662 RR2 464 200 TZ 895 265 R5A 132 129 Sub -total Dwelling Units 6,604 1,659 iLess Reductions @!15% -991 _ -249 1,410 Sub -total Dwelling Units 5,613 (Less Market Factor @ 25% -1,430 _ -353 1,058 INet Dwelling Units 4,201 Average Population per DU 2.21 2.21 Total Additional Population @ Buildout 9,304 2,337 98.2 Population Projections The following population projections were taken from the 1997 Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan — Section 1 -8, Table 3. Table 13. Panulctrian Proirction _Year Actual Point Roberts Whatcom Countv 1950 _ 267 66,733 70,317 1960 232 1970 326 81,983 1980 461 106,700 127,780 148,300 220,366 1990 916 1995 1,050 Forecast 2015 1,319 9.38.3 Results of Workshops — Alternatives Considered Various group activities were conducted throughout the Sub -Area planning process. The results of these facilitated activities provided a background for the discussions that resulted in the Sub - Area Vision, Goals, Policies, and Projects. Detailed below are the results of the activities. 9.3.18.3.1 Meeting of September 21, 2000 Activity 1 — Participants were asked to list current "Opportunities" for Point Roberts and current "Issues ". 51 Whatcom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan Activity 2 — Participants were then given an opportunity to "vote" for their highest ranked (i.e. - most important) Opportunity and Issue. Note: Number of votes received is in parenthesis. Trail System & Greenbelts Committee to Rebuild Lighthouse Fishing Pier Heron Rookery / Bird Sanctuary Historical Museum Natural Beauty "End of Road" Marina & Airport School Turnout Bus (2) PACE Program (2) Quality of life (1) Old Subdivision's - 1973 Style Change of Voters (50% = 4 years) Transp. /Road Maint. & Road Standards More Diverse Housing Choices Circulation — Lack of Connections (1) Uncertainty Due To Land Speculation (1) Relocation of Homes From Canada Utility Location (underground) (1) Storm water (1) Minimum House Sizes (1) Views (2) Sewers Off Premise Signage Natural Gas /Fiber Optics Tourism Schools (lack beyond primary) Trees Impacting - View Corridor Opportunities Tourism (1) Chit wAef44a} Tree Preservation Shape Roads to Avoid Trees Shoreline Road ends Amount of Linear Shoreline Golf Course Whale Watching (1) Trails With Storm water System Issues 1.3.28.3.2 Meeting of October 20, 2000 (1) America Surrounded By Canada Access Economics (3) Enforcement (1) Kids Move Away After School Job's - Economic Development Recreation for Teens (2) Uncertainty Trees /Natural Environment Zoning Uncertainty "Gridism" - Straight Roads Privatization of the Waterfront Access to Beach Gravel Pit Population Comes & Goes (Seasonal) Growth Medical Services - Clinic Return on Taxes Border Activity I — Participants were asked how to describe Point Roberts to a first -time visitor. The following list ensued. Heaven on Earth Natural Beauty The "Other San Juan Island • Happening • Village • Diverse Community • "Gated" Community Currently "Distressed" Next to a Major Metropolitan Area The Pearl of the Northwest Unique Geographical Isolation Canadian Influence Something for Everybody Good Security /Safety Big Boating/Water Sport Area 52 Clamming/Crabbing Beach Combing Whale Watching Warm Swimming Significant Bird Population New Golf Course Rural Area Next to Major City Weather — More Sun, Less Rain Live Here by Choice Kayaking Quiet Community Clean Air /Sunshine Outdoor Activities Arts and Crafts Community Diverse Housing Types Whatcom County 201761 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan Different/Unique History Diverse Geography Economy Beginning to Grow Activity 2 — Participants were asked to list all potential issues and opportunities facing Point Roberts in the future. Sewer System Need Isolation from Medical/County Services Enforcement of Laws /Regulations Border Issues Water Availability & Connections Growth Pressures Sustainable Growth/Development Youth/Aduh Recreational Facilities Natural Limitations on Growth Building Community Telephone Issues Finding Things to Bring Us Together Tourism/Beach Draw /Marina Lack of Accommodations Economic Development Ferry Service Lack of Services for Locals High Tech Development Return on Taxes Paid School Past Grade Three Competing Needs of FT /PT Residents Airport/Pier Development Lack of Medical Facility Economic Opportunities Pressure on Forested Lands Splintered Community Losing Touch w /Neighbors Natural Gas Family Wage Jobs Balancing Diversity in PR Lack of Public Dialog Trails /Access to Public Lands Long Way to Bellingham Losing the Rural Character Impact on Wildlife Growth Not Benefiting Local Lacking Enough People/Mass Beautification/ Utility Loc. Needs of Seniors Dev of Shared Vision Lack of Local Political Rep. Lighthouse Park Activity 3 — Participants were asked to rank, using three sticky -dots, the items of highest priority. The following vote totals resulted: Issues and Qp0l tunitics ChwLn Sewer System Need Sustainable Growth/Development Airport/Pier Development Enforcement of Laws /Regulations Economic Development High Tech Development Losing the Rural Character Lack of Accommodations Development of a Shared Vision Natural Limitations on Growth Trails /Access to Public Lands Telephone Issues Finding Things to Bring Us Together Tourism/Beach Draw /Marina School Past Grade Three Lack of Economic Opportunities Isolation from Medical/County Services Border Issues Water Availability & Connections Youth/Adult Recreational Facilities Ferry Service Return on Taxes Paid Lack of Medical Facility 53 Number of Dots 17 10 10 5 5 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Whatcom County 201704 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan Lack of Public Dialog Impact on Wildlife 9.3.38.3.3 Meeting of October 21, 2000 Activity I - A series of five different future development alternatives were then presented to the community members. Each alternative included a narrative of the development outcomes that would be experienced and a map of the probable development patterns. Following the presentation, the audience was broken into four groups and asked to discuss and "grade" each alternative. The five alternatives were: Alternative 1 Point Roberts Today and Tomorrow - This alternative represented a continuation of the current development patterns. Alternative 2 Finding a Center - This alternative stressed the development of a focused mixed -use village center. Alternative 3 Destination Point Roberts - This alternative was centered in the creation of convention and conference facilities and the multi -day visitor. Alternative 4 Cluster and Connect Point Roberts - This alternative saw the creation of multiple, small, scattered commercial areas. Alternative 5 Art, Culture, and Recreation at Point Roberts - This alternative stressed the day- visitor by creating festivals and events. The combined community "grade" for each of the alternatives was as follows: Table 14. Point Roberts Charrette Alternatives Report Card Grading Guide — Use the following letters to grade the Alternatives for each category goal: A = Achievcs category goal. D = Probable will not achieve category goal. B = t1as good potenlial to schiavc category goal. F = Will be dcuitnental io category goal. C =Somewhat achic�.0ti calegory garsl. Grading Categories Today & Tomorrow Finding a Center Destination Pt Roberts Cluster & Connect Art Culture & Recreation Maintains and /or Contributes to C+ B+ C+ C B+ Community Character Fosters Appropriate Economic C+ B C+ D+ B+ -Development Preserves Natural Systems & Protects the D- C+ C+ D+ C+ Environment Provides Goods & Services Needed in the C B+ B- C C Community Provides and /or Enhances Recreational C- C+ B+ C+ B+ Opportunities Contributes to the Diversity of the C+ C+ B+ C B+ Community Final Grade 54 Whatcom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan Activity 2 - Participants were again broken into four groups and asked to draw a new land use map. These maps could include any of the elements of the prior alternative maps or new elements agreed to by the group. Following this activity, a representative of the group presented each of the four new maps to the audience. The following common themes were noted in all of the four new alternatives: • A focused town center on Gulf Road extending from Tyee Drive to beach • Additional facilities /services at Lighthouse Park • Community events to draw day time and overnight visitors • Trails, bicycle paths and open space • Protection of tree cover and wildlife habitat • Additional recreational facilities and support services near Lighthouse Park, Maple Beach, the new golf course /Monument Park, Lily Point and the Marina. Additional ideas proposed by one or more of the groups include: • Maintaining a vegetated corridor and discouraging additional commercial development along Tyee Drive near the US /Canadian border • Encourage infill of automobile - orientated businesses (grocery stores, gas stations, lumber stores, etc.) along Tyee Drive • Encourage infill of pedestrian- orientated businesses (retail shops, restaurants, galleries, etc.) on Gulf Road near the Community Center • Develop parking areas on Gulf Road for shoppers and community events • Encourage non - retail (offices, light assembly, etc.) businesses to locate on the edge of the new pedestrian- orientated mixed -use focused town center • Encourage bed and breakfast and small lodges for overnight guests • Cluster new residential development in areas where services can be provided 9:48.4 Rules of Conduct & Social Contract The following Rules of Conduct & Social Contract was adopted by the Steering Committee at the onset of the Sub -Area planning process: Membership and Procedures • The Sub -Area Plan Steering Committee shall be appointed by the County Council. The Steering Committee may elect a chairperson, or co- chairpersons. • The meetings of the Steering Committee shall be called to order and facilitated by the consultant. • Meetings of the Steering Committee shall be held consistent with the attached schedule. • Public attendance is always welcome at all meetings of the Steering Committee; however, public testimony will not be taken at all meetings. Written comment is always welcome. • Whenever possible, consensus based decision making will be utilized. If consensus is not possible due to time constraints, a forced - choice methodology based on agreed- W Whateom County 20170 -4 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan upon evaluation criteria will be used. Evaluation criteria shall be approved by a majority of the Steering Committee. Rules of Conduct — Steering Committee Members • Opinions and points of view offered by Steering Committee members and the public shall be considered and discussed in a respectful manner. • Steering Committee members agree to consider both the best interests of the community and the rights of property owners prior to making any recommendations or decisions. • Members agree to attend all meetings of the Steering Committee. In the event of illness or unavoidable scheduling conflicts, members are encouraged to provide written comments regarding pending discussion items prior to the meeting for distribution. In addition, members acknowledge that it is their responsibility to review the results of the discussion which occurred in their absence. In all circumstances, members agree to refrain from "second guessing" or revisiting decisions and/or recommendations which were made at meetings for which they were absent. • Members agree to participate in a truthful and constructive manner. • Members agree to fully express their concerns regarding issues and/or procedures in a timely manner. Members agree not to "collect" their grievances and /or concerns and "unload" them at a later date. • Members agree to respect the role of the facilitator. Rules of Conduct — Consultant • The consultant agrees to act as a fair and impartial facilitator. The consultant shall strive to avoid pre - judgment on issues. • The consultant agrees to fully implement to the best of their ability the intent and direction of the Steering Committee. • The consultant agrees to provide technical expertise and recommendations based on their professional training and experience as required. • The consultant, consistent with their professional code of ethics, shall work in the public interest. • The consultant shall submit work products in a timely manner. I have reviewed these rules of conduct and social contract and agree to abide by them. Steering Committee Members: Syd Wallace Michael Rosser Irene Waters 56 Whatcom County 201701 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan Shelly Damewood Frank Ney Jim Julius Rick Sepler Greg Young 57 Consultant Whatcom County 20194 PointAoberts Sub -Area Plan 109 MALPS Point Roberts Community Quilt 1019.1 Topography Map I ")."'