Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPacket May 12 2009WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 2009 — 247 CLEARANCES Initial Date Date Received in Council Office Agenda Date Assigned to: Originator: Fleetwood 5/5/2009 5/12/2009 Planning Committe Division Head: Dept. Head: Prosecutor: Purchasin /Bud et: Executive: TITLE OF DOCUMENT.• Discuss recommendations of Ag Advisory Committee for long term ag land retention ATTACHMENTS: SEPA review required? ( ) Yes ( ) NO SEPA review completed? ( ) Yes ( ) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing ? ( ) Yes ( X ) NO Requested Date: SUMMARY STA TEMENT 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.) COMMITTEE ACTION. COUNCIL ACTION. Related County Contract #: Related File Numbers: Ordinance or Resolution Number: Please Note: Once adopted and signed, ordinances and resolutions are available for viewing and printing on the Coun 's website at. www.co.whatcom.wa.us/council. dATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 2009-210A CLEARANCES Initial Date Date Received in Council Office Agenda Date Assi ned to: Originator: Josh Fleischmann / j �r I 4128109 Introduction C n I O � � E � �V/ /J E D D Division Head.• Oliver (.`' Yt f/ It Y� b 5112109 Natural Resources Council Grah APR 2 0 2009 Dept. Head: David v l II _ Stalheim l4f COUNTY 1� V H A F C.OM COUNTY Prosecutor: Royce �� Buckingham Y ! i COUNCIL Purchasing/Budget: Executive: Pete Kremen TITLE OF DOCUMENT: Ordinance Removing the Lot Clustering Provision from Whatcom County Code 20.42, Rural Forestry District. ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance SEPA review required? ( X ) Yes ( ) NO Should Clerk schedule a !tearing? ( ) Yes ( x ) NO SEPA review completed? ( X ) Yes ( ) NO Requested Date: SUMMARY STATEMENT OR LEGAL NOTICE LANGUAGE: (If this item is an ordinance or requires a public !tearing, 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.) The proposed ordinance makes the provisions of interim ordinance Ord. 2006-00045, Ord. 2006-00057, Ord. 2007-00028, Ord. 2007- 00064, Ord. 2008-00018, and Ord. 2008-00045, permanent. The changes remove language referencing Lot Clustering from subsections WCC 20.42.130, 20.42.251-253, 20.42.300-320, and 20.42.450. Lot clustering would no longer be allowed in the Rural Forestry District. COMMITTEE ACTION. COUNCIL ACTION. 4/28/2009: Introduced Related County Contract #: Related File Numbers: Ordinance or Resolution Number: 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.us/council. 2 WHATCOM COUNTY 4coM co Planning & Development Services 3sP 5280 Northwest Drive, Bellingham, WA 98226-9097 , 360-676-6907, TTY 800-833-6384 9ShIN�+t� 360-738-2525 Fax MEMORANDUM To: Whatcom County Council Through: David Stalheim From: Joshua Fleischmann, Planner I-S Date: April 17, 2009 Subject: Rural Forestry Lot Clustering David Stalheim Director J.E. "Sam" Ryan Assistant Director In October 2006, the Whatcom County Council adopted an emergency ordinance (Ord 2006-045) removing the provision allowing for clustered subdivisions within the Rural Forest Districts of Whatcom County. In November 2006, the Whatcom County Council adopted an Interim Ordinance (Ord 2006-057) removing the provision allowing for clustered subdivisions within the Rural Forest Districts of Whatcom County, which has been renewed roughly every 6 months since November 2006. Also, in November 2006, a Determination of Non -Significance (DNS) was issued by the SERA official regarding the Interim Ordinance. On March 26, 2009, the Whatcom County Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed ordinance. The Whatcom County staff recommendation to the Planning Commission was to recommend approval of the proposed code amendments, and to recommend that when time and resources allow, the County should further investigate the feasibility of clustering in the Rural Forestry Zone. The Planning Commission passed a motion to recommend approval of the proposed code amendments, but not to recommend further investigation of the feasibility of clustering in the Rural Forestry Zone. The Planning Commission felt that it wasn't necessary to recommend further study of the feasibility of clustering, as this action can be added to the docket at any point in the future, when resources allow. Additionally, it is unclear as to whether or not clustering in the Rural Forest Districts is allowed under state law. Both the Rural Forestry and Agricultural zones are designated Resource Land. RCW 36.70A.177 authorizes cluster zoning within Agricultural zoning, however there is no such provision authorizing cluster zoning within the Rural Forestry Zone. As Agricultural was the only Resource Land explicitly designated to allow cluster zoning, the Planning Commission feels that the question of whether clusters are allowed in the Rural Forestry Zone should be resolved prior to recommending further study. The proposed ordinance permanently removes the lot clustering provision from Whatcom County Code 20.42, rural Forestry District. 3 SPONSORED BY: Consent PROPOSED BY: Nelson INTRODUCTION DATE: XXXX, 2009 ORDINANCE NO. REMOVING THE LOT CLUSTERING PROVISION FROM WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 20.42, RURAL FORESTRY DISTRICT WHEREAS, the Whatcom County Council wishes to maintain and enhance Whatcom County's natural resource industries and protect the rural character of the County; and WHEREAS, approximately 36,526 acres of land in Whatcom County are identified as supporting commercial forestry with zoning of rural or agriculture; and WHEREAS, the Whatcom County Council recognizes that conversion of forest use to other incompatible land uses can and will threaten future forest practices; and WHEREAS, continued pressure to convert land to residential use will threaten this valuable resource and can reduce environmental protection; and WHEREAS, on November 21, 2006, May 22, 2007, November 20, 2007, May 20, 2008, and November 12, 2008, the Whatcom County Council adopted interim ordinances removing the lot clustering provision from Whatcom County Code 20.42, Rural Forestry; and WHEREAS, The ordinance currently in effect (Ordinance 2008-045) will expire on May 28, 2009; and WHEREAS, the Whatcom County SEPA Official issued a Determination of Non - Significance on November 1, 2006; and WHEREAS, the Council makes the following findings of fact to justify its actions as required by RCW 36.70.795: 1. The Resource Lands Chapter of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan states that the goals of individual forest landowners; whether in the forestry zone or not, encompass a broader range of objectives than just timber production and may include management for wildlife, conservation, specialty forest products, firewood, privacy, aesthetics, and low density residential or other uses compatible with forestry. 2. County -Wide Planning Policy I-9 states, "As part of a broad based economy, productive timber, agriculture and fisheries industries should be maintained in a sustainable manner." 0 3. Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan Policy 8F-3 states: "Lands mostly devoted to growing trees for commercial timber production, usually located within public service districts such as fire or water districts, accessed by private roads built to Whatcom County development standards or public roads, with low density residential development. Land parcels are generally 20 acres or greater in size." 4. Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan Policy 8F-7 states: "Discourage inappropriate conversion of productive forest land to incompatible non -forest uses. It is the intent of this policy not to allow conversion of forest land if the proposed use is incompatible with the maintenance of long-term forest management. Incompatible uses include those which: • create fire or safety hazards to adjacent forest land; • permanently remove a significant portion of a parcel from productive forest use; • create significant financial hardships for adjacent forest landowners; or • can lead to land use conflicts with adjacent forest landowners." 5. Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan Policy 8H-6 states: "Adopt development regulations that would allow minimal residential development in Commercial Forestry zones."; and WHEREAS, the Council makes the following conclusions: 1. This interim regulation relating to removal of the clustering provision from Whatcom County Code 20.42 is consistent with the planning goals of the Growth Management Act (RCW36.70A.020). 2. This regulation is consistent with the goals of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan. 5 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Whatcom County Council that Whatcom County Code 20.42, Rural Forestry District, is hereby amended as indicated in Exhibit A to this ordinance. BE IT FINALLY ORDAINED that adjudication of invalidity of any of the sections, clauses, or provisions of this ordinance shall not affect or impair the validity of the ordinance as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so declared to be invalid. ADOPTED this day of , 2009. WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL ATTEST: WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Dana Brown -Davis, Clerk of the Council APPROVED AS TVOR r Civil Deputy Prosecutor Carl Weimer, Council Chair WHATCOM COUNTY EXECUTIVE WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Pete Kremen, County Executive ( ) Approved Date Signed: ( ) Denied 0• EXHIBIT A Chapter RURAL FORESTRY (RF) DISTRICT Sections: 20.42.010 Purpose. 20.42.050 Permitted uses. 20.42.100 Accessory uses. 20.42.130 Administrative approval uses. 20.42.150 Conditional uses. 20.42.200 Prohibited uses. 20.42.250 Minimum lot size and width. 20.42.251 Minimum lot size. 20.42.252 Maximum density and minimum lot size. 20.42.253 Minimum lot width and depth. 20.42.315 Repealed. 20.42.330 Deleted. 20.42.350 Building setbacks. 20.42.400 Height limitations. 20.42.450 Lot coverage. 20.42.550 Reforestation area. 20.42.650 Development criteria. 20.42.651 Plat language for proposed subdivisions. 20.42.652 Use of natural resources. 20.42.653 Landscaping. 20.42.654 Parking requirements. 20.42.655 Livestock regulations. 20.42.656 Domestic water supplies. 20.42.657 Drainage. 20.42.900 Conditional use permit criteria. 20.42.010 Purpose. The purpose of this district is to implement the forestry designation of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan, established pursuant to RCW 36.70A.170, by providing the opportunity for nonindustrial landowners to manage their land for long-term productivity, and sustained use of forest resources. In addition, the district encourages the management of land for wildlife, aesthetics, and other noncommodity values. It also provides for uses that are compatible with these activities, while maintaining water quality and soil productivity. Lummi Island Scenic Estates shall be administered under the RR -I zone district regulations. (Ord. 2005-079 § 1, 2005; Ord. 2003-029 § 1 (Att. A § 6), 2003; Ord. 98-083 Exh. A § 66, 1998; Ord. 92-094, 1992; Ord. 91-023, 1991; Ord. 87-12, 1987; Ord. 87-11, 1987; Ord. 86-42, 1986). 20.42.050 Permitted uses. 7 Unless otherwise provided herein, permitted, accessory and conditional uses shall be administered pursuant to the applicable provisions of Chapter 20.80 WCC (Supplementary Requirements) and Chapter 20.84 WCC (Variances, Conditional Uses and Appeals), the Whatcom County SEPA Ordinance, the Whatcom County Subdivision Ordinance and the Whatcom County Shoreline Management Program. .051 The cultivation, harvest, and production of forest products or any forest crop, in accordance with the Forest Practice Act of 1974 and any regulations adopted pursuant thereto; and the cultivation, harvest and production of ferns, moss, boughs, bark, berries, nuts, tree fruits, tree seeds, nursery stock, and Christmas trees. .052 Agriculture, floriculture, horticulture, beekeeping; raising, keeping and feeding of domestic animals, poultry and livestock; and structures accessory to animal husbandry. 053 Operation of sawmills, chippers, shake and shingle mills, scaling. stations; log dumps, sorting and storage areas; forest industry equipment maintenance buildings and storage yards, and forest industry residue dumps and other uses involved in the harvesting and primary processing of timber; provided, that all such uses within 1,000 feet of any existing Residential or Commercial Zone District as well as the Recreation and Open Space (ROS) District, or park, or recreation area shall be temporary and of less than 12 months' duration. (1) The intent of processing is initial reduction in bulk and/or to facilitate transport to secondary processing centers; and (2) All uses within 1,000 feet of a park, recreation area or zone district other than Rural, Agriculture or Industrial, shall be temporary and of less than 12 months' duration. .054 The management and propagation of fish and wildlife. .055 Watershed management practices including erosion control measures, drainage control structures, vegetation management to improve runoff characteristics, weather stations, stream gauging stations, or watershed research facilities. 056 One single-family dwelling per legal lot of record. 