. 2 Sensitive Areas Map 'Transportation Map 4 D.JQ.4 Existing Land Use Map 1(�.59,C, Proposed Land Use Map 58 Whatcom County 201191 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan See flon4V) 1410 SUPPORTING DATA "Point Rnha7.r 5'om tdti i; Special" Point Roberts Community Quilt 14.110.1 Point Roberts Border Crossings Point Roberts Washington Note: figures compiled using federal calendar (Oct. — Sept.) US /Canada Border Crossings Source: U.S. Customs, Blaine WA 1986 Through 2000 Note: September 2000 figures assumed, date not available 59 I Whatcom County 20170-1 Point Roberts Sub -Area Plan 14.210.2 Tax Assessed Valuation — Point Roberts, City of Blaine, Birch Bay Water & Sewer District, and Whatcom County Fire District No. 13 Table 15. Tax Assessed Valuation — Point Roberts, City of Blaine, Birch Bay Water & Sewer District, and Whatcom Cuunty Fire District No. 13 BIRCH POINT ROBERTS CITY OF BLAINE 100% Valuati on New Construction 100% Valuation New Construction 1991 AV $ 178 679,438 $ $ 4,341,420 1,993,130 1992 AV $ 181,034,177 1993 AV $ 185,592,504 $ - 1994 AV $ 277,639,303 $ 11,389,855 1995 AV $ 279,316,206 $ 1 789,835 1996 AV $ 281,011,580 $ 1,685,110 1997 AV $ 279,834,824 $ 1,912,020 1998 AV $ 245,134,010 $ 2,335,540 1999 AV $ 246,703,274 $ 2,570,895 2000 AV 1 $ 248,091,883 $ 2,328,080 BIRCH BAY WATER & SEWER CITY OF BLAINE 100% Valuati on New Construction 1991 AV 100% Valuation New Construction 1991 AV $ 197,893,150 $ 14,773,610 1992 AV $ 216,560,177 $ 15,232,485 1993 AV $ 230,180,045 $ 8,765,350 1994 AV $ 304,465,767 $ 12,758,779 1995 AV $ 313,805,516 $ 11,656.785 1996 AV $ 330,989 526 $ 15,807,080 1997 AV $ 353,318,169 $ 5,556,955 1998 AV $ 374,281,133 $ . 13,023,180 1999 AV $ 385,315,071 $ 9,722,615 2000 AV $ 400,985,634 1 $ 9,743,475 BIRCH BAY WATER & SEWER 100% Valuati on New Construction 1991 AV $ 227,365,664 ** ** 1992 AV $ 237,200,636 1993 AV $ 245,595,510 ** 1994 AV $ 412,070,222 ** 1995 AV $ 423,517,432 ** 1996 AV $ 414,403,591 ........__. ** 1997 AV $ 420,878,624 ** 1998 AV $ 440,530,258 ** 1999 AV $ 450,697,906 ** 2000 AV $ 473,708,804 ** Source: Whatcom County Assessor 3 Water /Sewer Districts are set up for their funding such that new construction is not an amount specifically used in their levy calculations. Therefore, there is no new construction dollar amount listed. " Be aware that the valuation listed is not necessarily every parcel within the boundaries of the fire district. Parcels within the fire district boundary which have no improvements or improved acreage do not pay the fire district levy 60 FIRE DISTRICT #13 100% Valuation New Construction 1991 AV $ 323,724,490 $ 12,638,030 1992 AV $ 338,298,322 $ 12,078,425 1993 AV $ 355,665,172 $ 14,489,384 1994 AV $ 583,971,007 $ 32 294,638 1995 AV $ 601,582,843 $ 17,305,510 1996 AV 1997 AV $ 601,478,039 $ 597,439,119 $ 7,361,400 $ 8,715,090 1998 AV $ 633,698,245 $ 19,804,758 1999 AV $ 653,481,122 $ 13,552,355 2000 AV $ 672,892,984 $ 16,833,295 Source: Whatcom County Assessor 3 Water /Sewer Districts are set up for their funding such that new construction is not an amount specifically used in their levy calculations. Therefore, there is no new construction dollar amount listed. " Be aware that the valuation listed is not necessarily every parcel within the boundaries of the fire district. Parcels within the fire district boundary which have no improvements or improved acreage do not pay the fire district levy 60 EXHIBIT B (Point Roberts Character Plan) Chapter 20.72 POINT ROBERTS SPECIAL DISTRICT (Showing proposed amendments incorporated from the to- be- repealed Point Roberts Character Plan) Sections: 20.72.010 Purpose. 20.72.020 Application. 20.72.022 Area and applicability. 20.72.050 Permitted uses. 20.72.100 Accessory uses. 20.72.130 Administrative approval uses. 20.72.150 Conditional uses. 20.72.200 Prohibited uses. 20.72.250 Minimum lot size. 20.72.260 Maximum density. 20.72.270 Subdivision requirements. 20.72.400 Height limitations. 20.72.650 Development criteria. 20.72.651 Facility design. 20.72.652 Archaeological resources. 20.72.653 Tree canopy retention. (Adopted by reference in WCCP Chapter 2.) 20.72.654 Site design /view corridors. 20.72.655 Public restrooms and trash facilities. 20.72.656 Vehicular access. 20.72.657 Non - vehicular access. 20.72.658 Drainage. 20.72.659 Parking. 20.72.670 Signs. 20.72.010 Purpose. Point Roberts is a unique area of Whatcom County because of its relatively small size, its mixed development character, its relative isolation and the constraints on normal growth patterns caused by the impact of access only via an international border crossing. This geographic isolation from the remainder of Whatcom County complicates the direct application of other zone districts within this title. Point Roberts is considered a limited area of more intense rural development, being clearly bounded by the border and marine environment. However, within these boundaries are zoning districts allowing a variety of development intensities. Proposed changes in uses or lots, and new proposed uses, must be consistent with rural land use as set forth in the Comprehensive Plan. The Point Roberts Special District is an overlay zone which imposes additional controls and creates opportunities not available in the underlying zone districts to fit the needs of Point Roberts. This district is designed to protect the rural character of Point Roberts while allowing opportunities for community growth and self - reliance. 20.72.020 Application. 20.72.022 Area and applicability. The Point Roberts Special District is an overlay zone which covers the entire geographic area of Point Roberts. Any regulations contained herein which are more restrictive than those in the underlying zone districts or in the Shoreline Management Program shall apply. Opportunities, or lesser restrictions, shall also override the requirements of the underlying zone. However, if the provisions of this chapter conflict with the provisions of the Shoreline Management Program, then the most restrictive shall apply. 20.72.030 Review of permit applications by the Point Roberts Community Advisory Committee. A The Point Roberts Community Advisory Committee .PRCAC is a local body advisoEy to Whatcom County through the office of the Whatcom County Executive and of the Whatcom County Council. (B) The pertinent purpose of the PRCAC, as it relates to development permits, is to examine commercial and institutional permit applicationswk4in the Point Roberts subarea ^mm °.--O °' - i -t.: ^* and make recommendations to Whatcom County Planning and Development Services as to their compliance with this Chapter and consistency with the Point Roberts Design Guidelines. (C) Upon receipt of a permit application, Planning and_Development Services will forward the application to the PRCAC for review and comment. Permit applications are to be promptly examined by the PRCAC and a determination made, with or without recommendations, within 30 days of receipt of the application. D Planning and Development Services will consider all pertinent comments received by the PRCAC prior to issuing a decision on the permit. 20.72.050 Permitted uses. All permitted uses in the underlying zone districts are permitted except as expressly prohibited or made conditional, or further conditioned by this chapter. In addition, the following uses are permitted: .051 In the RC Zone, bed and breakfast establishments and bed and breakfast inns. 20.72.100 Accessory uses. All accessory uses in the underlying zone districts are permitted as accessory uses. 20.72.130 Administrative approval uses. All administrative approval uses in the underlying zone districts are permitted except as expressly prohibited or made conditional, or further conditioned by this chapter. In addition, the following uses are permitted subject to administrative approval pursuant to WCC 20.84.235: .135 One private, noncommercial, recreational vehicle or park model trailer and one accessory guest RV per lot; provided, that the following minimum requirements and standards are met and /or followed: (1) All recreational vehicles that remain on the site for more than 14 consecutive days shall be connected to a permitted on -site sewage system or public sewer. (2) Maximum length of stay of any recreational vehicle on a lot shall not exceed 120 days per calendar year; provided, that no accessory guest RV shall remain on the subject lot for more than 14 consecutive days +nor more than 30 days total per calendar year. (3) All recreational vehicles shall be screened from neighboring properties not using RVs and from public roads. Such screening may consist of landscaped buffer areas, native vegetation or a fence. (4) Lots shall not be leased or rented out on a daily or overnight basis for recreational use. (5) Accessory structures are limited to one personal storage building no larger than 200 square feet. (6) The locations of parked RVs on vacant lots shall observe normal building setback standards for a single - family residence. (7) All recreational vehicles shall be supported by their own wheels or camper jacks, and not be fastened to accessory structures. Placement of a recreational vehicle on a foundation or removal of the wheels of a recreational vehicle, except for temporary purposes for repair, is prohibited. 20.72.150 Conditional uses. All conditional uses in the underlying zone districts shall remain conditional uses unless expressly prohibited by this chapter. In addition, the following uses shall only be conditionally permitted: .151 Hotels, motels and time share condominiums. .152 Surface and subsurface mining including the extraction of sand and gravel shall be conditionally permitted in the Rural Zone under the provisions set forth in WCC 20.36.150. .153 In the R5A Zone located west of the Point Roberts Marina and east of Marine Drive, an air park facility /subdivision and commercial activities incidental to aviation facilities may be conditionally permitted; provided, that: (1) The proposed air park will comply with national, state and local aviation regulations and safety standards; and (2) Residential development shall be subordinate to the primary airstrip operations; and (3) An air park shall include a 50 -foot vegetated buffer between the proposed facility /subdivision and adjacent parcels; provided, that the required buffer may be reduced or eliminated where such a buffer might otherwise interfere with site access; use of the airstrip and /or taxi way(s); health and safety of air park residents, visitors or operators; and /or FAA regulations. Any open space reserve tract(s) associated with the proposed air park shall be exempt from the buffer requirements of this section; provided, that the open space reserve tract establishes a minimum distance of 50 feet between the air park facility /subdivision and adjacent parcels; and (4) If a proposed subdivision, binding site plan, or short subdivision is located adjacent to an existing airstrip, the developer and any subsequent purchasers or successors in interest shall agree to refrain from any legal action to restrain or collect damages from the owners or users, or from Whatcom County, arising out of normal operation or use of the airstrip. The agreement shall appear as a covenant or deed restriction upon the plat, tract or instrument of conveyance and shall run with the land. .154 In the Rural District, private commercial sports facilities and clubs permitted as conditional uses under WCC 20.30.165 shall include horse racing facilities and pari - mutuel wagering as regulated and licensed by the Washington State Horse Racing Commission, together with the usual accessory uses including club house, food and beverage service, restaurant and stables. .155 In the Resort Commercial District, dry boat storage, including stacked storage, and boat trailer storage associated with a marina. 20.72.200 Prohibited uses. In addition to the uses prohibited in the underlying zone districts, the following uses are prohibited: .201 Service stations in all zones, except expansion of existing service stations by adding additional pumps or hose dispensers. .202 The following uses are prohibited in the Resort Commercial Zone District in the Maple Beach area of Point Roberts: (1) Rooming houses. (2) Taverns. (3) Commercial parking lots or garages. .204 The following uses are prohibited in the Small Town Commercial Zone District along Gulf Road only: (1) Mini storage facilities. (2) Animal kennels not associated with a veterinary practice. (3) Motorized vehicles and equipment, motorcycle, marine, farm implement, light and heavy equipment, recreational vehicle service, repair, washing facilities, commercial storage or sale. (4) Additional recreational vehicle parks. (5) Cemeteries. 20.72.250 Minimum lot size. .251 Where the cluster subdivision option is used to protect a critical area: (1) A parcel size reduction of five percent may be granted where average parcel size (except the reserve tract) is less than 10,000 square feet; or (2) A parcel size reduction of 10 percent may be granted where average parcel size (except the reserve tract) is 10,000 square feet; or (3) More of a reduction may be granted only if the resultant lots are able to meet the applicable development standards of this title and other county ordinances, including setbacks and minimum reserve tract area. 20.72.260 Maximum density. .261 Except as modified by this chapter, all residential densities in the Rural General Commercial, Small Town Commercial and Resort Commercial Zones shall not exceed 10 units per acre. 4 .262 For the purpose of developing an air park facility only, the parcels zoned 115A that are located west of the Point Roberts Marina and east of Marine Drive, including the airstrip property, may be developed as a cluster development at a maximum density of one dwelling unit per acre. 20.72.270 Subdivision requirements. .271 Lands within the Rural Zone District in Point Roberts shall be exempt from the provisions of the Agriculture Protection Overlay District, Chapter 20.38 WCC. 20.72.350 Building setbacks /buffer areas. (Adopted by reference in WCCP Chapter 2.) (1) Building setbacks along Tyee Drive and Roosevelt Road are increased to 50 feet and 40 feet respectively. In existing treed areas along Tyee Drive and Roosevelt Road, a 50- foot /40 -foot vegetative buffer comprised of existing trees shall be maintained for visual or aesthetic purposes except for necessary ingress and egress points. In open areas a 50- foot /40 -foot planted buffer shall be developed as part of the normal landscape requirements for site development. (2) Within the Small Town Commercial Zone along Gulf Road, commercial, institutional and mixed use building setbacks shall be reduced to 10 feet. Buildings oriented towards the street edge shall be encouraged and the front of buildings shall be designated for landscaping and pedestrian traffic. (3) The provisions of WCC 20.64.353 shall not apply to single - family residences in the Resort Commercial District at Point Roberts. 20.72.400 Height limitations. .401 The maximum building height within the Small Town Commercial Zone along Gulf Road shall be 45 feet. Height of structures shall also conform to the view corridor provisions of WCC 20.72.653 and the general requirements of WCC 20.80.675. .402 The maximum building height in all other zones shall be 25 feet unless further restricted by the Whatcom County Shoreline Management Program or the requiFemeRts of the adopted ehaFacte p4R. Height of structures shall also conform to the general requirements of WCC 20.80.675 where applicable. .403 Through the variance process established in Chv4 -)t+1 -WCC 20.84 WCC, the maximum building height for any use outside of the Small Town Commercial Zone may be increased to 45 feet under the following conditions: (1) The resultant higher structure will not unreasonably impede views from other properties any more than would a similar structure of the same mass which conforms to the 25 -foot maximum building height. (2) Building setbacks pursuant to this chapter and WCC 20.80.200 shall be increased by one foot for each foot of building height in excess of 25 feet as applicable to all setbacks. 20.72.650 Development criteria. 20.72.651 Facility design. (Adopted by reference in WCCP Chapter 2.) (1) All commercial and institutional use structures shall conform be consistent withte the requirements of the Point Roberts Charaeter D1a ^Design Guidelines, which are herein adopted by reference as an addendum to this Chapter. (2) All commercial and institutional structures shall screen roof - mounted mechanical equipment so as not to be visible by surrounding uses or roads. 20.72.652 Archaeological resources. (1) Applicability. This section shall apply to regulated development activities within 500 feet of all known archaeological sites, including all recorded sites listed with the Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. The provisions of this section shall also apply to any archaeological resources that are inadvertently discovered in association with regulated development activities pursuant to this title; provided, that the provisions of this section may be waived if the technical administrator determines that the proposed development activities do not include any ground- disturbing activities and will not impact a regulated archaeological resource. (2) Archaeological Resource Protection. (a) Upon receipt of application for a development permit on properties within 500 feet of a site known to contain archaeological resources, the department shall require an archaeological resources site assessment. The site assessment shall be conducted by a professional archaeologist at the expense of the applicant or project proponent to determine the presence of significant archaeological resources. (b) If the archaeological resources site assessment identifies the presence of significant archaeological resources, an Archaeological Resource Management Plan (ARMP) shall be prepared by a professional archaeologist. The professional archaeologist shall solicit comments from the Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Lummi Nation Historic Preservation Office, and Nooksack Tribe. Comments received shall be incorporated into the conclusions and recommended conditions of the ARMP to the maximum practicable. (i) An ARMP shall contain the following minimum elements: (A) The purpose of the project, an examination of project on -site design alternatives, and an explanation of why the proposed activity requires a location on, or access across and /or through, a significant archaeological resource; and (B) A description of the archaeological resources affected by the proposal; and (C) An assessment of the archaeological resource and an analysis of the potential adverse impacts as a result of the activity; and (D) An analysis of how these impacts have been avoided; or (E) Where avoidance is not possible, how these impacts have been mitigated /minimized; and 2 (F) A recommendation of appropriate mitigation measures, which may include but are not limited to the following: 1. Recording the site with the State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation; 2. Re- interment in the case of grave sites; 3. Covering the site with a nonstructural surface to discourage pilferage (e.g., maintained grass or pavement); 4. Excavation and recovery of resources; 5. Inventorying prior to covering of resources with structures or development; and 6. Monitoring of construction excavation. (ii) The recommendations and conclusions of the ARMP shall be used to assist the technical administrator in making final administrative decisions concerning the presence and extent of archaeological resources and appropriate mitigating measures. The technical administrator shall consult with the Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Lummi Nation Historic Preservation Office, and Nooksack Tribe prior to approval of the ARMP. (iii) The technical administrator may reject or request revision of the conclusions reached in an ARMP when the technical administrator can demonstrate that the assessment is inaccurate or does not fully address the archaeological resource management concerns involved. (c) Within 15 days of receipt of a complete development permit application in an area of known archaeological resources, the county shall notify and request a recommendation from appropriate agencies such as the Whatcom Museum, Western Washington University Anthropology Department, the Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, the Lummi Nation Historic Preservation Office, and Nooksack Tribe. Recommendations of such agencies and other affected persons shall be duly considered and adhered to whenever possible and reasonable. Notification shall include the following information: (i) The date of application, the date of notice of completion for the application, and the date of the notice of application; (ii) The date, time, place, and type of the hearing, if applicable, and scheduled at the date of notice of the application; (iii) A site map including the street address, tax parcel number, township, range, and section of the proposed project area; (iv) A description of the proposed project action and a list of the project permits included in the application, and, if applicable, a list of any studies requested by the county; (v) The identification of other permits not included in the application to the extent known by the county; (vi) The identification of existing environmental documents that evaluate the proposed project and, if not otherwise stated on the document providing notice of application, the location where the application and any studies can be reviewed; (vii) Any other information determined appropriate by the county; 7 (viii) A statement indicating those development regulations that will be used for project mitigation or a determination of consistency if they have been identified at the time of notice; (ix) A statement of the limits of the public comment period, the right of each