057 Deleted by Ord. 2001-012. .058 Surface mining, rock crushing, washing and sorting subject to the Forest Practices Act (Chapter 76.09 RCW); provided, that administrative approval is required for accessory rock crushing activities located within 1,000 feet from a rural or residential district. .059 Repealed by Ord. 2000-006. .060 Living quarters for trail crews, fire crews, nursery crews, logging crews, maintenance crews and watchmen. .061 Hydroelectric power generation facilities using only diversion structures creating impoundments less than three acres, and cogeneration facilities; provided, that the power shall be to serve and will be associated with a permitted or conditional use situated in the Forestry Zone District. .062 Storage of explosives operated in compliance with Chapter 70.74 RCW. .063 Trails, trailheads, restroom facilities and associated parking areas for no more than 30 vehicles. .064 Temporary dwelling units which have full living accommodations including sleeping, self-contained cooking, bathing, and toilet facilities where the plumbing is connected to permanent site sewage and water systems, including those travel trailers and recreational vehicles that meet the above description, for use by owners during the period of construction of a permanent dwelling while building permit is valid, not to exceed two years. .065 Private, noncommercial, recreation occupancy of a recreational vehicle; provided, that the following minimum requirements and standards are met and/or followed: (1) Maximum length of stay of any recreational vehicle on a lot shall not exceed a total of 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. (2) One recreational vehicle and one accessory guest RV per lot shall be allowed. If such lot is greater than five nominal acres, one additional guest RV may be allowed per each additional two acres of the subject lot. The total number of recreational vehicles on a single lot at one time shall not exceed five. (3) In the case of a special event or occasion: (a) Any proponent of a temporary special event which requires a total allowable number of RVs that exceeds the standard maximum allowed, shall file an affidavit with the department of planning and development services which specifies the nature of the special event, location, specified days of the proposed use and the sanitation and wastewater disposal facilities proposed for the event. (b) The duration of the temporary special event shall include the days the use is being set up and established as well as when the event actually takes place. (c) A parcel shall host no more than three temporary special events within a calendar year; provided, that the time periods specified in subsection (1) of this section are not exceeded. (4) 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 or shall provide documentation that wastewater was removed by a licensed sanitary disposal service. (5) All recreational vehicles shall be screened from neighboring properties not using RVs and from public roads. Such screening may consist of landscaped buffer areas, suitable native vegetation or a fence. (6) Lots shall not be leased or rented out on a daily or overnight basis for recreational use. 9 (7) The locations of parked RVs on vacant lots shall observe normal building setback standards for a single-family residence. (8) 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. .066 Gravel bar scalping projects within the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Program. .067 Light industrial/manufacturing uses that were legal under concomitant agreement filed under Auditor File # 940107190 (as revised under Auditor File # ) prior to the effective adoption date of the county's Comprehensive Plan, May 20, 1997, will be considered permitted uses. Expansion will be allowed as a permitted use but will be limited to the land area zoned Light Impact Industrial on May 20, 1997, and must comply with applicable conditions and with the requirements of the Light Impact Industrial zone where there is conflict with the requirements of the Rural Forestry zone. .068 One one-story detached accessory storage building per lot; provided, that the floor area shall not exceed 200 square feet and shall only be used for personal storage and not for habitation or business; and provided further, that the storage building shall contain no indoor plumbing but may be served with electrical power for lighting. .069 Public forest preserves, wildlife reserves, natural systems education, and/or interpretive areas. .088 Adult family homes as defined in Chapter 70.128 RCW. .089 Boarding homes that are similar in size, facilities and occupancy to other residential structures permitted in the zoning district. .090 Mental health facilities that provide residential treatment and are similar in size, facilities and occupancy to other residential structures permitted in the zoning district. .091 Substance abuse facilities that provide residential treatment and are similar in size, facilities and occupancy to other residential structures permitted in the zoning district. (Ord. 2005-079 § 1, 2005; Ord. 2004-026 § 1, 2004; Ord. 2004-014 § 2, 2004; Ord. 2001-012 § 1, 2001; Ord. 2000- 040 § 1, 2000; Ord. 2000-006 § 9, 2000; Ord. 99-062, 1999; Ord. 98-078 Exh. A, 1998; Ord. 97-069, 1997; Ord. 92-094, 1992; Ord. 92-079, 1992; Ord. 88-29, 1988; Ord. 87-23, 1987; Ord. 86-42, 1986). 20.42.100 Accessory uses. .101 Utilization of sewage sludge on land when regulated by a utilization permit issued by the Bellingham-Whatcom County district department of public health in accordance with WAC 173-304-300. This would apply to any land owned or leased by the same operator. Utilization of sludge in the Lake Whatcom watershed is not allowed. 10 .102 Uses incidental to the primary permitted uses. .103 (1) The usual wholesale marketing activities associated with the agricultural, aquacultural, forestry, and mineral resource uses permitted in this district. (2) Retail marketing, by the operator, of Whatcom County products which originate from the permitted uses stated in WCC 20.42.050; provided: (a) Only one stand containing not more than 500 square feet of floor area shall be permitted; (b) Such stand shall be subject to the setback requirements of WCC 20.80.200; and (c) Such stand shall be provided with a sufficient area to permit at least five automobiles to park safely off the road right-of-way and to re-enter the traffic in a forward direction. .104 On -site treatment and storage facilities for hazardous wastes associated with outright permitted uses or approved conditional uses subject to the most current siting criteria under Chapter 173-303 WAC. On -site treatment and storage facilities for hazardous wastes are not allowed in the Lake Whatcom watershed. .105 Home occupations, when in compliance with the following: (1) The occupation or profession shall be carried out wholly within the principal or accessory buildings; and (2) Not more than two persons outside the immediate family shall be employed in the home occupation. (Ord. 2003-029 § 1 (Att. A § 13), 2003; Ord. 96-056 Att. A § 31, 1996; Ord. 92-094, 1992; Ord. 91-023, 1991; Ord. 89-10, 1989; Ord. 88-29, 1988; Ord. 87-84, 1987). 20.42.130 Administrative approval uses. The following uses are permitted subject to administrative approval pursuant to WCC 20.84.235. .131 A temporary second dwelling unit of no more than 1,248 square feet in floor area, in the form of a manufactured home, a fully serviced travel trailer or motor home, to provide: (1) A temporary dwelling space for family members who, due to professionally documented physical or mental disorders, or risks of such disorders, require supervision and care where such care is provided by members of the family who reside on the property; or (2) A temporary dwelling space for a person providing care for the resident owner of the subject property when said owner needs supervision and care as described in (1) above. Approval Requirements: Administrative approval for temporary second dwelling units shall be approved if it is determined that the proposal meets the following requirements: (1) Temporary second dwelling units shall only be permitted on fully serviced parcels on which the applicant can meet setback, ingress, egress, height restrictions, and lot coverage requirements. 11 (2) The size of the temporary dwelling shall be appropriate to the use and size of the parcel and shall be limited so as to comply with the standards set forth in (1) above. (3) The temporary home shall be connected to an approved water supply and adequate capacity sewage disposal system approved by the Whatcom County health department. (4) When care is no longer necessary, the temporary home shall be removed within 60 days. (5) The permit shall be valid for one year. The permit may be extended on a yearly basis; provided, that an affidavit is furnished by the permittee affirming that the circumstances allowing the original permit remain in effect. (6) A covenant shall be filed that restricts sale of the property while the temporary dwelling is in place. (7) The use will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses. (8) Evidence of adequate off-street parking space shall be provided. (9) There shall be no occupancy of the temporary dwelling outside the conditions under which the temporary dwelling is permitted pursuant to this section. (10) All mobile homes must demonstrate compliance with minimum HUD Fire Safety Standards and compliance with current Washington Administrative Code (WAC). Penalties: False statements on supporting documentation submitted with the application or failure to comply with any of the approval requirements may be cause for revocation of the permit and prosecution. .132 Accessory apartments or detached accessory dwelling units to single- family dwellings; provided, that all of the following approval requirements are met: (1) In addition to an existing or permitted dwelling, there shall be no more than one accessory apartment or detached accessory dwelling unit per lot; (2) The owner(s) of the single-family lot upon which the accessory apartment or detached accessory dwelling unit is located shall occupy as their primary domicile at least one of the dwelling units on that lot; (3) Proof that adequate provisions have been made for potable water, wastewater disposal, and stormwater runoff for the additional dwelling unit must be obtained prior to application for a building permit; (4) There shall be only one front entrance to the house visible from the front yard and street for accessory apartments and only one additional entrance visible from the front yard for detached accessory dwelling units; (5) Accessory apartments and detached accessory units shall be clearly a subordinate part of an existing residence; (6) In no case shall an accessory apartment or detached dwelling unit be larger than 1,248 square feet in floor area; (7) Long plats and short plats which are granted after January 25, 1994, shall be marked, specifically designating lots allowed to be developed with accessory apartments or detached accessory dwelling units at the option of the developer for future individual owners. Accessory apartments and detached accessory dwelling units shall be prohibited on: (a) All lots in long plats which received preliminary plat approval after January 25, 1994, unless those lots have been specifically marked for such use through the long plat process; 12 (b) All lots within short plats which received approval after January 25, 1994, unless those lots have been specifically marked for such use through the short plat process; (8) A common driveway serving both the existing unit and any accessory unit shall be used to the greatest extent possible; (9) A deed restriction is recorded with the Whatcom County auditor prior to building permit issuance, stating: (a) Detached accessory dwelling units and associated land cannot be sold separately from the original dwelling; except in the event the zoning permits such a land division; and (b) One of the dwellings must be the primary domicile of the owner; (10) Outside of an urban growth area, the minimum lot size for detached accessory units shall be 20 acres; (11) Accessory apartments and detached accessory dwelling units to single- family dwellings are allowed within the Lake Whatcom watershed, only under the following circumstances: (a) Development of the parcel with the primary residence and accessory apartment or detached accessory dwelling shall conform to the density of the zoning district in which it is located. Adjacent properties in the same ownership may be bound by covenant to comply with the underlying zoning density; and (b) All of the above approval requirements shall be met for so long as the accessory unit remains; (12) Detached accessory units shall be located closer to the primary unit than to any adjoining property line unless site constraints require location closer to the property line. If an accessory unit is located closer to an adjacent property line than to the primary dwelling or within 50 feet of an adjoining property, the applicant must provide a statement of nonobjection from the adjacent property owner and must screen the unit to minimize visual impacts; (13) All mobile homes must demonstrate compliance with minimum HUD Fire Safety Standards and compliance with Washington Administrative Code (WAC). .133 Surface mining subject to Washington State's Surface Mining Act (Chapter 78.44 RCW), and accessory washing, sorting, and rock crushing, when within a Mineral Resource Land Special District subject to the requirements of Chapter 20.73 WCC and all other applicable regulations. .135 Cottage industries employing no more than two people on -site, other than family members residing on the premises; provided, that in addition to the criteria found in WCC 20.84.220 and 20.97.087: (1) The zoning administrator, at his or her discretion, may place limitations on the square footage in an existing or new structure used for a cottage industry and construction of new buildings to house said activity shall not, in any case, exceed 2,500 square feet of total floor area. The total land area used for buildings and outside storage or other uses related to the cottage industry shall not exceed 10,000 square feet or 25 percent of the site, whichever is less. (2) The parcel size shall not be less than one acre. 13 (3) In the event materials will be stored outdoors, the zoning administrator shall require adequate landscaping, screening, or other devices in order that the material will not be visible by surrounding uses or roads. (4) One nonilluminated sign, not to exceed 16 square feet in size, mounted on the property, is permitted. A larger sign up to 32 square feet may be approved by the hearing examiner as a conditional use. (5) Seasonal employees working less than 21 days per year will not be counted as employees if they are engaged in work directly related to agriculture or forestry. .136 Forestry related/wood based