agency to comment on the application within a 15 -day time period, receive notice of and participate in any hearings, request a copy of the decision once made, and to appeal a decision when allowed by law. In addition, the statement shall indicate that any agency wishing to receive personal notice of any hearings must notify the hearing examiner's office within 15 days of the date of the notice of application. (d) In granting development permits, the county may attach reasonable conditions to provide sufficient time and /or conditions for consultation with the Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Lummi Nation Historic Preservation Office and Nooksack Tribe, and to assure that valuable information and materials are properly protected, or for appropriate agencies to contact property owners regarding purchase or other long -term arrangements. Provision for the protection and preservation of archaeological sites shall be incorporated to the maximum extent possible. (3) Inadvertent Discovery. (a) Whenever historic, cultural or archaeological sites or artifacts of potential significance are discovered in the process of development, work on that portion of the development site shall be stopped immediately and the find reported as soon as possible to the county. (4) (b) The administrator shall then notify the Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Lummi Nation Historic Preservation Office, Nooksack Tribe and other appropriate agencies and shall request that an immediate site assessment be conducted by a professional archaeologist pursuant to subsection (2)(a) of this section to determine the significance of the discovery. If a positive determination is not received within 14 days of receipt of such request, or if a negative determination is received, such stopped work may resume. (b) On receipt of a positive determination of the site's significance, the administrator may invoke the provisions of subsection (2)(b) of this section. 20.72.653 Landscaping, Screening, and Tree canopy retention. (Adopted by reference in WCCP Chapter 2.) In addition to compliance with all other requirements of this title and other titles of the Whatcom County Code, development activities shall be subject to the following provisions: (A) _Landscaping (1) Where possible the removal of existing vegetation should be minimized in areas that possess a natural beauty. (2) Special efforts shall be made to preserve existing stands of healthy trees throughout the area proposed for development. (3) Long expanses of fencing should be broken up by the use of landscaping. (4) The practice of monoculture shall be avoided. Plantings should have variety in their design. 93 (5) Attention should be given to the growth rate of the planting materials used and how they will relate to the site in the future. (B) Screening (1) Dumpster and utility areas of businesses or other use buildings in commercial areas shall be screened, using earth berms, landscaping or building wall. (C) Tree Canopy Retention (1) In the RC, RGC, and STC Districts, existing tree canopy areas (as defined by the dripline of the tree(s)) may be used to meet all or part of the open space requirements of this title. If existing tree canopy areas do not fully satisfy the minimum open space requirements of the applicable zone district, the remainder of the required open space shall be subject to the landscaping requirements established in WCC 20.80.300. (2) In the RR, TZ and R Districts: (a) Residential Development. (i) Lots less than one -half acre may remove 100 percent of the existing tree canopy on site; provided, that 30 percent of the pre- existing tree canopy shall be replanted. (ii) Lots greater than, or equal to, one -half acre shall retain 30 percent of the existing tree canopy area on a lot. Trees may be removed within areas to be cleared for purposes of a building site, driveways, parking areas, and areas to be landscaped, but such areas shall not exceed 5,000 square feet or 70 percent, whichever is greater, of the total lot area. (iii) On lots greater than one acre, no more than 50 percent of the existing tree canopy area shall be removed. (b) Commercial, institutional and recreational development may use existing tree canopy areas to meet all or part of the landscaping requirements of this title. (3) The following criteria shall be used to determine which tree canopy areas are to be prioritized for retention: (a) Stands of mature native trees; (b) Trees on sensitive slopes, on lands classified as having landslide hazards, or high erosion hazards, as defined under the critical areas ordinance; (c) Trees within critical areas or their associated setback and /or buffer areas as defined under WCC Title 16 or 23; or (d) Trees with significant habitat value as identified by a qualified wildlife biologist or by the technical administrator, per WCC Title 16. (4) A 200 -meter protective buffer of existing trees and vegetation shall be maintained around the Heronry. (5) Buffering which recognizes the need for safety and the unique features of Lily Point shall be required on the Point. No development shall take place in such areas. (6) The county shall require that tree canopy areas to be retained are identified on a site plan and clearly flagged, or delineated, on the site. A tree canopy area retention plan must accompany a project or clearing permit application and be approved by the technical administrator before clearing activity takes place. The plan shall contain the following components: (a) A scaled drawing identifying the following: (i) North arrow; 0 (ii) Property boundaries; (iii) Existing structures; (iv) Site access; (v) Tree canopy areas to be removed; (vi) The outer dripline of tree canopy areas to be retained; (vii) Critical areas including, but not limited to, slopes, wetlands, and habitat conservation areas; (viii) Protection measures to be utilized for areas that will be undisturbed; and (ix) Areas to be replanted pursuant to subsection (9) of this section; (b) A planting schedule that indicates the time frame for replanting of trees as applicable; and (c) Provisions for maintenance and monitoring. (7) Prior to any land clearing activity or development activity, any tree canopy areas designated for retention shall be delineated by temporary fencing, tape, or other indicators around the outer dripline of the trees. Temporary fencing, tape, or other indicators shall be clearly visible and shall be maintained for the duration of the proposed clearing or development activity. Any tree canopy areas designated for retention shall be field verified by the technical administrator before clearing activities begin. Trees within canopy areas designated for retention shall not be damaged by clearing, excavation, ground surface level changes, soil compaction, or any other activities that may cause damage of roots or trunks. Machinery, impervious surfaces, fill and storage of construction materials shall be kept outside of the dripline of tree canopy areas designated for retention. (8) Tree canopy areas maybe removed when limited to those canopy areas affected under the following circumstances: (a) Fire prevention methods when supported by the county fire marshal; (b) Hazard trees, as defined in Chapter 20.97 WCC, are identified (an evaluation and determination by a licensed arborist or forester may be required); (c) Encroachments where the trunk, branches or roots would be, or are, in contact with main or accessory structures; or (d) Where installation and /or maintenance of roads or utilities would unavoidably require removal or cut through the root system. (9) In the event that tree canopy areas in excess of the applicable threshold must be removed to facilitate reasonable use of the site, or to eliminate hazard trees, not less than two replacement trees shall be planted for every tree removed. Replacement trees shall: (a) Be of the same, or similar, native species as those trees removed from the site, (b) Be planted to re- establish tree clusters where they previously existed, or to enhance protected tree clusters; (c) Be planted in locations appropriate to the species' growth habitat and horticultural requirements; and (d) Be located away from areas where damage is likely. (10)lf any trees within canopy areas designated for retention are damaged or destroyed through the fault of the applicant, agent or successor, the applicant, their agent or successor shall restore the site pursuant to a restoration plan approved by the county. 10 (11) The County may require a bond or other security in an amount not to exceed 125 percent of the merchantable timber to guarantee retention of existing trees within designated tree canopy areas during construction. In the event of a dispute between the landowner and the county over the established value, an assessment will be made by a professional forester or arborist whose selection will be made by mutual agreement between the county and the landowner. The fee for the services of the professional forester or arborist shall be paid by the landowner or responsible party. In the event any trees designated to be retained are removed, the county shall require that sufficient trees be replanted to replace those previously in existence. In the event that replanting does not occur, the county may enforce upon any bond posted. Each tree removed or destroyed shall constitute a separate violation. 20.72.654 Site design /view corridors. (Adopted by reference in WCCP Chapter 2.) All rtr..rt. Fes or deyelnnrv.antr other than a singly f5 mil i 11—ne on a i _ .Ji"i I iOt SW II frr tr. the ��pfi*- rCiYF4 « ^CJY J� w411�v I Ir{3. t I 1 C9�Ci 1� °.....ts of the adopted Point Roberts Character 141a4l. Scenic views and open space shall be considered in all developments and the site plan designed to ensure view access is maximized while maintaining reasonable use of the development site. 20.72.655 Public restrooms and trash facilities. All new and redeveloped commercial establishments on Point Roberts that are open to the public shall make adequate provision for trash disposal and handicapped - accessible public restrooms. Establishments with less than four employees on premises at one time may utilize a unisex facility. Commercial complexes may provide common restrooms and /or trash disposal, or two or more establishments in one commercial area may jointly provide for such facilities, subject to appropriate agreements or covenants to ensure the facilities are available and properly maintained. Dumpsters within commercial areas shall be screened from public view using landscaping or building walls. 20.72.656 Vehicular access. Driveways and curb cuts shall be minimized along all collector roads. Each existing lot shall be allowed only one driveway or curb cut; adjacent lots are encouraged to share access points. In new developments, lots or leased sites shall be oriented toward internal driveways, parking areas, or roads, with limited access to collector roads. These access points should normally not be closer than 400 feet apart. 20.72.657 Non - vehicular access. (1) Commercial development or redevelopment of any parcel along Tyee Drive, Gulf Road, Marine Drive and APA Road shall be required to install appropriate street improvements along the road frontage of the parcel which may include curbs, gutters, sidewalks, boardwalks, benches, lighting, and appropriate provisions for bicycle and equestrian facilities in accordance with applicable Comprehensive Plan policies, land use regulations and current road standards. Planting of street trees along the road frontage(s) of the subject parcel shall be required. These requirements may be waived if a local improvement district, road improvement district, or 11 transportation benefit district is formed for the purpose of providing the aforementioned improvements. (2) Commercial development of any parcel along a collector street shall require a no- protest agreement to participate in a local improvement district, road improvement district, or transportation benefit district. 20.72.658 Drainage. All development activity within Whatcom County shall be subject to the stormwater management provisions of WCC 20.80.630 Stormwater and drainage the txlhateem GgURty Oe..elopment StapdaFds unless specifically exempted. No project permit shall be issued prior to meeting the stormwater management requirements of this title and the Whateem COUAty DeyelepmeRt StandaNs. 20.72.659 Parking. (A) Parking shall conform to the requirements of WCC 20.80.500 unless otherwise specified in this section. (B) Within the Small Town Commercial Zone: (1) Parking lots shall be provided only at the rear or side of buildings. (2) New parking lots shall connect with existing parking facilities and allow for connection to future lots where applicable. (3) Minimum parking standards may be reduced if a shared parking agreement has been filed with the county auditor's office establishing a shared parking lot for land uses with noncompeting hours of operation, or for multitenant retail and commercial facilities; provided, the parking lot is not located further than 700 feet from any of the uses it is intended to serve. (a) The minimum required parking in shared facilities shall be based on the land use with the highest parking demand. (b) Mixed use development with similar operating hours may be required to submit a parking demand study to determine if parking can be combined. (4) Minimum parking standards along Gulf Road may be reduced to the minimum required emergency, ADA, and /or service parking only; provided, that it can be demonstrated that a public benefit parking area or other similar consolidated parking concept will adequately serve the proposed use. (a) A parking demand study shall be submitted which determines whether all land uses intending to utilize the consolidated parking area will be adequately served. (b) Pedestrian walkways connecting the proposed use with a consolidated parking area shall be provided. Refer to the Poirot Roberts c-ha Ar teF Plan fr. deSigR .ideldReS. 20.72.670 Signs and Irla Poles. (A) Signs in the Small Town Commercial (STC), Rural General Commercial (RGC), Rural Industrial Manufacturing (RIM), and Resort Commercial (RC) Zones are permitted subject to the provisions of WCC 20.80.410 and 20.80.470, and subject to the following: 12 (1) Not more than one freestanding sign is permitted on a lot of record, and a freestanding sign shall have no more than two sign faces. Freestanding signs shall not exceed 12 feet in height and shall not exceed 40 square feet in area per sign face. (2) Not more than 10 square feet of sign area per sign face may be internally illuminated. Characters within the internally illuminated sign area shall be achromatic and no larger than six inches tall. Signs may be externally illuminated. (3) Single -faced signs placed on walls or eaves of business establishments shall not exceed a total of 40 square feet per business establishment. (4) Signs shall not rotate or otherwise be in motion, and copy or pictures on the sign shall not flash, scroll, or display a video or animated image. (5) For purposes of this section, any sign erected or existing as of July 1, 2016, that has a valid permit from the department, but does not conform with the provisions of this section, is a nonconforming sign. A nonconforming sign may be maintained only by painting or refinishing the surface of the sign face or sign structure so as to keep the appearance of the sign as it was when the prior permit was issued. Any structural or other substantial maintenance to a nonconforming sign shall render the prior permit void and shall result in the reclassification of such sign as an illegal sign. Where there are conflicts between this section and Chapter 20.83 WCC, the provisions of this section shall prevail. (6) Flag Poles. (1) The height of flag poles shall not exceed twenty (20) feet. 2 Flag Poles on top of buildings shall not exceed ten 10 feet above the roof top. 13 EXF (Point Rober POINT ROBERTS DESIGN GUIDELINES Addendum to WCC 20.72: Design Guidelines for Commercial and Instututional Uses in the Point Roberts Subarea Whatcom County, Washington Point Roberts Design Guidelines Point Roberts, Whatcom County, Washington Contents Section1.0. Objectives .................................................................................................. ............................... 1 Section2.0. Scope ......................................................................................................... ............................... 2 Section 3.0. Administrative Processes ........................................................................... ............................... 4 Section 3.1. Point Roberts Community Advisory Committee ................................... ............................... 4 Section 3.2. How the Process Works ......................................................................... ............................... 5 Section3.3. Required Plans ....................................................................................... ............................... 5 Section 4.0. Architectural Design Criteria ..................................................................... ............................... 6 Section4.1. Introduction ........................................................................................... ............................... 6 Section4.2. Roof Design ........................................................................................... ............................... 9 Section4.3. Roof Materials ..................................................................................... ............................... 10 Section4.4. Exterior Finish ...................................................................................... ............................... 10 Section4.5. Materials ............................................................................................. ............................... 10 Section4.6. Windows .............................................................................................. ............................... 10 Section4.7. Doors ................................................................................................... ............................... 11 Section4.8. Vents .................................................................................................... ............................... 11 Section 4.9. Porches and Awnings ............................................................ ............................... ..... 11 Section4.10. Colors ................................................................................................. ............................... 11 Section4.11. Hardware ........................................................................................... ............................... 11 Section 4.12. Other Features .................................................................................. ............................... 12 Section 4.13. Exterior Finish and Detail ....................................... ............................... ........ 12 Section4.14. Lighting .............................................................................................. ............................... 16 Section5.0. Glossary ..................................................................................................... ............................... 1 POINT ROBERTS DESIGN GUIDELINES, 2017 irlo rinn the ;IF ; r"p8n 4 rk-cmr-to-CLIL, f n ; t D k ef +i, r"� � f-e ❑inn Ak;en TH -wrin Cr Nis n U a p H Ur " n u u U, v Group has beeR asked a Or of search' first 05 this- Character Pla-P benef44he-C-G+7F147nURitY at large)" UP merm c h h a been selpr-tindl!" gFOUP has thought long and- Ward the v.65hps of the eRt'Fe eommunity of Paint Peberts in respect to the C---h-;; Fa ete F P la n. This 4 n rz! u d e s yea r re w n d-, --m al ts-, Jengtime property owner.5; WhA rpc;4d r-E? teR+pe;-a� Reweemers; te the PeiRt who wish to establich Foots heFe, and of caufse thi- h. r-GmnqwlqmtY, VJ44-th.@ -tot lot Feepen Rg of the sEheel heFe and a new sen o0i NT id pessibilhty h-;4r-, flA_;AiP_Fed; a community with no SrheA-.l I;ir-kr, a do-;Ppr-Rahip hp and "t e si v.g i Vh t_: h I d- r e_.A that a t p F o v d e a E el 1 -.1 1 . i -a -Rd life force to the towns in which they live, WeFk and -p4y. g Like it or not, Point Robert_ =r a f4e*-tom-�ke-it OF OF its eC0R0M4G-W,-k-bedF1g tA thfl... ... marketeanditkmF,4-�oa del!aF. At this point, the fn-ajerity Bf buy some heFe for a be g-----;-- , Thf-iq tho __Y go h-. .e. As as theC4na44R-4944ar--staV-s FL-a5gRahly StFOOg, the Al I,'-- cash f ow. Ut4 �P14 the C. pa4ia44 .. I did the befder-+.-, F#ir.i r.- �r Figure 1. Point Roberts Post Office, early I wted, so emss s,1_1ffP_rF_q_A. Thp I Real riprWpAtr, vfpre .... ve layo4 1900's seen ;Fi three oF four different businpss 19eatiess-4ugg4pg ()Re the this Plan i!; t9 WFR three eir even four paF4 time jabs (if they wefe44e$(,+ thiS bwdeF town into som U-41g--m -E3 a of objeetives of de5t"nation. if the remm p341G-ular Ire . AUFesque, pede5tFiaR friendly area that . ; people to look and 1jRgeF for a whHe, so mur-ah the bette.r. if the aestheAk-appeaWf new businesse g in moves other small bum tA- fp-P-1 rmpfirleRt that they too CGUid 5Ucceed, beHer y ARd a IaFge";Iversi *Y Of bUSiReSSES OH the Point adds to the empl91L ,t-Wpo4u4typeQ-4 People wmil foF the pFesent iRevitably WaRt gF roes and ga5, but cei4a*Rly if they aFe offered OtheF enitles, th-V will waunt _the n+-4_8.-^,.Ir ' their b �me ities, We. Most people in small Gomrnunities leya4ly tiRm leng they fee' that their custem is valued. s-uppert inity when it Jd be for the 1. if they d"&;4 -A G-L4ffh as as h^,.. r.F 11ingham beeaU5e we ri'ue cal pretty essential niches aren't filled here. - a umber R And if visiters epime FleRgertha ktakestofiliupthecara stoc"p 9R mi k and cheese,44&�- their wallets as they ea le the Point. Ag4�s the time PeFoOdseleeteEl, the tUFn of tha rept,ery was a boo �,�y, or-Peint Roberts By 19G5 #:K--Fe WeFe f9pt lshii4g is ps operating e4 thn r. honer of the Point, and industry bet - j � — � � - . . :iity fishers, people ea 5 Seattle e4iA 11 4 t-k- th- fm.+ ,t far _thzLDcdxa1_ POINT ROBERTS CHARACTER PLAN DES IG N G U IDELANES, 20167 enrollment in.r-r..,-.rnrA_ ' staff , ehallenging and heady time lool. lie frtr the stubborn, eeerk ha lA -PAted 90111 4a rl Fn cattle and r "cn h If �e - - p� T,l��Q'1"IVT�SI'�� TI'iCTi: R�� -gT�J the,se-w1a$- w€,- 5Wp -"�tj44hp l np d �Ife t trancfe to real "t � e legend of the American I Ic Q R IRT�� �T4 A " Fiqufe-- 2-.RGmt- Rabart6 Td31wasN r west side Gulf Rd. in tho ly-1 -900 6 POINT ROBERTS DESIGN GUIDELINES, 2017 2 Point Roberts,... ^rehiteet Design Review Guidelines Section 1.0 -001. Objectives [joint C1e.be Fts has a PFBU h.- .r: + -a..