cottage industries which employ no more than 10 on -site people other than family members residing on the premises, including primary or low intensity secondary processing of timber not permitted in WCC 20.42.053, including fabrication of furniture and fixtures, partitions, shelves and lockers, manufacture, processing, treatment and fabrication of lumber, millwork, miscellaneous wood products, and other wooden building and roofing materials, excluding pulp, paper or plywood mills, conducted in structure(s) other than the dwelling unit; provided, that: (1) The administrator, at his discretion, in consideration of the surrounding development patterns, property uses and size of the lot on which the proposed cottage industry is locating, may place limitations on the square footage used in an existing or new structure used for a cottage industry. The construction of new buildings to house said activity shall not, in any case, exceed 4,000 square feet of total floor area. (2) The parcel must access from a collector arterial or higher standard street (this could include shared access). (3) Minimum parcel size is one acre. Minimum lot size is five acres for buildings which exceed 2,500 square feet of total floor area, and/or are constructed of materials which are not of similar materials or scale to a single-family residence. (4) Minimum open space requirement is 40 percent. Adequate buffering is required for both visual screening and noise reduction and must comply with WCC 20.80.345. The administrator may modify the required buffer widths, either reduction or enlargement, on a site -specific basis. A finding regarding the rationale for such modification will be entered into the record. Site development should maintain the existing natural vegetation to the greatest extent possible. (5) All work is conducted within a building, except that uses which are complementary to the Rural Forestry District and which are determined to be harmonious with adjacent parcels may be allowed outdoors. (6) In the event materials will be stored outdoors, the administrator may require adequate landscaping, screening or other devices in order that the material will not be visible by surrounding uses or roads. (7) For parcels visible from a state scenic highway, the administrator shall, at his discretion, require additional measures or restrictions to protect scenic vistas. (8) The operation of the business must comply with county/state noise, air quality and all other applicable regulations. (9) There is no polluting or hazardous industrial discharge to a public sewer or septic system. (10) One nonilluminated freestanding sign, visible from the road, and not exceeding six feet in height, may be permitted. One additional nonilluminated sign may be attached to the building for a maximum total signage of 16 14 square feet. No portion of any sign shall extend above the lowest portion of the roof. (11) Not more than 10 nonfamily members not residing on the premises can be employed on site. (12) An application packet shall be submitted on forms provided by county and must provide a site plan, drawn to scale, which shows the location of existing and proposed structures, includes dimensions of new and proposed structures to property lines, distance to adjacent structures, uses of adjacent parcels, existing vegetative cover and proposed modifications to vegetative cover of proposed site, location of permanent buffers and proposed plant materials for the permanent buffer, including species, sizes and spacing. (Ord. 2005-079 § 1, 2005; Ord. 2001-012 § 1, 2001; Ord. 98-078 Exh. A, 1998; Ord. 98-018 § 1, 1998; Ord. 97-069, 1997). 20.42.150 Conditional uses. The conditional uses listed herein shall be administered pursuant to the applicable provisions of Chapter 20.80 WCC (Supplementary Requirements) and Chapter 20.84 WCC (Variances, Conditional Uses and Appeals), the Whatcom County SEPA Ordinance, the Whatcom County Subdivision Ordinance and the Whatcom County Shoreline Management Program. Applicable conditional use permit criteria are established in the provisions of WCC 20.42.900 and will not be subject to the conditional use criteria provided for in WCC 20.84.220. .151 Construction and operation of water diversion structures, impoundment dams and hydroelectric generating facilities not permitted under WCC 20.42.061. .152 Bed and breakfast establishments. .153 Surface mining, rock crushing, and accessory washing and sorting, subject to the conditions in WCC 20.36.159. .154 Operation of indoor or outdoor parks and recreation facilities including camps, community centers, campgrounds, activity centers, marinas, riding academies, developed trailheads with more than 30 parking spaces and off - road vehicle parks; provided, that in the Lake Whatcom watershed riding academies, marinas, recreational vehicle and off -road vehicle parks are not allowed. .155 The operation of facilities intended to provide education related to forestry, natural resources and wildlife and the purpose of this district, including but not limited to demonstration forests and conservation laboratories, educational meeting facilities and related uses including rental cabins or other lodging structures, cooking and dining facilities, retail sales or meeting supplies and gifts, in the Foothills Subarea, South Fork Valley, the Newhalem Exclave and the Baker Lake Exclave, provided the following standards are met: (1) Density shall not exceed one sleeping unit per one gross acre or a maximum of 50 beds for the entire development. (2) Each cabin shall have a maximum of three sleeping units. (3) Must be located with vehicular access fronting on paved county roads or private roads improved to county standards. 15 (4) Front yard setback shall be 75 feet, with 100 feet side and rear yard setbacks to adjacent properties. (5) Lot coverage for all facilities, including the rental cabins, shall not exceed 20 percent, clustered on no more than 50 percent of the property. .156 Aircraft landing areas when solely for personal (aircraft based at those landing areas are owned or controlled by the landowner or tenant and subject to any limitations deemed necessary by the hearing examiner) or forest management uses; provided the centerline of any such landing area shall not be located within 500 feet of any zone boundary other than a Commercial Forestry zone, property line, building, or structure; except that a legal affidavit from adjacent property owner(s) allowing all, or a portion, of that 500 feet as a recorded easement on their property, presented as part of a conditional use permit application, shall be acceptable. The surface of any such landing areas shall be grass or sod and not longer than 2,500 feet. It shall be unlighted and for daytime use only. Handling and storage of fuel and bulk chemicals associated with forest management on or near the landing area, and fuels and lubricants associated with the operation of personal use aircraft, will be stored and handled in accordance with pertinent state and county codes. Notification of conditional use permit application hearing shall go, by first class mail, to residents within 1,000 feet from any point on a proposed aircraft landing area; the applicant shall pay the cost of such mailings. 157 The operation of fur farms and kennels. 158 Major utility and communication facilities. .159 Primary or low intensity, secondary processing facilities of timber not permitted in WCC 20.42.053, including fabrication of furniture and fixtures, partitions, shelves and lockers, manufacture, processing, treatment and fabrication of lumber, millwork, miscellaneous wood products, and other wooden building, roofing and construction materials and building material yards, if screened by a fence and/or vegetation as specified in WCC 20.80.355; excluding pulp or paper mills. The conditional use provisions is applicable for proposals which include structures that exceed 4,000 square feet and employ more than 10 nonfamily members. .162 Asphalt and concrete batch plants, when within an MRL Special District. .163 The permanent alteration or removal of more than 20 percent of the lot area, excluding natural meadows, bogs, surface waters, and rock outcrops, from the production of forest products when not otherwise authorized by WCC 20.42.450. .164 Cottage industries as defined by WCC 20.97.087, excluding those allowed in WCC 20.42.135, and which employ not more than four people outside the family conducted in structure(s) other than the dwelling unit. Such activities will comply with all other provisions of WCC 20.36.161(1) through (5). 16 .165 Public facilities for emergency -related health and safety purposes, such as firehalls and Washington State Department of Transportation satellite road safety facilities. .166 Shooting ranges. .185 Type I solid waste handling facilities. 186 Type II solid waste handling facilities. .187 Mitigation banks as a form of compensatory mitigation for wetland and habitat conservation area impacts when permitted in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 16.16 WCC; provided, applications for mitigation banks shall be processed as a major development project pursuant to Chapter 20.88 WCC. (Ord. 2005-068 § 2, 2005; Ord. 2004-041 § 1, 2004; Ord. 2004-026 § 1, 2004; Ord. 2004-014 § 2, 2004; Ord. 2001-012 § 1, 2001; Ord. 2000- 064 § 1, 2000; Ord. 99-031, 1999; Res. 99-010 Exh. A, 1999; Ord. 98-078 Exh. A, 1998; Ord. 97-069, 1997; Ord. 96-056 Att. A §§ J2, 33, 1996; Ord. 93-076, 1993; Ord. 92-094, 1992; Ord. 92-079, 1992; Ord. 91-013, 1991; Ord. 88-29, 1988; Ord. 86-42, 1986). 20.42.200 Prohibited uses. 201 All other uses. 202 Adult businesses. (Ord. 99-070 § 2, 1999; Ord. 92-094, 1992) 20.42.250 Minimum lot size and width. 20.42.251 Minimum lot size. (1) For the purpose of creating new residential building lots within the Forestry District, one land use density is provided. The minimum lot size requirements for new residential construction building lets, the n9iniFnufn let si shall be 20 nominal acres or 1/32 of a section. When the ,.'uster subdiyisien .,.,,,thed ; used, the n9ininium let size l (2) Divisions of land for nonresidential purposes shall have a minimum lot size of 20 acres. (Ord. 96-056 Att. A § 14, 1996; Ord. 92-094, 1992; Ord. 86- 42, 1986). 20.42.252 Maximum density and minimum lot size. Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Reserve Area (Gluster ' Conventional�� Gluste r Subdivisionsi 1 dwelling 20 acres 1 aeFe 20 affes 85% unit/20 acres (Ord. 92-096, 1992; Ord. 92-094, 1992; Ord. 86-42, 1986). 17 20.42.253 Minimum lot width and depth. Width at Street Line Conventional �;� ��_Mpt Glust - Minimum Mean Depth 5350 709* 53SR 100❑ *30R en a eul de sac only Width at Building Line Conventional e Minimum Mean Depth 2700 8�70❑ 100❑ (Ord. 92-096, 1992; Ord. 92-094, 1992; Ord, 86-42, 1986). - - - - - - - - MIN,- - - -- - - - Nil I - -- - - -- - -- -- -- -- - -- -- - -- - --- - -- - -- -- ---- -- - -- - -- - - -- RAI ------- - - -- - - -- -— _111---- - - - -- -- - ------ jr ... ... IN - -- - - --- -- -- -- - - - -- - --- -- - -- - -- -- - - ---- -- --- - - - -- -- - -- - - ----- - - - ---- - - - - -- - ------ - -- - ............ - -- - - -- - - -- - -- -- - - ---- - - NO - - --- - - - - ---- - -- - - - - - -- -- - - - - - - -- - - - - -- -- -- - - -- -- WIN -- M I - - --- -- - - --- - - - - --- -NOW-. - - - - - - - - -- - -- - - -- -- - -- -- --- - -- --- -- . rMs 0,111 - - - -- -- -- - - - -- --- PRO Wroll NOW I - -- - - -- -- - -- - -- -- - -- -- ----- - - - -- - - -- - - -- fts'"IM. M IN 19 20.42.330 Planned unit development. Deleted by Ord. 96-056. (Ord. 92-094, 1992; Ord. 86-42, 1986). 20.42.350 Building setbacks. Building setbacks shall be administered pursuant to WCC 20.80.200 (Setback Requirements). Building setbacks for parcels of less than five nominal acres shall be administered pursuant to WCC 20.80.256(4). (Ord. 2003-029 § 1 (Att. A § 2), 2003; Ord. 99-0080, 1999; Ord. 99-0058; Ord. 92-094, 1992; Ord. 86-42, 1986). 20.42.400 Height limitations. No residential structures or buildings accessory thereto with the exception of barns and silos shall exceed a height of 35 feet. (Ord. 92-094, 1992). 20.42.450 Lot coverage. No more than 20 percent of the lot area shall be permanently altered or removed from production of forest products, excluding natural meadows, bogs, surface water and rock outcrops, unless authorized as a conditional use; 2 .42-300 or the planned unit development provision of Chapter 20.85 WCC, in which case, no structure or combination of structures, including accessory buildings, shall occupy or cover more than 35 percent of the lot. (Ord. 92- 094, 1992; Ord. 86-42, 1986). 20.42.550 Reforestation area. Upon completion of forest harvest operations, the highest priority for reforestation shall be given to that land within 100 feet of another zone district. Reforestation shall utilize seedlings or whips and shall be consistent with the Forest Practice Act of 1974, as amended. (Ord. 92-094, 1992; Ord. 86-42, 1986). 20.42.650 Development criteria. (Ord. 96-056 Att. A § Al, 1996). 20.42.651 Plat language for proposed subdivisions. When a proposed subdivision, binding site plan, short subdivision or exempt land division will be located adjacent to or across a right-of-way from an existing Forestry District, 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 of such adjacent properties, or from Whatcom County, arising out of any reasonable and lawful activity on said forestry lands which occurs in the normal course of their established use. The agreement shall appear as a covenant or deed restriction upon the plat, tract or instrument of conveyance and shall run with the land. (Ord. 99-058, 1999; Ord. 92-015, 1992; Ord. 87-12, 1987; Ord. 87-11, 1987). 20.42.652 Use of natural resources. All discretionary project permits for land on or within one-half mile of the area designated as Agriculture, Rural, Commercial Forestry or Rural Forestry 20 or within 300 feet of an area designated as Mineral Resource Lands in the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan, or upon which farm operations are being conducted, shall be subject to the right to farm, right to practice forestry and mineral land disclosure policies contained in WCC Title 14, Use of Natural Resources. (Ord. 98-083 Exh. A § 48, 1998; Ord. 96-056 Att. A § A2, 1996; Ord. 92-094, 1992; Ord. 92-015, 1992). 