•. c.. h�red oA rural farming r The objective of these Design Guidelines is to encourage the commercial core to become more of a destination: A picturesque, pedestrian - friendly area that invites people to look and linger for a while. If the aesthetic appeal of new businesses moves other small business_ owners to feel confident that they too could succeed, better yet. And a larger diversity of businesses can the Point adds to the employment opportunity pool. It is desirable that the nautical and pioneering spirit be preserved where possible and encouraged were ^:e in the exterior facades of its commercial and institutional developments. is t�dr It is therefore a stated objective of this document that a broad Northwest Heritage Character which incorporates elements of historical and marine industrial themes be encouraged for commercial and institutional development at Point Roberts. In addition to the general purposes of the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance, this document is intended for the following purposes: a. To be consistent with the goals and policies of the Washington State Growth Management Act. b. To protect, enhance and preserve the social, cultural, economic, environmental and aesthetic values which have established the desirable quality and unique character of Point Roberts. c. To encourage creative approaches to the use of land and related physical development. d. To encourage the enhancement and preservation of land or buildings of unique or outstanding scenic or historic significance. e. To minimize incompatible and unsightly surroundings and visual blight, which prevent orderly community development and reduce community property values. f. To encourage the setting aside of public open space within new development through the mechanisms of planned unit development and /or density transfer, as provided for in Title 20, Section 89.03, the Whatcom County Zoning Ordinance. g. To recognize environmental and aesthetic design as well as energy efficiency as integral parts of the planning process. These criteria are not intended to restrict imagination, innovation,. or variety, but rather to assist in focusing on design principles. This approach can result in creative solutions which will develop a satisfactory visual appearance within the Point Roberts area, preserve taxable values and promote the public health, safety, and welfare. It is not the intent of this document or of any -the review process to cause any undue delay or hardship to the applicants. ° Tt�a�zt �. r- -ts h rep- °iGT?c a _ pplemeFA . POINT ROBERTS C-14An nCT —ESIGN GULDELINL,.S, 20167 Section 2.0 -901. Scope ^r �' ° °r' ° *�� in Tit' °Pursuant to WCC 20.72.651, all commercial and institutional use structures in the ege PA, .,Anremat d;5tFiEtPoint Roberts Subarea that require a building permit and appuirteRa igR5 shaII conform to these Design Guidelinesrequir°rn°R *r of the ad E) ^' ^�" .iew h ll ner,u- cirrx.wi I rl stitutirt al . rtr r-t� a a. r..f �, ' �'t ?$ ri��FN$' ��c -+�+- u�i'I'�-S'-t$"e3rr- rrc.ri �ii�ransri" �'d4`SO4a y� cen5tFUCti0F1 that requires a build` ■ � 9 A p4ea4 efl --&f 14e-gu e;iner, €3 X11 " i., p. i* in this .:4l he pakiewl•,.-Iy vigorous. Application of the guidelines @ tsiele the T I l .rte. ia.i��� -ko i t. �4 443, � �rca�- rX S�cv�-aTa'�'racsciia7- °�nc-�rvi c -rmc'r „ J .da issues rnRWaintr T41N T40N t- r- r �s R3W CANADA RR1 RR2 M on" STC .� RC GC LII Trans R5A ROS POINT ROBERTS DESIGN GUIDELINES, 2017 LEGEND Rural Residential 1 DU /Ac Rural Residential 2 DU /Ac Small Town Commercial Resort Commercial General Commercial Light Impact Industrial Transitional Rural 1 DUl5 Ac Recreation and Open Space 2 POINT ROBERTS DESIGN GUIDELINES, 2017 Figure --C ornpafi Section 3.0 -00- -1. Administrative ProcessesRequir-ements and Regions Section 3.1. Point Roberts Community Advisory Committee The Point Roberts Community Advisory Committee ( PRCAC) is a local advisory body to Whatcom County through the office of the Whatcorn County Executive and of the Whatcom County Council. The PRCAC consists of individuals appointed as provided in Whatcom County Code, Chapter 2,98. The purpose of the PRCAC as it relates to the Design Guidelines is to examine commercial and institutional . use building permit applications and make recommendations as to their compliance with ..__ _ the Design Guidelines to Whatcom County Planning and Development Services (PDS). Building permit applications are to be promptly examined and a determination submitted to PDS, with or without a recommendation, within 30 days of receipt of the application. All PRCAC members shall adhere to a code of conduct. The oarticioants shall ensure that all committee business and any permit reviews are dealt with objectively. No participant shall have a conflict of interest, or appear to have a conflict of interest, in relation to any permit application under review. No participant shall receive a benefit, monetary or otherwise, arising from the business of the Advisory Committee. No participant shall have a personal interest in the outcome of the design review process. A determination of conflict can be made through a democratic vote of all participants. In the event of a potential conflict either through voluntary recognition or committee determination. the oarticioant shall abstain from that review process. POINT ROBERTS DESIGN GUIDELINES, 2017 4 Section 3 -08.2. How the Process Works 1. Copies of the Point Roberts rhaFactnr °l^ ^Design Guidelines are available from the Whatcom County Department of Planning and Development Services. http : / /www.co.whatcom.wa.us /1143 /Point- Roberts - Subarea -Plan 2. Building Permit applications are also available at Planning and Development Services. 3. Prior to applying for a building permit, developers should familiarize themselves with the'er Plan dae wmentDesign Guidelines and seek professional assistance, where necessary. This will ensure a speedy and successful permit application. 4. In addition to the customary permit and servicing requirements of the County, any commercial or institutional use structure d,n permit application will be evaluated for iaRC -e `e.,.-r.- c-empliance" consistency with the Point Roberts Charar *°r D1°.F.Design Guidelines. This will be reflected in the permit checklist. 5. The Point RebeFts GhaFaeteF olaR Advisepr Grr.. mitte PRCAC will examine applications within 30 days prior to the date of building permit application to i„diEateand provide their determination of ^nee whether the proposal is consistent, or not, with the Character PfaRDesign Guidelines. 6. The PRCAC Peir.t Rebe +r GhaFar:ter Plan dyisep, Committee is an fecal dvisory body to Whatcom County -..rlm rtrnt,..n allthOFity. It . ,ill examine a „licatig With Fespeet tee .,I guideliR purpose of the Committee is to assist the County in making its determination of itEGM„li°^G-P "consistency. All decisions of the County will -shall be final. Section 3. -083. Required Plans In order to assess eam - consistency with the ChaFacteFlllanDesign Guidelines, the ` "'tem r ouRt„ D. par-+mERt- Of PlaR liRg and Development Sen iEesPDS will require at the time of application the following: 1. A sere -site plan indicating the street, all structures, landscaping, ingress /egress, parking facilities, freestanding sign locatiens freestanding lighting facilities, waste facilities, pedestrian walkways, fencing, screening and other miscellaneous appurtenances (e.g. fire hydrants), if any. The plan must be to scale and indicate the dimensions of any structures, setbacks, and parking facilities. 2. A-sealeBuilding elevations, to scale, that whieh learly indicates structural dimensions, heights, and roof lines, as well as any other exterior designs and finishes visible at ground level from any point on the compass. Diagrams must include specification for all doors, windows, porches and awnings. The types of roofing and siding materials(s) must be specified. Color chips for roofing, siding, and awning materials must be made available. All exterior lighting facilities must be clearly outlined and indicate Thr. Ir. i +ir. .. rl rli r of signs on. etructurnr. will hr. rin rl., ndir;ate l style and finish. r^�rrs; ^^ .. __ _.,._.., :.._._____. 4. Sign Regulations- Refer to eFdona nr�ezr r..w rin..r and fl-. POINT ROBERTS DESIGN GUIDELINES, 2017 5 $ NER fit 11l hO hi H Mi �l F4@ -6 -W h se- Fn Come Section 4.0 -80-1. Architectural Design Criteria Section 4.1 -002. Introduction In order to accurately portray the Point Roberts CharacteF design theme as outlined pFeviously in the objective statement, it is important to examine the historical styles of west coast commercial and residential rural architecture which were prevalent at the end of the nineteenth century and up to the First World War. Structures of that period were designed to be functional, durable, and cost effective in construction. Natural materials which were locally available were used whenever possible. Architects knowledgeable in this area will not have difficulty in incorporating these criteria into their designs for Point Roberts. Designs for commercial and institutional developments in rural areas such as Point Roberts were local adaptations from larger metropolitan centers of North America. Rural development styles reflect the fact that professional architects were not always available as they were in larger centers. In spite of this, simple designs by many pioneer builders managed to incorporate structural and finishing features more commonly associated with larger commercial centers. This attention to random detail was indicative of the independent entrepreneurial characters of many pioneer developers. An example of the personal touch was the attention given to the use of detail cornices and brackets under the eaves of buildings. In conclusion, it should be emphasized that early building styles were borrowed from many areas of North America by pioneers immigrating to this area. The primary focus of the .- 4...iete. �Design Guidelines is to revitalize the early Northwest Coast atmosphere which existed in Point Roberts at the turn of the century. Because of its direct link to the Pacific Ocean, it is also important that marine industrial accents and themes be included in the historical objective. For the purposes of this document, the term 'marine industrial' refers to the features of commercial establishments peculiar to maritime regions, i.e. canneries, fisheries, marinas etc. Although architectural styles in the commercial district are circumscribed by the theme of the Point Roberts Glha -;;4pr °'a ^Design Guidelines objective, there is ample room within the framework for artistic expression and creativity. Evaluation of the appearance of a project shall be based on the quality of its design and relationship to its surroundings. POINT ROBERTS DESIGN GUIDELINES, 2017 L se-utiV tiSTi'i'sL'I'i" Building t �ad-Adjoining AL -1� -i +in ally i +h r Point Oohar +r cornmercia 1 r n~ad ayeelepe i+h��' [ p" Space re b-e-twe -.l r +.�.,,,,rr{*. ec lmre nine ati..e .d �ing the aterfr .e +.-.rea snit �+ +h T"p'G'1: iklT�-i • �P o I P ii--��il i�'crce°'r'�' 4T GG ■ 2 - A PaY4.IIding setbaeks-,hia4l confoFm n+ of th f h ; t - r P' � o rnak +l�r. hr� +.. een.. the r ndWa . @Rd the m?iriltl 4d4 -ffg IL G Pl P>r L4TI I[]irl 1� ,p d'IiC CI C OI CQ OCCIY Fna&sec&--r"'ice4es-tF#rin fr- nrl y. Gene r` {$Vi$i'I 1G1'5-' i•� �.l h,-. n.d�._. to arJartr".an and the n r.tre .e.J w, nt between businesses �+ henever n rihla In addi tion to sidewalks and 1 .e ° hna $ r nitiar r Irl ;nTloIrin 1+ ..h ,L.l�. bicycle rh.l.e nirLn+ fe � i�ld4 rr 3. Parking shouid be placed at the rem-ar 9F side of buoidings where pessible and bWdiRgS gFienteel VifaFdS4hstreeczuge. All a -y.de to make the rt��_t e� -�� edeStr rrm friend le. T rnccrrcc'r. Seetion4-00"uA(H*gAvass c e^ : T: 71 11:: T:I T: R�sT.T.7f191�T7RrRGT>FT.T.fr7l. :f7:r7.T.:7. s r s. &--R$i.e+ O.eh.er +r has a pFewd hint,er�C�F��i �ll�3- n =. + +h +i.t. Firhinn industry. Thir resuked in a var y PA;at a4+,--r +r ! der Ilan arzWo..:[r�.