20.42.653 Landscaping. Refer to WCC 20.80.300 for landscaping requirements. (Ord. 92-094, 1992; Ord. 89-117, 1989). 20.42.654 Parking requirements. Parking shall conform to the requirements of WCC 20.80.500. However, recreation vehicles and boat parking and storage shall be limited to side and rear yards. (Ord. 92-094, 1992). 20.42.655 Livestock regulations. The keeping of livestock shall be administered pursuant to WCC 20.80.800 (Supplementary Requirements). (Ord. 92-094, 1992). 20.42.656 Domestic water supplies. Domestic water supply sources shall not be located within 100 feet of the property boundary or on an adjacent property without written consent of the adjacent property owner. (Ord. 92-094, 1992; Ord. 86-42, 1986). 20.42.657 Drainage. All development activity within Whatcom County shall be subject to the stormwater management provisions of the Whatcom County Development Standards unless specifically exempted. No project permit shall be issued prior to meeting submittal requirements relating to stormwater management in the appropriate chapters of the Whatcom County Development Standards. (Ord. 96-056 Att. A § A2, 1996; Ord. 94-022, 1994). 20.42.900 Conditional use permit criteria. .901 The conditional uses listed in WCC 20.42.150 shall be subject to the following Forestry conditional use criteria. Said criteria listed in WCC 20.42.902 shall supersede the criteria listed in WCC 20.84.220. .902 Before approving an application for a conditional use permit, the hearing examiner shall ensure that any specific standards of the use district defining the conditional use are fulfilled and shall find adequate evidence showing that the proposed conditional use at the proposed location will: (1) Be in accordance with all applicable local and state laws, standards and regulations; (2) Be reasonably compatible with the surrounding environment and with the policies of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan; (3) Not generate traffic in excess of capacity of the public road system at reasonable safety and service levels; 21 (4) Not create unreasonable demands for public expenditures to provide services, facilities, or utilities beyond that which is normally required for permitted uses in the Forestry District; (5) Provide entrances to public roads or private roads open to public use in accordance with applicable county or state standards; (6) Provide reasonable sound and sight buffering so as not to detract from normal use of surrounding property, public and private roads, and trails open to public use; (7) Be located a reasonable distance from areas of actual or potential natural hazard; (8) Not unreasonably contribute to actual or potential water quality or quantity problems; (9) Be designed to provide reasonable safety from fire hazard; (10) Not unreasonably interfere with any territorial or otherwise significant view from surrounding property and public roads; (11) Not remove areas of native vegetation which protect shorelines and streambanks from erosion, except as necessary for such uses as culverts, bridges, boat ramps, recreation areas and stream bank stabilization projects; and (12) Include reasonable soil erosion plans necessary to prevent soil, organic debris and other pollutants from entering streams, ponds, or lakes. (Ord. 92-094, 1992). 22 WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF REPORT I. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL AND RECOMMENDATION File # PLN2009-00011 File Name: Ordinance Permanently Removing the Lot Clustering Provision from Whatcom County Code 20.42, Rural Forestry District Applicant: Whatcom County Council Request Action: The request is to amend the Official Whatcom County Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 20.42, removing language referencing Lot Clustering. The subsections affected would be WCC 20.42.130, 20.42.251-253, 20.42.300-320 (Deleted, and 20.42.450. Reason for Request: After discussions held at the Planning and Development Committee and at the full Council meetings, and in consideration of public testimony, the County Council has expressed a desire to make the interim ordinance permanent. Council members expressed that they don't feel that clustering is appropriate for the Rural Forestry zone and/or the current clustering provision doesn't work as intended and needs revision. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the Whatcom County Council for the proposed Whatcom County Code amendments. Staff also recommends that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation to the Whatcom County Council that when time and resources allow, the County should further investigate the feasibility of clustering in the Rural Forestry Zone, including creation of more adequate code language. II. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The purpose of Rural Forestry District is to implement the forestry designation of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan by providing the opportunity for non -industrial landowners to manage their land for long-term productivity and sustained use of forest resources. In addition, the district encourages the management of land for wildlife, aesthetics, and other non -commodity values. It also provides for uses that are compatible with these activities, while maintaining water quality and soil productivity. The purpose of lot clustering, according to the presently deleted language from WCC 20.42.310, is to "provide a method of creating economical building lots with spatially efficient sizes" and "to reduce development cost, increase energy efficiency and reserve areas of land which are suitable for agriculture, forestry, open space or possible future development." ■ In October, 2006, the Whatcom County Council adopted an emergency ordinance removing the provision allowing for clustered subdivisions within the Rural Forest Districts of Whatcom County. This emergency ordinance remained in effect for 60 days [Ord. 2006-00045]. 23 File #PLN2009-000XX March 17, 2009 Rural Forestry Lot Clustering Staff Report, Page 2 ■ On November 1, 2006, the Whatcom County SEPA Official issued a Determination of Non - Significance. ■ In November, 2006 the County Council adopted an Interim Ordinance removing the provision allowing for clustered subdivisions within the Rural Forest Districts of Whatcom County. This Interim Ordinance remained in effect for 6 months [Ord. 2006-00057]. ■ In May, 2007 the County Council renewed the Interim Ordinance removing the provision allowing for clustered subdivisions within the Rural Forest Districts of Whatcom County. This Interim Ordinance remained in effect for 6 months [Ord. 2007-00028]. ■ In November, 2007 the County Council renewed the Interim Ordinance removing the provision allowing for clustered subdivisions within the Rural Forest Districts of Whatcom County. This Interim Ordinance remained in effect for 6 months [Ord. 2007-00064]. ■ In May, 2008 County staff requested input from the Planning Commission about the proposed ordinance. After deliberation, the Planning Commission recommended that the County Council provide funding for a consultant to further study this issue, as prohibiting clustering could have unforeseen impacts on rural forestry. ■ In May, 2008 the County Council renewed the Interim Ordinance removing the provision allowing for clustered subdivisions within the Rural Forest Districts of Whatcom County. This Interim Ordinance remained in effect for 6 months [Ord. 2008-00018]. ■ The department submitted a funding request as part of the 2009 budget proposal. This request is not proposed for funding at this time. ■ In November, 2008 the County Council renewed the Interim Ordinance removing the provision allowing for clustered subdivisions within the Rural Forest Districts of Whatcom County. This Interim Ordinance will expire on May 12, 2009 [Ord. 2008-00045]. ■ In January, 2009 the Planning and Development Committee reviewed the Rural Forest Cluster Ordinance and directed staff to make the interim moratorium permanent. ■ Enactment of the emergency moratoria was intended to provide Council with an opportunity to review the Whatcom County Code and evaluate a menu of alternatives that could be implemented to encourage the conservation of productive forest lands and discouraging incompatible uses in a manner consistent with the requirements of the Growth Management Act, the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan, and as mandated by and described in County Wide Planning Policies. ■ Record material and County Council minutes dated October 10th, 2006 discuss at significant length the conclusion there may be unintended consequences resulting from exercise of the clustered lot subdivisions provisions of WCC 20.42.300. Possible consequences include conflicts between incompatible uses, unacceptable change to the rural nature of the Rural Forestry districts, a general decline in the overall quality of forestry resources considering there is no management or maintenance requirement for preservation of the forestry resources within Whatcom County Code. Therefore, the resultant Emergency Ordinance struck the lot clustering provision from WCC 20.42.300-320. ■ The proposed amendments are intended to replace Interim Ordinance Ord. 2008-00045 and provide permanent removal of the provisions allowing for clustered subdivisions within the Rural Forestry Districts of Whatcom County. 24 File #PLN2009-000XX March 17, 2009 Rural Forestry Lot Clustering Staff Report, Page 3 Upon compliance with RCW 36.70A.130, Whatcom County shall be required to adopt and enforce ordinances and regulations for Class IV - General Forest Practices involving road construction or timber harvest on lands platted after January 1, 1960, among others. Lots created by the clustering provision would be under the jurisdiction of Whatcom County, while lots created by the 20-acre exemption provision may remain under the jurisdiction of the Washington State Department of Natural Resources. Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO), Shoreline Management Program (SMP) and Water Resource Special Management Area (WRSMA) standards are generally more protective of critical areas, shorelines of the state, and local watersheds than DNR regulations for forest practices. ANALYSIS OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT Pursuant to Whatcom County Code (WCC) 20.90.050, Whatcom County Planning and Development Services staff is required to: 1) Evaluate the proposed amendment in relationship to the goals, objectives and policies of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan as authorized by the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) — RCW 36.70A; 2) Address consistency with interlocal planning agreements between the County and associated cities; 3) Consider whether the proposed amendment is consistent with any associated city's comprehensive plan and 4) Consider possible environmental impacts that have been identified by the lead agency designated SEPA official through the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) threshold determination process. What follows are the relevant sections from applicable code and planning documents with staff discussion noted below each section. Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies The proposed amendment has been reviewed for conformance with the following Goals and Policies of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan. As many of the goals and policies address similar topics, similar goals and policies have been grouped below and followed by an appropriate discussion. The following goals and policies address cluster development. GOAL 2DD: Retain the rural character and lifestyle of Whatcom County. Policy 2DD-4: Support cluster housing in rural subdivisions. GOAL 2VV: Ensure equity between the public benefit and the private burden while encouraging open space retention. Policy 2VV-9: Support the conservation of unique environmental features through the creative use of cluster subdivisions. DISCUSSION: This ordinance would remove the ability to use clustering in the division of land to conserve unique environmental features within the Rural Forestry -zoned land. 25 File #PLN2009-000XX March 17, 2009 Rural Forestry Lot Clustering Staff Report, Page 4 The following goals and policies address protection of critical habitat, and threatened and endangered species. GOAL 2M: Protect and encourage restoration of habitat for fish and wildlife populations. Policy 2M-1: Ensure that new land uses do not degrade habitat of threatened and endangered species. GOAL 2SS: Conserve or enhance important natural, cultural, and scenic resources. Policy 2SS-3: Protect unique or critical wildlife and native plant habitat. DISCUSSION: By removing the lot clustering provision there are likely to be more interactions between humans and threatened and endangered species. For species that have a low tolerance for human interaction, consistent human activity may result in otherwise suitable habitat becoming unusable, resulting in displacement. By allowing clustering, large tracts of land can be managed at a landscape level, where human activity will be less constant, but singular forest activities will likely be greater in scope. By being able to manage activities at a landscape level, in addition to the ability to protect core zones of critical habitat, corridors between core zones may also be protected. The following goals and policies address the long-term productive use of natural resources. GOAL 2FF: Provide employment opportunities in the rural parts of Whatcom County. Policy 2FF-1: Support small businesses, cottage industries, home occupations, resource - based and other appropriate light industry in the rural areas of Whatcom County. Policy 2FF-4: Support resource -based industries that require only rural services, conserve the natural resource land base, and help maintain the rural character and lifestyle of the community. Locate the resource -based industries near small towns or crossroads communities. Resource -based industries with up to fifty employees may be approved by conditional use, provided that the industry processes agricultural or forestry products that are predominantly locally grown. Assure adequate facilities, mitigation and buffers through development regulations. GOAL 7A: Promote a healthy economy which provides ample opportunity for family -wage jobs for diverse segments of the community is essential to the quality of life in the area. Policy 7A-8: Enhance the environment for resource -based industries and the growing service industry with an emphasis on the communities in eastern Whatcom County. GOAL 7G: Coordinate economic development with environmental, resource, and other comprehensive land use and open space policies and measures to enhance the community's overall quality of life. Policy 7G-1: Recognize the natural environment as a major asset and manage environmental resources accordingly. GOAL 7H: To promote economic diversity, continue to support the resource industries as significant elements of the local economy including the employment base. 26 File #PLN2009-000XX Rural Forestry Lot Clustering March 17, 2009 Staff Report. Paae 5 Policy 7H-3: Maintain the commercial forestland base of Whatcom County to assure the industry's continued economic viability and sustainable harvest. Policy 7H-4: As part of a broad -based economy, foster productive timber, agriculture and fisheries industries in a sustainable manner. GOAL 8F: Maintain and enhance Whatcom County's forest land base. Policy 817-3: Apply the following general criteria for Rural and Commercial Forestry zones: Rural Forestry Zone: Lands mostly devoted to growing trees for commercial timber production, usually located within public service districts such as fire or water districts, accessed by private roads built to Whatcom County development standards or public roads, with low density residential development. Land parcels are generally 20 acres or greater in size. Policy 8F-6: Establish flexibility in land use plans and regulations to encourage maintenance of the productive forest land base. Policy 8F-7: Discourage inappropriate conversion of productive forest land to incompatible non -forest uses. It is the intent of this policy not to allow conversion of forest land if the proposed use is incompatible with the maintenance of long-term forest management. Incompatible uses include those which: • create fire or safety hazards to adjacent forest land; • permanently remove a significant portion of a parcel from productive forest use; • create significant financial hardships for adjacent forest landowners; or • can lead to land use conflicts with adjacent forest landowners. GOAL 8G: Maintain and enhance Whatcom County's forest products industry. Policy 8G-3: Support the efforts of the forest landowners and managers in Whatcom County to operate in a long-term, sustainable manner as part of a stable, broad based economy. Discussion: Due to the uncertainty of individual landowner's plans for parcels created by the 20-acre exemption, the removal of the clustering provision and resulting reserve tract results in less certainty over resource -based employment. While the reserve tract created through clustering would allow for better coordination and efficient use of the natural resource land -base, as it would remain under a single ownership, individual landowners would have their own management priorities, resulting in less coordination and likely less efficient resource management. However, long-term productivity and sustained use of forest resources are the purpose of the Rural Forestry zone, and the clustering provision proposed for removal had no requirements that the reserve tract remain actively managed. Without a requirement that a reserve tract created by clustering continue to be actively managed for long-term production of forest products, there will be uncertainty as to how these goals and policies will be met, either with or without clustering. The following goals and policies address conflicts between landowners and different land uses. GOAL 8H: Reduce land use conflicts between Whatcom County's forest and nonforest landowners. 27 File #PLN2009-000XX March 17, 2009 Rural Forestry Lot Clustering Staff Report, Page 6 Policy 81-1-5: Work cooperatively with the Washington State Department of Natural Resources, forest landowners, and the general public to address community concerns and land use conflicts which may arise as a result of forest practices. GOAL 10J: Minimize conflicts between different land uses. Discussion: The removal of the lot clustering provision may reduce the likelihood of conflicts between forest landowners. Those that purchase 20-acre lots of forestland are more likely to be aware of, involved in, and accepting of forest practice performed by others in the Rural Forestry District. While there is no difference in overall density by using clustering as opposed to lots created by exemption, clustered homes would be more concentrated than they otherwise would be. It is likely that clustered homes would be located closer to lands not zoned RF. For landowners neighboring the RF clusters who are accustomed to more dispersed development patterns, this could pose potential conflicts as it may be in contrast to their view of rural character. The following goals and policies address reducing impacts on water and other natural resources and achieving environmental goals. Goal 81: Ensure that forest practices avoid adverse impacts to the habitat of threatened and endangered fish and wildlife species. Policy 81-1: Ensure that adequate riparian buffers are maintained along rivers and streams. Policy 81-2: Minimize sedimentation to rivers and streams. GOAL 10H: Encourage limiting impacts from resource uses on the natural environment. GOAL 11A: Protect natural resources and systems, life and property from potential hazards. Policy 11A-5: Actively pursue voluntary, cooperative and mutually beneficial efforts aimed at advancing county environmental goals. GOAL 11 E: Protect and enhance water quality and promote sustainable and efficient use of water resources. Policy 11 E-2: Maintain as a high priority the protection of water quality and quantity, and associated features like watersheds and aquifers. Discussion; At some point in the near future, Whatcom County will receive regulatory jurisdiction over Class IV — Forest Practices that involve timber harvest and road construction. Under Whatcom County Jurisdiction, lots created through clustering, including the reserve tract, would be held to resource protection standards outlined in the Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO), Shoreline Management Program (SNIP) and local water resource protection provisions. These standards are generally more protective of water resources and the environment than DNR regulations for forest practices. By removing the clustering provision, it is possible that forest practices on lots created by exemption would be held to the less restrictive DNR standards. The following goal addresses long term effects of development. File 4PLN2009-000XX Rural Forestry Lot Clustering March 17, 2009 Staff Report, Page 7 GOAL 10K: Consider long term effects of building practices on communities and natural resource depletion. Discussion: Clustering alone will not increase the likelihood of future growth and urban- or suburban -style development. Only rezoning RF land, which would remove its designation as a zone for long-term forestry production and run counter to Comprehensive Plan goals and policies that express a desire for preservation of natural resource industries, would increase the likelihood of development beyond overall densities already provided. However, clustered homes would be more concentrated than they otherwise would be, which could pose potential conflicts for as it is in contrast to common views of rural character and dispersed development. Due to the uncertainty of individual landowner's plans for parcels created by the 20-acre exemption, the removal of the clustering provision and resulting reserve tract results in less certainty over resource -based employment. Individual landowners would have their own management priorities, resulting in less coordination and likely less efficient resource management. However, long-term productivity and sustained use of forest resources are the purpose of the Rural Forestry zone, and the clustering provision proposed for removal had zero requirements that the reserve tract remain actively managed. County -Wide Planning Policies (8) Natural Resource Industries. Maintain and enhance natural resource -based industries, including productive timber, agricultural, and fisheries industries. Encourage the conservation of productive forest lands and productive agricultural lands, and discourage incompatible uses. Discussion: Due to the uncertainty of individual landowner's plans for parcels created by the 20-acre exemption, the removal of the clustering provision and resulting reserve tract results in less certainty over resource -based employment. While the reserve tract created through clustering would allow for better coordination and efficient use of the natural resource land base, as it would remain under a single ownership, individual landowners would have their own management priorities, resulting in less coordination and likely less efficient resource management. However, long-term productivity and sustained use of forest resources are the purpose of the Rural Forestry zone, and the clustering provision proposed for removal had zero requirements that the reserve tract remain actively managed. Without a requirement that a reserve tract created by clustering continue to be actively managed for long-term production of forest products, there will be uncertainty as to how these goals and policies will be met, either with or without clustering. (10) Environment. Protect the environment and enhance the state's high quality of life, including air and water quality, and the availability of water. Discussion: At some point in the near future, Whatcom County will receive regulatory jurisdiction over Class IV — Forest Practices that involve timber harvest and road construction. Under Whatcom County Jurisdiction, lots created through clustering, including the reserve tract, would be held to resource protection standards outlined in the Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO), Shoreline Management Program (SMP) and local water resource protection provisions. These standards are generally more protective of water resources and the environment than DNR regulations for forest practices. By removing the clustering provision, it is possible that forest practices on lots created by exemption would be held to the less restrictive DNR standards. (11) Citizen Participation and Coordination. Encourage the involvement of citizens in the 29 File #PLN2009-000XX March 17, 2009 Rural Forestry Lot Clustering Staff Report, Page 8 planning process and ensure coordination between communities and jurisdictions to reconcile conflicts. Discussion: Since the October 2006 emergency ordinance that removed the lot clustering provision from the Rural Forestry District, there have been no fewer than 7 council meetings at which citizens commented on Rural Forestry lot clustering. The County Council has considered this testimony in their desire to permanently remove the lot clustering provision from the Rural Forestry District. RCW 36.70A Growth Management RCW 36.70A.020 Goals: The following goals are adopted to guide the development and adoption of comprehensive plans and development regulations of those counties and cities that are required or choose to plan under RCW 36.70A.040. The following goals are not listed in order of priority and shall be used exclusively for the purpose of guiding the development of comprehensive plans and development regulations: (8) Natural Resource Industries. Maintain and enhance natural resource -based industries, including productive timber, agricultural, and fisheries industries. Encourage the conservation of productive forest lands and productive agricultural lands, and discourage incompatible uses. Discussion: Due to the uncertainty of individual landowner's plans for parcels created by the 20-acre exemption, the removal of the clustering provision and resulting reserve tract results in less certainty over resource -based employment. While the reserve tract created through clustering would allow for better coordination and efficient use of the natural resource land -base, as it would remain under a single ownership, individual landowners would have their own management priorities, resulting in less coordination and likely less efficient resource management. However, long-term productivity and sustained use of forest resources are the purpose of the Rural Forestry zone, and the clustering provision proposed for removal had zero requirements that the reserve tract remain actively managed. Without a requirement that a reserve tract created by clustering continue to be actively managed for long-term production of forest products, there will be uncertainty as to how these goals and policies will be met, either with or without clustering. (10) Environment. Protect the environment and enhance the state's high quality of life, including air and water quality, and the availability of water; and (14) Shoreline Management. Per RCW 36.70A.480 Shorelines of the State, the goals and policies of the Shoreline Management Act, as set forth in RCW 90.58.020, are added as one of the goals of the Growth Management Act. (3) Result in long term over short term benefit; (4) Protect the resources and ecology of the shoreline; Discussion: At some point in the near future, Whatcom County will receive regulatory jurisdiction over Class IV — Forest Practices that involve timber harvest and road construction. Under Whatcom County Jurisdiction, lots created through clustering, including the reserve tract, would be held to resource protection standards outlined in the Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO), Shoreline Management Program (SNIP) and local water resource protection provisions. These standards are generally more protective of water resources and the environment than DNR regulations for forest practices. By removing the clustering provision, it is possible that forest practices on lots created by 30 File #PLN2009-000XX March 17, 2009 Rural Forestry Lot Clustering Staff Report, Page 9 exemption would be held to the less restrictive DNR standards. (11) Citizen Participation and Coordination. Encourage the involvement of citizens in the planning process and ensure coordination between communities and jurisdictions to reconcile conflicts. Discussion: Since the October 2006 emergency ordinance that removed the lot clustering provision from the Rural Forestry District, there have been no fewer than 7 council meetings at which citizens commented on Rural Forestry lot clustering. The County Council has considered this testimony in their desire to permanently remove the lot clustering provision from the Rural Forestry District. The following sections of RCW 36.70A reference the importance of protection and conservation of long-term productive natural resource lands. 