�l.ges44iis hist 4e4a4i.enrhin afid metric +r tra.rfl G a R n y4 rnh style r +r. �•i-ovivir `el�`i` r-Ih :. k Fn, be ,rr nn:1 rr T 4 , 4i,r—I shaped i4-4ed 04Rg POINT ROBERTS DESIGN GUIDELINES, 2017 Ay e- Seaiaw"45-.Height Build;nos in Point Roberts have tFadot; ly bee., one to two stories in height. This��wt4y-"e te the wood fFame building technology of the day and coincidentaky resulted in a pleasing visual apship L—i....een uii.dingr and the stFeet. ff LIZ 111 L2Mft. K-mr. Mg. I.Tmr.i Whatcom County Zoning Regulation5 20.72.401 limit height to 25 feet in the Point Roberts Suh-are-a-T buildings to e-of4w- stGries--re5pectii '. A. conditional use-pepT* rnee g4he Fequ;FefReRts of Regulations WCC 20.72.402 05 peFmissible. jll� lilt ul i 11111111111 -A -i ZW11111 �11W POINT ROBERTS DESIGN GUIDELINES, 2017 N' - a - K,th4_h� tAIL it - i Rgure 9. Th,- h, 1,ines&GGmefT-foot of GO Section 4.2 -986. Roof Design a. Roof design is not restricted. Exterior appearance and detailing are. Both large and small commercial structures of either one or two stories in height that uiii4emuse a flat roofing system shall incorporate overhangs with eaves, brackets, and cornices. b. Pitched roofs shall be a gable, shed, or hip design. Roof dormers are acceptable. Roof designs utilizing lanterns and turrets of an historical nature are also acceptable, as are false fronts on pitched roofs. c. Cannery -style structures acceptable along waterfront areas shall wtilize -use pitched roofing systems in accordance with historical accuracy for this POINT ROBERTS DESIGN GUIDELINES, 2017 geographic location. d. Porches and awnings shall conform harmoniously to adjoining roof systems. e. Mechanical equipment on roofs shall be screened from public view with harmonious materials, or be so located as to not be visible from any public view. Section 4.3- 007. Roof Materials Materials used are restricted. Flat roof technology usually consists of tar and gravel materials. A variety of differing materials are used on pitched roofs. Duroid, shakes, and sheet metal are acceptable. Also acceptable is sheet metal with a colorized coating. The color shall be harmonious with adjoining areas. Tile roofing is unacceptable. Section 4.4 -008. Exterior Finish For the purposes of tW"haracter Planthese Guidelines, the use of the word "traditional' refers to the styles and customs prevalent in the Pacific Northwest at the end of the nineteenth century up to the First World War- asel+raedrpage It is important to bear in mind that the primary focus of finish is Pacific Northwest Heritage. As a secondary focus, building features could include marine industrial accents. Section 4.5 -009. Materials Materials used in any new structure or a renovation shall be of durable quality. In addition to traditional materials, architects and developers shall a use modern materials that will accurately simulate the desired historical effect. Section 4.6 -0-0. Windows a. Windows should reflect the use of traditional form and finish. b. Glazing amounts shall conform to the applicable Washington State Energy Code Requirements. c. Historically, windows were an important aspect of building design. The extensive use of windows Ch ..., + ,. o� .., is recommendedr hh --p d. Historically, the most commonly used type of window was the double hung sash window. The 04d +aa A �?6�H-4�C-,44f4:�r t—[4e- extensive use of this type of window, either single or combination(s), with or without mullions, is recommended. e. Windows maybe either functional or non - functional. Other than conventional rectangular or square windows, geometrically shaped windows are acceptable in limited applications. POINT ROBERTS DESIGN GUIDELINES, 2017 10 g. Other types of windows which are historically accurate and acceptable are bay, bow and oriel windows. h. Leaded and stained glass windows and / or inserts are acceptable. Fanlight windows above entrance ways are acceptable. Window shutters are acceptable. k. Mirror finish bronze windows are not permitted. Glass blocks are not permitted. Section 4.7 -044. Doors a. Doors shall a -use traditional form and finish whenever possible. The CharaEter NaFwDesi n Guidelines recognizes the principle requirements of security in selection of material. Section 4.8 -04-2. Vents a. The use of geometric louvered vents on building facades is Character 1]la ncourageds - ;e---se o; geemetric louvered .rents on L. uil ding #-.,..- des Section 4.9 -013. Porches and Awnings a. The use of traditional style porches Character °Loris encourageds the use of tFa d:tionar style per6hes -if so desired. A porch may be simple in design, or encompass a wide variety of traditional decorative features. Posts may be carved or turned. Decorative handrails, balusters and spandrels are encouraged where desired. Any porch structure shall conform to the balance and symmetry of the overall structure. b. Canopies shall be sloped, three point or four point with fascia. Canopies shall be high enough to permit marquee signs or lighting underneath but should not obscure building details such as corner boards, trim or cornices. Styles which are unacceptable include curved, quarter barrel, half _dome and rte ug arter- sphere. Canopies or awnings may be finished in cedar shingles or durable fabric such as acrylic coated 100% polyester or canvas. Vinyl, plastic, or backlit awnings are not acceptable. Neon and fluorescent lighting of canopies is not acceptable. JSee also Section Vill 4.14 regarding lighting.? Canopies supported on posts shall have the posts located on private property. Canopies should be at least four feet wide in order to protect pedestrians from rain and snow. Canopies whir# that project over public property shall F.049FR4- o all Whatcom County Ccodes. Section 4.10 -014. Colors Heritage colors are traditionally strong but muted. DevelapeFs Applicants may use whatever brand of paint they wish tot: however, chosen colors shall hewever correspond to the range of thirty -six colors and corresponding stains offered in the Martin - Senour Williamsburg Heritage Series. Color chips shall be submitted as FequiFed "L, -a d. mistr ative rego4t e�n-s. Section 4.11 -045. Hardware The choice of hardware for doors, windows, shutters, etc., is dictated by the need for security and durability. Whenever possible, the ChaFaUeF Plan ° °rOWFage- -the use of either wrought iron or polished brass type finishes is encouraged. POINT ROBERTS DESIGN GUIDELINES, 2017 11 Section 4.12 -A-16. Other Features a. Posts, beams, timbers, and pilings. These materials are acceptable in the design of cannery or "Market Type" structures. They may be incorporated in the actual structure or as an addition to the main structure. b. Trash receptacles shall be screened from public view. c. Chimneys: When a chimney cap is incorporated into a structure, a corbeled chimney cap is recognized as traditionally accurate. Other designs are acceptable. d. Fire Hydrants. New and reconditioned hydrants should be antique in appearance. Point Roberts Water District #4 is encouraged to regulate a single antique appearance for hydrants in the commercial eeFedistrict. e. Ornamental Ironwork: Cast and wrought iron features are acceptable. Weathervanes, roof cresting, finials, and traditional railings are acceptable. Marine Industrial Items: Nautical accents are an important feature of the character objective for Point Roberts. The ChaFaCAeF PlaR °.,. auragar use of pilings, turnbuckles, pulley assemblies, nets, ropes, oars, fish floats, ship and wheelhouse paraphernalia, barrels, chains, and anchors is encouraged. Section 4.13 -0-17. Exterior Finish and Detail The exterior finish of structures shall accurately reflect the traditional exterior finishes of Pacific Northwest architecture prevalent until the end of the First World War. The types of material used at that time were wood, brick and stone. Variations in the use of these types of materials (natural or cultured) shall present an acceptable appearance. Stucco came into vogue around the end of World War I, and is not representative of the period objective of these Design GuidelinesCharacter PlaR. The most traditional siding used in many parts of North America was clapboard. Clapboard consists of overlapping boards that are laid horizontally. They were painted or stained, and often economic conditions dictated that they be left in a natural state. The maximum exposed width of board is six inches per board. Each board is either tapered or grooved for a perfect fit. Thef- fF�1 =s�r�y es the use of clapboard siding is strongly encouraged. Another acceptable style of siding is 'board and batten.' Board siding was laid vertically and the joints were often covered with another generally nars-ower strip of wood, gesePalle RaFrowe . This type of siding has particular significance in cannery style applications. Another type of material traditionally used on the West Coast is wood shingles. Brick and stone finishes are also acceptable. They normally occur in combination with wood finishes, although buildings constructed of brick are accurate. The use of stone was common for foundations of rural buildings. Cultured concrete blocks ..that incorporate a field or cut stone look are acceptable. Plain or modern textures are not acceptable. Other unacceptable finish materials include duroid, ceramic tiles, plywood, and imitation stone and brick paneling. Stucco, when used in specialty application, shall not cover more than 20% of the total exterior surface of a building. The traditional handmade character finish and decoration is an important aspect of a facade that warrants special attention. Flat roofed buildings shall incorporate overhangs with detailed cornices and brackets. This detail may also apply to buildings that incorporate a false front. Pitched roof designs may incorporate cresting, dormers, or louvered ventilators. Victorian - =style specialty shingling may be incorporated into an exterior facade as an accent feature. Architects knowledgeable in historical finishes will know that modern and machine - -made materials can be successfully incorporated in the Point Roberts area when detailed appropriately. POINT ROBERTS DESIGN GUIDELINES, 2017 12 Section - 04" ssarmy T._ Qa TA.rLu0ght vase shaped .1 St ,red to ui.capeft, 344-. 2�ff 113 d y Hat+a • AA form �� h +h' g,rer frame h., n �+:..n ..F . ride h.. Fds (usually nlararl. C.. `avTCCV. rriia hh3rnu'rr-rc -ra'u t' 1{ 1 whose "r+.'nts ar,-+ r+�.,,eFed L.,, batt,n 3. Firacket; A pF_j'e_Gt4ig -support used under corniees, eaves, l9alconmes oF windows to provi rr � r Structural Or a.,r. -.hr ,;alr-•ai As ...4......!« 0 + IY FiveA4*F-�t7thinmeF Q $fie edge than +hir r. n #il.r.1 r laid hn rietal.r r ' nd with edea e f lanO.nn OR _ wooden _ framed h.ildi^a_ %. Pa�rhnl. A .lock of m ±rr. :i r. .nr }iRg Gr....r. the r.laRe of the wall used to acpper'--t -a" upper elemen (-ee i, hattlem .3t' „ UL ``ICJ TTTI rt r rt 6. CarRke• The i rrtn,¢r_rxo,ct aP4-p +-9 eCtir.rr eEti ,n 4 h -1 A h th � nr.-.ieei nte. �r-ml � _j___..:a c� 'TTL, c'ri C'eri i'C'� fT4'I�GC- 0134 -4 t'� "1 `Tr'�i Molding or ,-amhi F4a tie n a+ h. cl(etr nd mr.lrl inn se to -. hi,ildir. OF to define the meeting of. all a .d a ilir.rr Cupelaw A Founded r«r rart?nrr� ilart�4T,�yr IiLn de., i.-a r n frrim the rc.r..f_ 8. r .I�,�lrer. h vertical ainde �o� rtad housing that rir+ sash, oF glazed fFarnes, set On .stir II.r grooved fFaR4es +fd-eapable of hei -19. — e edge, „ rh .n it n „ woof. !I. _Fanlight A_rmifr „1-.r or elliptical . : A r.r r afte ,i+h ri. nl-be el, ront� dan—A. a P 7 r 4.1. O NO N A 7 3 •�= .rr•s •w��>• 1 POINT ROBERTS DESIGN GUIDED 22 C d el• ! wall r t .,f -.rrl yr F4,ri � 1�..