36.70A.030 Definitions Notes: Finding — Intent — 1994 c 307: "The legislature finds that it is in the public interest to identify and provide long-term conservation of those productive natural resource lands that are critical to and can be managed economically and practically for long-term commercial production of food, fiber, and minerals. Successful achievement of the natural resource industries' goal set forth in RCW 36.70A.020 requires the conservation of a land base sufficient in size and quality to maintain and enhance those industries and the development and use of land use techniques that discourage uses incompatible to the management of designated lands. 36.70A.040 Who must plan — Summary of requirements — Development regulations must implement comprehensive plans. (3) Any county or city that is initially required to conform with all of the requirements of this chapter under subsection (1) of this section shall take actions under this chapter as follows: (a) The county legislative authority shall adopt a county -wide planning policy under RCW 36.70A.210; (b) the county and each city located within the county shall designate critical areas, agricultural lands, forest lands, and mineral resource lands, and adopt development regulations conserving these designated agricultural lands, forest lands, and mineral resource lands and protecting these designated critical areas, under RCW 36.70A.170 and 36.70A.060; (c) the county shall designate and take other actions related to urban growth areas under RCW 36.70A.110; (d) if the county has a population of fifty thousand or more, the county and each city located within the county shall adopt a comprehensive plan under this chapter and development regulations that are consistent with and implement the comprehensive plan on or before July 1, 1994, and if the county has a population of less than fifty thousand, the county and each city located within the county shall adopt a comprehensive plan under this chapter and development regulations that are consistent with and implement the comprehensive plan by January 1, 1995, but if the governor makes written findings that a county with a population of less than fifty thousand or a city located within such a county is not making reasonable progress toward adopting a comprehensive plan and development regulations the governor may reduce this deadline for such actions to be taken by no more than one hundred eighty days. Any county or city subject to this subsection may obtain an additional six months before it is required to have adopted its development regulations by submitting a letter notifying the department of community, trade, and economic development of its need prior to the deadline for adopting both a comprehensive plan and development regulations. 36.70A.060 Natural resource lands and critical areas — Development regulations. (1)(a) Except as provided in *RCW 36.70A.1701, each county that is required or 31 File #PLN2009-000XX March 17, 2009 Rural Forestry Lot Clustering Staff Report, Page 10 chooses to plan under RCW 36.70A.040, and each city within such county, shall adopt development regulations on or before September 1, 1991, to assure the conservation of agricultural, forest, and mineral resource lands designated under RCW 36.70A.170. Regulations adopted under this subsection may not prohibit uses legally existing on any parcel prior to their adoption and shall remain in effect until the county or city adopts development regulations pursuant to RCW 36.70A.040. Such regulations shall assure that the use of lands adjacent to agricultural, forest, or mineral resource lands shall not interfere with the continued use, in the accustomed manner and in accordance with best management practices, of these designated lands for the production of food, agricultural products, or timber, or for the extraction of minerals. 36.70A.170 Natural resource lands and critical areas — Designations. (1) On or before September 1, 1991, each county, and each city, shall designate where appropriate: (a) Agricultural lands that are not already characterized by urban growth and that have long-term significance for the commercial production of food or other agricultural products; (b) Forest lands that are not already characterized by urban growth and that have long-term significance for the commercial production of timber; (c) Mineral resource lands that are not already characterized by urban growth and that have long-term significance for the extraction of minerals; and (d) Critical areas. (2) In making the designations required by this section, counties and cities shall consider the guidelines established pursuant to RCW 36.70A.050. 36.70A.177 Agricultural lands — Innovative zoning techniques — Accessory Uses (1) A county or a city may use a variety of innovative zoning techniques in areas designated as agricultural lands of long-term commercial significance under RCW 36.70A.170. The innovative zoning techniques should be designed to conserve agricultural lands and encourage the agricultural economy. Except as provided in subsection (3) of this section, a county or city should encourage nonagricultural uses to be limited to lands with poor soils or otherwise not suitable for agricultural purposes. (2) Innovative zoning techniques a county or city may consider include, but are not limited to: (b) Cluster zoning, which allows for new development on one portion of the land, leaving the remainder in agricultural or open space uses; Discussion: While agricultural, forest, and mineral resource lands are all designated as Natural resource lands, per RCW 36.70A.170, chapter 36.70A allows for clusters in agricultural lands, but didn't make similar provisions for forest resource lands. This could be a deliberate effort on behalf of the legislature to state that clustered homes in forest resource lands are incompatible. If this is the case, clustering could be allowed by rezoning Rural Forestry District land to Rural land. In addition to allowing lot clustering, this move would remove these lands from being designated as long-term productive forest land. 36.70A.345 Sanctions The governor may impose a sanction or sanctions specified under RCW 36.70A.340 on: (1) A county or city that fails to designate critical areas, agricultural lands, forest lands, or mineral resource lands under RCW 36.70A.170 by the date such action was required to have been taken; (2) a county or city that fails to adopt development regulations under RCW 36.70A.060 protecting critical areas or conserving agricultural lands, forest lands, or mineral resource lands by the date such action was required to have been taken; (3) a 32 File #PLN2009-000XX March 17, 2009 Rural Forestry Lot Clustering Staff Report, Page 11 county that fails to designate urban growth areas under RCW 36.70A.110 by the date such action was required to have been taken; and (4) a county or city that fails to adopt its comprehensive plan or development regulations when such actions are required to be taken. WAC 365-190 — Minimum guidelines to classify agriculture, forest, mineral lands and critical areas. 365-190-020 Purpose. The intent of this chapter is to establish minimum guidelines to assist all counties and cities statewide in classifying agricultural lands, forest lands, mineral resource lands, and critical areas. These guidelines shall be considered by counties and cities in designating these lands. Growth management, natural resource land conservation, and critical areas protection share problems related to governmental costs and efficiency. Sprawl and the unwise development of natural resource lands or areas susceptible to natural hazards may lead to inefficient use of limited public resources, jeopardize environmental resource functions and values, subject persons and property to unsafe conditions, and affect the perceived quality of life. It is more costly to remedy the loss of natural resource lands or critical areas than to conserve and protect them from loss or degradation. The inherent economic, social, and cultural values of natural resource lands and critical areas should be considered in the development of strategies designed to conserve and protect lands. In recognition of these common concerns, classification and designation of natural resource lands and critical areas is intended to assure the long-term conservation of natural resource lands and to. preclude land uses and developments which are incompatible with critical areas. There are qualitative differences between and among natural resource lands and critical areas. Not all areas and ecosystems are critical for the same reasons. Some are critical because of the hazard they present to public health and safety, some because of the values they represent to the public welfare. In some cases, the risk posed to the public by use or development of a critical area can be mitigated or reduced by engineering or design; in other cases that risk cannot be effectively reduced except by avoidance of the critical area. Hence, classification and designation of critical areas is intended to lead counties and cities to recognize the differences among these areas, and to develop appropriate regulatory and nonregulatory actions in response. Counties and cities required or opting to plan under the Growth Management Act of 1990 should consider the definitions and guidelines in this chapter when preparing development regulations which preclude uses and development incompatible with critical areas (see RCW 36.70A.060). Precluding incompatible uses and development does not mean a prohibition of all uses or development. Rather, it means governing changes in land uses, new activities, or development that could adversely affect critical areas. Thus for each critical area, counties and cities planning under the act should define classification schemes and prepare development regulations that govern changes in land uses and new activities by prohibiting clearly inappropriate actions and restricting, allowing, or conditioning other activities as appropriate. It is the intent of these guidelines that critical areas designations overlay other land uses including designated natural resource lands. That is, if two or more land use designations apply to a given parcel or a portion of a parcel, both or all designations shall be made. Regarding natural resource lands, counties and cities should allow existing and ongoing resource management operations, that have long-term commercial significance, to continue. Counties and cities should encourage utilization of best management practices where existing and ongoing resource management operations that have long-term commercial significance include designated critical areas. Future operations or expansion of existing operations should be done in consideration of protecting critical areas. 33 File #PLN2009-000XX March 17, 2009 Rural Forestry Lot Clustering Staff Report, Page 12 Discussion: Pursuant to WAC 365-190, Whatcom County has designated agricultural, forest, and mineral resource lands as natural resource lands of long-term productivity. Environmental Review Pursuant to the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) rules, proposed agency actions must be evaluated to determine whether probable significant adverse environmental impacts are likely to occur as a result of implementation. The SEPA official issued a Determination of Non -Significance on November 1, 2006. Consistency with Interlocal Agreements & Comprehensive Plans of Cities The proposed amendment applies to land that is within city urban growth areas, therefore, pursuant to the provisions of Whatcom County Code, Chapter 20.80.051 (3) (a) (4) the amendment has been developed in accordance with adopted interlocal agreements of the associated cities, and has been evaluated for consistency with their respective comprehensive plans. Discussion: Staff has reviewed the interlocal agreements of cities likely to be affected by the proposed amendment if adopted. Staff has noted no apparent inconsistencies with the interlocal agreements with cities or their respective comprehensive plans. IV. FINDINGS OF FACT AND REASONS FOR ACTION 1. In October, 2006, the Whatcom County Council adopted an emergency ordinance removing the provision allowing for clustered subdivisions within the Rural Forest Districts of Whatcom County. This emergency ordinance remained in effect for 60 days. 2. The SEPA official issued a Determination of Non -Significance (DNS) on November 1, 2006. 3. In November, 2006 the County Council adopted an Interim Ordinance removing the provision allowing for clustered subdivisions within the Rural Forest Districts of Whatcom County. The present interim ordinance has been renewed roughly every 6 months since November 2006. 4. In May, 2008 County staff requested input from the Planning commission about the proposed ordinance. After deliberation, the Planning Commission recommended that the County Council provide funding for a consultant to further study this issue, as prohibiting clustering could have unforeseen impacts on rural forestry. 5. The Planning and Development Services Department submitted a funding request as part of the 2009 budget proposal. This request is not proposed for funding at this time. 6. On January 27, 2009 the Planning and Development Committee directed staff to make the interim moratorium permanent. 7. Notice of the subject amendment was sent to the Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development (CTED) and other state agencies on March 10, 2009. 8. Since the October 2006 emergency ordinance that removed the lot clustering 34 File #PLN2009-000XX March 17, 2009 Rural Forestry Lot Clustering Staff Report, Page 13 provision from the Rural Forestry District, there have been no fewer than 7 council meetings at which citizens commented on Rural Forestry lot clustering. 9. The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing related to the subject amendment on March 26, 2009. 10. Upon compliance with RCW 36.70A.130, Whatcom County shall be required to adopt and enforce ordinances and regulations for Class IV — General Forest Practices involving road construction or timber harvest on lands platted after January 1, 1960. Lots created by the clustering provision would be under the regulatory jurisdiction of Whatcom County, while lots created by the 20-acre exemption provision may remain under the jurisdiction of the Washington State Department of Natural Resources. 11. A reserve tract created through clustering would allow for management under a single ownership. 12. The clustering provision proposed for removal has no requirements that the reserve tract remain actively managed. 13. Clustering alone will not increase the likelihood of future growth. Only rezoning Rural Forestry District land, which would remove its designation as a zone for long-term forestry production and run counter to Comprehensive Plan goals and policies that express a desire for preservation of natural resource industries, would increase the likelihood of development beyond overall densities already provided. 14. A conservation easement, or similar tool, could be used to prevent future development on the reserve tract. 15. Clustering alone results in no increase in overall density, though the lots created by clustering are more concentrated than they would be through creation by 20-acre exemption. V. CONCLUSION The proposal meets all of the legal requirements as noted within the Findings of Fact and Reasons for Action. The proposed amendment is compatible with the Growth Management Act. The proposed amendment is both compatible and incompatible with Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies, along with policies within Whatcom County's County Wide Planning Policies. VI. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the Whatcom County Council for the proposed Whatcom County Code amendments. Staff also recommends that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation to the Whatcom County Council that when time and resources allow, the County should further investigate the feasibility of clustering in the Rural Forestry Zone, including creation of more adequate code language. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A — Proposed Rural Forestry District Code. 35 File #PLN2009-000XX Rural Forestry Lot Clustering Exhibit A Chapter 20.42 RURAL FORESTRY (RF) DISTRICT Sections: 20.42.010 Purpose. 20.42.050 Permitted uses. 20.42.100 Accessory uses. 20.42.130 Administrative approval uses. 20.42.150 Conditional uses. 20.42.200 Prohibited uses. 20.42.250 Minimum lot size and width. 20.42.251 Minimum lot size. 20.42.252 Maximum density and minimum lot size. 20.42.253 Minimum lot width and depth. 20.42.315 Repealed. 20.42.320 Reserve traet-. 20.42.330 Deleted. 20 42 350 Building setbacks 20.42.400 Height limitations. 20.42.450 Lot coverage. 20.42.550 Reforestation area. 20.42.650 Development criteria. 20.42.651 Plat language for proposed subdivisions. 20.42.652 Use of natural resources. 20.42.653 Landscaping. 20.42.654 Parking requirements. 20.42.655 Livestock regulations. 20.42.656 Domestic water supplies. 20.42.657 Drainage. 20.42.900 Conditional use permit criteria. 20.42.010 Purpose. March 17, 2009 Staff Report, Page 14 The purpose of this district is to implement the forestry designation of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan, established pursuant to RCW 36.70A.170, by providing the opportunity for nonindustrial landowners to manage their land for long-term productivity, and sustained use of forest resources. In addition, the district encourages the management of land for wildlife, aesthetics, and other noncommodity values. It also provides for uses that are compatible with these activities, while maintaining water quality and soil productivity. Lummi Island Scenic Estates shall be administered under the RR -I zone district regulations. (Ord. 2008-018 Exh. A, 2008; Ord. 2005-079 § 1, 2005; Ord. 2003-029 § 1 (Att. A § 6), 2003; Ord. 98-083 Exh. A § 66, 1998; Ord. 92-094, 1992; Ord. 91-023, 1991; Ord. 87-12, 1987; Ord. 87-11, 1987; Ord. 86-42, 1986). 36 File #PLN2009-000XX March 17, 2009 Rural Forestry Lot Clustering Staff Report, Page 15 20.42.050 Permitted uses. Unless otherwise provided herein, permitted, accessory and conditional uses shall be administered pursuant to the applicable provisions of Chapter 20.80 WCC (Supplementary Requirements) and Chapter 20.84 WCC (Variances, Conditional Uses, Administrative Approval Uses and Appeals), the Whatcom County SEPA Ordinance, the Whatcom County Subdivision Ordinance and the Whatcom County Shoreline Management Program. .051 The cultivation, harvest, and production of forest products or any forest crop, in accordance with the Forest Practice Act of 1974 and any regulations adopted pursuant thereto; and the cultivation, harvest and production of ferns, moss, boughs, bark, berries, nuts, tree fruits, tree seeds, nursery stock, and Christmas trees. .052 Agriculture, floriculture, horticulture, beekeeping; raising, keeping and feeding of domestic animals, poultry and livestock; and structures accessory to animal husbandry. .053 Operation of sawmills, chippers, shake and shingle mills, scaling stations; log dumps, sorting and storage areas; forest industry equipment maintenance buildings and storage yards, and forest industry residue dumps and other uses involved in the harvesting and primary processing of timber; provided, that all such uses within 1,000 feet of any existing Residential or Commercial Zone District as well as the Recreation and Open Space (ROS) District, or park, or recreation area shall be temporary and of less than 12 months' duration. (1) The intent of processing is initial reduction in bulk and/or to facilitate transport to secondary processing centers; and (2) All uses within 1,000 feet of a park, recreation area or zone district other than Rural, Agriculture or Industrial shall be temporary and of less than 12 months' duration. .054 The management and propagation of fish and wildlife. .055 Watershed management practices including erosion control measures, drainage control structures, vegetation management to improve runoff characteristics, weather stations, stream gauging stations, or watershed research facilities. .056 One single-family dwelling per legal lot of record. .057 Deleted by Ord. 2001-012. .058 Surface mining, rock crushing, washing and sorting subject to the Forest Practices Act (Chapter 76.09 RCW); provided, that administrative approval is required for accessory rock crushing activities located within 1,000 feet from a rural or residential district. .059 Repealed by Ord. 2000-006. .060 Living quarters for trail crews, fire crews, nursery crews, logging crews, maintenance crews and watchmen. 37 File #PLN2009-000XX March 17, 2009 Rural Forestry Lot Clustering Staff Report, Page 16 .061 Hydroelectric power generation facilities using only diversion structures creating impoundments less than three acres, and cogeneration facilities; provided, that the power shall be to serve and will be associated with a permitted or conditional use situated in the Forestry Zone District. 062 Storage of explosives operated in compliance with Chapter 70.74 RCW. .063 Trails, trailheads, restroom facilities and associated parking areas for no more than 30 vehicles. .064 Temporary dwelling units which have full living accommodations including sleeping, self- contained cooking, bathing, and toilet facilities where the plumbing is connected to permanent site sewage and water systems, including those travel trailers and recreational vehicles that meet the above description, for use by owners during the period of construction of a permanent dwelling while building permit is valid, not to exceed two years. .065 Private, noncommercial, recreation occupancy of a recreational vehicle; provided, that the following minimum requirements and standards are met and/or followed: (1) Maximum length of stay of any recreational vehicle on a lot shall not exceed a total of 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. (2) One recreational vehicle and one accessory guest RV per lot shall be allowed. If such lot is greater than five nominal acres, one additional guest RV may be allowed per each additional two acres of the subject lot. The total number of recreational vehicles on a single lot at one time.shall not exceed five. (3) In the case of a special event or occasion: (a) Any proponent of a temporary special event which requires a total allowable number of RVs that exceeds the standard maximum allowed shall file an affidavit with the department of planning and development services which specifies the nature of the special event, location, specified days of the proposed use and the sanitation and wastewater disposal facilities proposed for the event. (b) The duration of the temporary special event shall include the days the use is being set up and established as well as when the event actually takes place. (c) A parcel shall host no more than three temporary special events within a calendar year; provided, that the time periods specified in subsection (1) of this section are not exceeded. (4) 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 or shall provide documentation that wastewater was removed by a licensed sanitary disposal service. (5) All recreational vehicles shall be screened from neighboring properties not using RVs and from public roads. Such screening may consist of landscaped buffer areas, suitable native vegetation or a fence. WN File #PLN2009-000XX March 17, 2009 Rural Forestry Lot Clustering Staff Report, Page 17 (6) Lots shall not be leased or rented out on a daily or overnight basis for recreational use. (7) The locations of parked RVs on vacant lots shall observe normal building setback standards for a single-family residence. (8) 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. .066 Gravel bar scalping projects within the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Program. .067 Light industrial/manufacturing uses that were legal under concomitant agreement filed under Auditor File No. 940107190 (as revised under Auditor File No. _) prior to the effective adoption date of the county's Comprehensive Plan, May 20, 1997, will be considered permitted uses. Expansion will be allowed as a permitted use but will be limited to the land area zoned Light Impact Industrial on May 20, 1997, and must comply with applicable conditions and with the requirements of the Light Impact Industrial Zone where there is conflict with the requirements of the Rural Forestry Zone. .068 One one-story detached accessory storage building per lot; provided, that the floor area shall not exceed 200 square feet and shall only be used for personal storage and not for habitation or business; and provided further, that the storage building shall contain no indoor plumbing but may be served with electrical power for lighting. .069 Public forest preserves, wildlife reserves, natural systems education, and/or interpretive areas. .088 Adult family homes as defined in Chapter 70.128 RCW. .089 Boarding homes that are similar in size, facilities and occupancy to other residential structures permitted in the zoning district. .090 Mental health facilities that provide residential treatment and are similar in size, facilities and occupancy to other residential structures permitted in the zoning district. .091 Substance abuse facilities that provide residential treatment and are similar in size, facilities and occupancy to other residential structures permitted in the zoning district. (Ord. 2008-018 Exh. A, 2008; Ord. 2005-079 § 1, 2005; Ord. 2004-026 § 1, 2004; Ord. 2004-014 § 2, 2004; Ord. 2001-012 § 1, 2001; Ord. 2000-040 § 1, 2000; Ord. 2000-006 § 9, 2000; Ord. 99-062, 1999; Ord. 98-078 Exh. A, 1998; Ord. 97-069, 1997; Ord. 92-094, 1992; Ord. 92-079, 1992; Ord. 88-29, 1988; Ord. 87-23, 1987; Ord. 86-42, 1986). 20.42.100 Accessory uses. .101 Utilization of sewage sludge on land when regulated by a utilization permit issued by the Bellingham-Whatcom County district department of public health in accordance with WAC 173- 304-300. This would apply to any land owned or leased by the same operator. Utilization of sludge in the Lake Whatcom watershed is not allowed. 