�t�. .-. th,� .-hits er of t-f� �k}E �- �a' P' c' r�rtarrr�- n�TT�"�7�TC'Tr�n--m- �-Y*c -r-cr � ECtibl3tWe: ip a skeletal frame h.ri- uCCI he columns and the windows af each �23 r�kmi E�: �i -�Q�f�r a r r '- i4Fi+ff. WiTfill M TrCr, �s f+Zi V. i Section!; 002. Site Preparation The rem$Y f existing ve etation shew clrbe Mi :T zed ..+hara r. rib'L' ire areas that possess a ate al PFGpesed for development Deference WGIC 20L72 65, a� a ae e be- ,r-e-spensib Ez fer the upkeep of irr Ti e prEnar�(�Wi nr�r�"��1�$�� ion a -44d 0 ng the right .F_ the right ef _ , fin r,Y. -... baskets, fl..wnr_n,ntr„ they shall take fUll . Sihil:ty f.-.F maintenance. ■ C =� POINT ROBERTS DESIGN GUIDELINES, 2017 14 The @etir•e of Fnenar..ltwe shall edr..d Plantffings—,kat4d-have VaFiety in their rderir,r, Aaer.*- R howl h + the growth rata eft I r t t 'als used an cL�s��ri_ }L �rsverr�c°�r�, v"'en cv �o�r-c��- i�Freu'rmx� materials t�e�- ti'i-s +hr Se-C- If#I-5444-. kways Plan +rrannit. r ar the use of trail' rrd IL Clth r.t hl t 4kw' -� eerie F}-"vn'n cr .o m��'rri--'zicsv�aravrc�r r�c2 f paving °`'' F,9 , r and rr r, d .nta r :fa c' n The use of .+haler Rot a ragarL- Sec4jo" -00r Landscape Plan Requ�,�nts Th.a Fal ion ite. shall he inrl.�rdn-rl" 'vlE tl4- #ie4aT dsca. .- design air-.n to -he submitted hefo a fha_r &Aew C� girr� 1. A s t of d H. ry scale. 2 A r l.r, —ti d of the entire nra eet, identifying the _m....t aaR d names of the l-.nd.l;Gdfrs...,.ti„ . � C r POINT ROBERTS DESIGN GUIDELINES, 2017 15 7 4 1O4RT,, -_ A.4.�Mu+.• axA -r.4 e... ._, . .. .. . . �yu,SM'' t,�Taviki('s _ c -I.A - g�, ... -. . ,.�,•'iy r+w.ywiP'.�s w4ffs n.0 i.ii *µ4' =4 Muff 4 . y :A '%A ^ •,•A .. L w -.+tir: •. Yx," • ,aq•a f'tay.ift. _ ` ; w .-•f !••r ky. ., R . - .i:•C. �.r �i t �s :1N V/',,.•• �t�'•r,«w"G�S. WC„ +R ,,I A,!"VLJL ' -_Orr _',,i* a -" c. •. rfi• ! : --w • •��"'*1k'T7 1t.•r -p iS.0 • Y► • ; I•F.A.!'�] s,, •'w'N.+wtrvc.N •� �. - .V rrii+Y!- i f ' • '� VdO. 60LW LOOM► Carwlat.r*�.yrti...arr E,klyuh�lha• +,,.: -�.. "�.1f}/e,aw1 t ' ' •.. ..,... -�.: •..[ ♦. r-• t'7R try,r c�.,a.. r, °.t Y.aw ■Y 'C" ■ • -. L r'i -.IOU a• • ,- ... Jr.++r a ;- r ..;: a•^ t - �war. �+r a . ...'—'-' -4. � , •, .. , .. • r .� ....1�, - mod• .._IP® ,..ys+ IQ' r• dr.rite• ,..�.w *Y3, 4 Act . -... -_ • e . -a � r,.aa . F� .Ay r ►f�+-aw+. 4�0'!•e' , e - T,wr =,!+C ryne.,'[tj, 41 [..,.r+afw• R•1, r...+�.wr -,a... DCr, JM .. x • � • .,.. .•. �..• WW{!' F.or.4lA (V!-* SVOTTIZ''E.!•r+ E'•rta tt:. ,�•r•C••`T..'r• • • f ..� wt• • ...: -n•t*L .—_. 11{,M 11DwJrWa4� �t •./. f:. ,.aas.a. r. +�. 1• • • • r r . � T ►'. 1� iYNra�.w• .�. .. s .._ �. ,i+,s- •aC'F'P p ] • • • ,-'. ". r. �.'�S y y,I11.itAM uur,.pavp A..w+: � " � . � •' t �-, LS • .. : w. E'er ,j i,riia�My '30.4�aw ��t4es "s �C I i�i..,eR• •�.r"�M` .-. � 11.1,�4�'YMM� I+Ml1� ..n. , F •a �AC�F_ :.°r--[�... �, 'i' j • .«�-. •.. • . . • , • . • �L „r.,. , ��;w,S'•� � { • }AAAA aMy ^Owl iti . af3 LC-9—', . - e , .x r. t • i ! ■ •� MiM/1i • r S s Figure 10. Ustof-Su -e- r Tress, and Sh Suggested nisr••bc and trek Lilae, heFitage VaFjetieS ef apple aRel peaF, r + and cherpy. Section 4.145 -904. Lighting A. Lighting requirements for commercial and institutional use must reflect the objectives of the GhaFaCAeF Pla Oesi n Guidelines. -In— . n�eaenr� 3�1. Exterior lighting, when used, shall enhance building and landscape design. The two acceptable formats for lighting design are: a. Marine Industrial b. Historic Industrial Within these formats, materials, finishes, and artistic styles are not restricted. 4-.2. The choice of lighting types, fixtures, and placements between adjacent structures and surrounding parking lots shall reflect the desire to achieve a balance and harmonious POINT ROBERTS DESIGN GUIDELINES, 2017 16 atmosphere. This is especially important in the commercial tee - district where it is desirable to have a unified ambience. 15 3. Lighting fixtures on structures shall harmonize with parking lot fixtures where possible. &A. Any County lighting services which abut Charar +^~ °'a ^the commercial district areas shall conform to the objectives of these GhaFaeteF PlanDesign Guidelines-objee4ve. Upon the formation of a lighting district for Point Roberts, lamps lighting the street and pedestrian walkways in the commercial ee€4_-district shall be of a single approved antique appearance. 7-.5. It is preferable that all lighting be low -rise and directed downward on to the site. 8-.6. Exterior lighting should be the minimum necessary to ensure safety and security. Excessive glare and brightness should be avoided. Excessive glare shall be shielded from residential areas. A.B.The following gives a description of acceptable standards and fixtures for the Point Roberts Subarea: 1. Base and standard must be of a nautical or historic industrial design. 2. Single or multiple brackets and globes are acceptable. 3. Fitters and globe must be of a nautical and / or historic design. 4. Louvered optic systems and refractors that reduce glare and cast light down are encouraged. 5. Indirect Cone Optic Systems that provide the warmth of candle or gaslight are encouraged. 6. Banner arms, planter arms, bracket filigrees and flag holders are acceptable appurtenances to the design of the standard. 7. Nautical bollards are acceptable. Figure -2 1. Some styles of heritage type lighting standards POINT ROBERTS DESIGN GUIDELINES, 2017 17 -Sectio 7-001. Par-king Facilitk—,4n4he-CommeFc-ia4-C-ore The rsr,i.deiiR@ rneeifi.--a y aipns at m Htaining the +.r itali+ae of the ee.mme.Fei a1 G _ .chile rl ReoWy j3f$W ii i uia{ F4"o} W}}i{yt •nary 1a n esses iA EeRjunction wit 1fl 77 65G In -addi +inn We rr+,cvhili++: these 'rinl•r+ - rerrtrrn' e the de sire to r..+dnrr+ + nhirl.ar fr -�a.�„ rr -,czr ra rcr r°S-'v's°a•c-rirr�. �--r cco $ tt@C- histr+riea1 co nre pt eF *h 1 1nlh01e +his it des ir .fh n.. 91 a of PoPFA civrnTiri i eivs ev°i c . v � ra'r Elevelop in the re. The ❑mint pr+4 -.nr+ T.-R eFta+ir. t StUdy of 1991 by the Tr ;,A G+W4p I W i ndiGa+ee that "t rg fftr rse -al, r- +�,;L�r��expec nrrn -. n er. delays hnr.+m,o n ra thrn"r:Grr 4he year." A present, trr—rm r. r+ rites} Roads. Tha e is definite need to rr+al`e n the t ff" { ated hae re retomerr natr-rs rzi+ Mr a4 ti -rc ..T nc- �c��eim,"c-•'�nc�riirnrc -'� in the tr f#" is t.. rra r. h h' derr travel thr nh the rrsr�',_mnrri3 ri e area. liV rrvrrrcvcrrr�zarvirsiir�iacS rriarusr5 travel r rr not�r to other areas raf Fein+ Roberte it away from the n arterli?r+ ni d on adi$Ff`}liti- 1(sRg faccilrritii;°..s -of neighboring b.0 -`-," S to H' —r'�'. %lgF�rr Il tieS ala 4F aid —Ty 1L're$tr rh- 3pn,rr ,e,p.ly at the Fear f 3 E 3. Nfjw paiifls gm lots rha11 co.n..p. ect with _aaistiF4g pa Fk++g4ae"es and allow fOF. Re ti0n W f LAL+r-e4&ts,. connectoon when ava4a le T is-.v44e&ak4H G9MFAWRal r,arkir.r. iae-ilit 4-- Wht+rnm County may all.. a ,,we-te-these a..ide; ., Ai4F-Lr. irtir PFOPeFty net�rictzioR� `d e —This h id h d rithra + d' hAfh� +r .++ Cnr �.+ +., r rl� +ira rdin �:-9I a $ H — er's�rrc sser .: rsr. va r p cji uv� i�:L9 TTl,�TTR:lT�TdRT.T# The tr_ raor+atio,�d rn nna -+tira,n nr rca +.. �. +i.n of a stirs, hirt., r +r r•t, .rrtr ..d,irk rer�.y+rc�'-li�'a +x°-YYSe a. 4 7 M.M. ,. :6 w e.nnre„cer Pessib4c- G. : m. I rl %nlst..r nirtri.-+ Hn rhe,.lLatteM W raf.a T ter. the r ri+ -a Rd objective of the Character Plan d. It i e-nmm ra.derlr although .-ate iseFy, updr�teddeeerry f". This lyd be to reflect any n.nr� _ t�iCr�tz�F I�cl ti i n diRdHrar or rtninrr rha.aarar n11 -ar tra f, rrther enhaRCe th - ohier•tiare of the Char. r t � �c t at in time. Ana. rea.'. .rta W _ * +ateiy be un,�rae �t�— -- -I _faAlka��cafla �el��t�+ -►��a would m rL i Eorair rnrtion m.aitlaarnai_ PA@ r +r d r riudentc willing to form s "Character Plan Qeuiesur Committee" t3�i;rTrc -changes. as it sees fi+ POINT ROBERTS DESIGN GUIDELINES, 2017 18 Figure - —A as4ca-A2a,Gker- s -Asscc, atio;i Sec-- fi4mn- 9- 0.9- -:-A dW s ry-Con - ittee I T# ❑n r.+ l]obertr f'ncrzmunit�._ Adym r matt �n nv nri Ir -.Ili. 1. � li d 49 f.. Ct;., ,ill' 3 a .., c u rl tc'r t �rgtr fi R �2%FT�i r1�nm �= r�`rirJS`rcucvr, craw' a"kati—ens for compliance - t} the —Point O ^hcF t s Character Plan. a = 7. 7. s. w M. s 'J S s 7 D 0 - k 1 1 -1 HUI POINT ROBERTS DESIGN GUIDELINES, 2017 19 Point a Eci � v!ai Design u ciici. Chackur.aur c Landse g POINT ROBERTS DESIGN GUIDELINES, 2017 20 Mv ! ,'I I�Tw irwi�AT r �i.rrs;l w.a c.r.r�.ivr uT.1+wr ��r.�arH ��+•• rxlw.r.wa r. �rx.�r�r.w. r,ir =.a .r.�.raw r,•�.wrnr. r.x l ' l Stem, Section 5.0. Glossga 1. Baluster: An u ri ht vase-shaped post used to support a rail. 2. Board & Batten: A form of sheathine for frame buildinEs consisting of wide boards (usually placed vertical) whose joints are covered by battens. 3. Bracket: A promecting support used under cortices eaves balconies or windows to provide structural or purely visual support. 4. Clapboard: A thin board, originally riven or split, thinner at one edge than the other (later sawn with this profile), laid horizontally, and with edges overlapping on a wooden - framed building. POINT ROBERTS UH n I nCTI,K uLA TM 1311SIGN GUIDF,,LINI S, 20167 S. Corbel: A block of masonry projecting from the plane of the wall used to support an upper element (cornice, battlements, or upper wall). 6. Cornice: The uppermost and projecting section of the entablature; hence the uppermost projecting molding or combination of brackets and moldings used to crown a building or to define the meeting of wall and ceiling. 7. Cupola: A rounded or rectangular tower -like device rising from the roof. 8. Dormer: A vertical window and its projected housing that rises from a sloping roof. 9. Double Hung Window: A window of two (or more) sash, or glazed frames, set in vertically grooved frames and capable of being raised or lowered independently of each other. 10. Eave: The lower edge, often overhanging, or a roof. 11. Fanlight: A circular or elliptical window over a door, often with elaborately contrived and interwoven mullions. 12. Finial: An ornament, usually foliate, used at the end or peak of a gable, tower or spire. 13. Gable: The triangularIV shaped area enclosed by the two sloped surfaces of a gable roof and the wall below; a generic term distinct from 'pediment' which refers to a portion of a classic fa ade. 14. Gable roof: A simple roof composed of two flat surfaces meeting to form a straight ridge. 15. Hipped roof: A roof of four sloped surfaces that meet in a point (with a square plan) or a sharp ridge line (rectangular plan). 16. Lantern: In architecture, a small square-or round glazed structure built atop a larger structure to admit light. 17. Leaded lass: Small glass panes, most of them clear but often colored too forming a eometric or foliate pattern, held in place by channels of lead soldered together. 18. Mass: The apparent expanse, bulk or size of a building, the main volume or volumes of a building when viewed as a whole. 19. Mullion: Originally the large vertical supports in glazed windows; often now any support strip, vertical or horizontal, in a glazed window. 20. Sash: Frame in which glass window panes are set. 21. Shed roof: The simplest roof consisting of a single inclined plane; used widely in domestic architecture. 22. Spandrel: In a wall system of arches the area between the architraves of the arches and the entablatures in a skeletal frame building, the panels between the columns and the windows of each story. 23. Turret: A small tower, sometimes corbeled out from the corner of a building. POINT ROBERTS DESIGN GUIDELINES, 2017 POINT ROBERTS DESIGN GUIDELINES, 2017