39 File #PLN2009-000XX Rural Forestry Lot Clustering 102 Uses incidental to the primary permitted uses. March 17, 2009 Staff Report, Page 18 .103 (1) The usual wholesale marketing activities associated with the agricultural, aquacultural, forestry, and mineral resource uses permitted in this district. (2) Retail marketing, by the operator, of Whatcom County products which originate from the permitted uses stated in WCC 20.42.050; provided: (a) Only one stand containing not more than 500 square feet of floor area shall be permitted; (b) Such stand shall be subject to the setback requirements of WCC 20.80.200; and (c) Such stand shall be provided with a sufficient area to permit at least five automobiles to park safely off the road right-of-way and to re-enter the traffic in a forward direction. .104 On -site treatment and storage facilities for hazardous wastes associated with outright permitted uses or approved conditional uses subject to the most current siting criteria under Chapter 173-303 WAC. On -site treatment and storage facilities for hazardous wastes are not allowed in the Lake Whatcom watershed. .105 Home occupations, when in compliance with the following: (1) The occupation or profession shall be carried out wholly within the principal or accessory buildings; and (2) Not more than two persons outside the immediate family shall be employed in the home occupation. (Ord. 2008-018 Exh. A, 2008; Ord. 2003-029 § 1 (Att. A § 13), 2003; Ord. 96-056 Att. A § J1, 1996; Ord. 92-094, 1992; Ord. 91-023, 1991; Ord. 89-10, 1989; Ord. 88-29, 1988; Ord. 87-84, 1987). 20.42.130 Administrative approval uses. The following uses are permitted subject to administrative approval pursuant to WCC 20.84.235. .131 A temporary second dwelling unit of no more than 1,248 square feet in floor area, in the form of a manufactured home, a fully serviced travel trailer or motor home, to provide: (1) A temporary dwelling space for family members who, due to professionally documented physical or mental disorders, or risks of such disorders, require supervision and care where such care is provided by members of the family who reside on the property; or (2) A temporary dwelling space for a person providing care for the resident owner of the subject property when said owner needs supervision and care as described in subsection (1) of this section. Approval Requirements: Administrative approval for temporary second dwelling units shall be approved if it is determined that the proposal meets the following requirements: W File #PLN2009-000XX Rural Forestry Lot Clustering March 17, 2009 Staff Report, Page 19 (1) Temporary second dwelling units shall only be permitted on fully serviced parcels on which the applicant can meet setback, ingress, egress, height restrictions, and lot coverage requirements. (2) The size of the temporary dwelling shall be appropriate to the use and size of the parcel and shall be limited so as to comply with the standards set forth in subsection (1) of this section. (3) The temporary home shall be connected to an approved water supply and adequate capacity sewage disposal system approved by the Whatcom County health department. (4) When care is no longer necessary, the temporary home shall be removed within 60 days. (5) The permit shall be valid for one year. The permit may be extended on a yearly basis; provided, that an affidavit is furnished by the permittee affirming that the circumstances allowing the original permit remain in effect. (6) A covenant shall be filed that restricts sale of the property while the temporary dwelling is in place. (7) The use will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses. (8) Evidence of adequate off-street parking space shall be provided. (9) There shall be no occupancy of the temporary dwelling outside the conditions under which the temporary dwelling is permitted pursuant to this section. (10) All mobile homes must demonstrate compliance with minimum HUD Fire Safety Standards and compliance with current Washington Administrative Code (WAC). Penalties: False statements on supporting documentation submitted with the application or failure to comply with any of the approval requirements may be cause for revocation of the permit and prosecution. .132 Accessory apartments or detached accessory dwelling units to single-family dwellings; provided, that all of the following approval requirements are met: (1) In addition to an existing or permitted dwelling, there shall be no more than one accessory apartment or detached accessory dwelling unit per lot; (2) The owner(s) of the single-family lot upon which the accessory apartment or detached accessory dwelling unit is located shall occupy as their primary domicile at least one of the dwelling units on that lot; (3) Proof that adequate provisions have been made for potable water, wastewater disposal, and stormwater runoff for the additional dwelling unit must be obtained prior to application for a building permit; 41 File #PLN2009-000XX Rural Forestry Lot Clus March 17, 2009 Staff Report, Page 20 (4) There shall be only one front entrance to the house visible from the front yard and street for accessory apartments and only one additional entrance visible from the front yard for detached accessory dwelling units; (5) Accessory apartments and detached accessory units shall be clearly a subordinate part of an existing residence; (6) In no case shall an accessory apartment or detached dwelling unit be larger than 1,248 square feet in floor area; (7) Long plats and short plats which are granted after January 25, 1994, shall be marked, specifically designating lots allowed to be developed with accessory apartments or detached accessory dwelling units at the option of the developer for future individual owners. Accessory apartments and detached accessory dwelling units shall be prohibited on: (a) All lots in long plats which received preliminary plat approval after January 25, 1994, unless those lots have been specifically marked for such use through the long plat process; (b) All lots within short plats which received approval after January 25, 1994, unless those lots have been specifically marked for such use through the short plat process; (8) A common driveway serving both the existing unit and any accessory unit shall be used to the greatest extent possible; (9) A deed restriction is recorded with the Whatcom County auditor prior to building permit issuance, stating: (a) Detached accessory dwelling units and associated land cannot be sold separately from the original dwelling, except in the event the zoning permits such a land division; and (b) One of the dwellings must be the primary domicile of the owner; (10) Outside of an urban growth area, the minimum lot size for detached accessory units shall be 20 acres; (11) Accessory apartments and detached accessory dwelling units to single-family dwellings are allowed within the Lake Whatcom watershed, only under the following circumstances: (a) Development of the parcel with the primary residence and accessory apartment or detached accessory dwelling shall conform to the density of the zoning district in which it is located. Adjacent properties in the same ownership may be bound by covenant to comply with the underlying zoning density; and (b) All of the above approval requirements shall be met for so long as the accessory unit remains; (12) Detached accessory units shall be located closer to the primary unit than to any adjoining property line unless site constraints require location closer to the property line. If an accessory 42 File #PLN2009-000XX Rural Forestry Lot Clustering March 17, 2009 Staff Report, Page 21 unit is located closer to an adjacent property line than to the primary dwelling or within 50 feet of an adjoining property, the applicant must provide a statement of nonobjection from the adjacent property owner and must screen the unit to minimize visual impacts; (13) All mobile homes must demonstrate compliance with minimum HUD Fire Safety Standards and compliance with Washington Administrative Code (WAC). .133 Surface mining subject to Washington State's Surface Mining Act (Chapter 78.44 RCW), and accessory washing, sorting, and rock crushing, when within a Mineral Resource Land Special District subject to the requirements of Chapter 20.73 WCC and all other applicable regulations. .135 Cottage industries employing no more than two people on -site, other than family members residing on the premises; provided, that in addition to the criteria found in WCC 20.84.220 and 20.97.087: (1) The zoning administrator, at his or her discretion, may place limitations on the square footage in an existing or new structure used for a cottage industry and construction of new buildings to house said activity shall not, in any case, exceed 2,500 square feet of total floor area. The total land area used for buildings and outside storage or other uses related to the cottage industry shall not exceed 10,000 square feet or 25 percent of the site, whichever is less. (2) The parcel size shall not be less than one acre. (3) In the event materials will be stored outdoors, the zoning administrator shall require adequate landscaping, screening, or other devices in order that the material will not be visible by surrounding uses or roads. (4) One nonilluminated sign, not to exceed 16 square feet in size, mounted on the property, is permitted. A larger sign up to 32 square feet may be approved by the hearing examiner as a conditional use. (5) Seasonal employees working less than 21 days per year will not be counted as employees if they are engaged in work directly related to agriculture or forestry. .136 Forestry related/wood based cottage industries which employ no more than 10 on -site people other than family members residing on the premises, including primary or low intensity secondary processing of timber not permitted in WCC 20.42.053, including fabrication of furniture and fixtures, partitions, shelves and lockers, manufacture, processing, treatment and fabrication of lumber, millwork, miscellaneous wood products, and other wooden building and roofing materials, excluding pulp, paper or plywood mills, conducted in structure(s) other than the dwelling unit; provided, that: (1) The administrator, at his discretion, in consideration of the surrounding development patterns, property uses and size of the lot on which the proposed cottage industry is locating, may place limitations on the square footage used in an existing or new structure used for a cottage industry. The construction of new buildings to house said activity shall not, in any case, exceed 4,000 square feet of total floor area. 43 File #PLN2009-000XX Rural Forestry Lot Clustering March 17, 2009 Staff Report. Paee 22 (2) The parcel must access from a collector arterial or higher standard street (this could include shared access). (3) Minimum parcel size is one acre. Minimum lot size is five acres for buildings which exceed 2,500 square feet of total floor area and/or are constructed of materials which are not of similar materials or scale to a single-family residence. (4) Minimum open space requirement is 40 percent. Adequate buffering is required for both visual screening and noise reduction and must comply with WCC 20.80.345. The administrator may modify the required buffer widths, either reduction or enlargement, on a site -specific basis. A finding regarding the rationale for such modification will be entered into the record. Site development should maintain the existing natural vegetation to the greatest extent possible. (5) All work is conducted within a building, except that uses which are complementary to the Rural Forestry District and which are determined to be harmonious with adjacent parcels may be allowed outdoors. (6) In the event materials will be stored outdoors, the administrator may require adequate landscaping, screening or other devices in order that the material will not be visible by surrounding uses or roads. (7) For parcels visible from a state scenic highway, the administrator shall, at his discretion, require additional measures or restrictions to protect scenic vistas. (8) The operation of the business must comply with county/state noise, air quality and all other applicable regulations. (9) There is no polluting or hazardous industrial discharge to a public sewer or septic system. (10) One nonilluminated freestanding sign, visible from the road, and not exceeding six feet in height, may be permitted. One additional nonilluminated sign may be attached to the building for a maximum total signage of 16 square feet. No portion of any sign shall extend above the lowest portion of the roof. (11) Not more than 10 nonfamily members not residing on the premises can be employed on site. (12) An application packet shall be submitted on forms provided by county and must provide a site plan, drawn to scale, which shows the location of existing and proposed structures, includes dimensions of new and proposed structures to property lines, distance to adjacent structures, uses of adjacent parcels, existing vegetative cover and proposed modifications to vegetative cover of proposed site, location of permanent buffers and proposed plant materials for the permanent buffer, including species, sizes and spacing. (Ord. 2008-018 Exh. A, 2008; Ord. 2006-061 § 1 (Att. A)(7), 2006; Ord. 2005-079 § 1, 2005; Ord. 2001-012 § 1, 2001; Ord. 98-078 Exh. A, 1998; Ord. 98-018 § 1, 1998; Ord. 97-069, 1997). 20.42.150 Conditional uses. The conditional uses listed herein shall be administered pursuant to the applicable provisions of Chapter 20.80 WCC (Supplementary Requirements) and Chapter 20.84 WCC (Variances, File #PLN2009-000XX March 17, 2009 Rural Forestry Lot Clustering Staff Report, Page 23 Conditional Uses, Administrative Approval Uses and Appeals), the Whatcom County SEPA Ordinance, the Whatcom County Subdivision Ordinance and the Whatcom County Shoreline Management Program. Applicable conditional use permit criteria are established in the provisions of WCC 20.42.900 and will not be subject to the conditional use criteria provided for in WCC 20.84.220. .151 Construction and operation of water diversion structures, impoundment dams and hydroelectric generating facilities not permitted under WCC 20.42.061. 152 Bed and breakfast establishments. .153 Surface mining, rock crushing, and accessory washing and sorting, subject to the conditions in WCC 20.36.159. .154 Operation of indoor or outdoor parks and recreation facilities including camps, community centers, campgrounds, activity centers, marinas, riding academies, developed trailheads with more than 30 parking spaces and off -road vehicle parks; provided, that in the Lake Whatcom watershed riding academies, marinas, recreational vehicle and off -road vehicle parks are not allowed. .155 The operation of facilities intended to provide education related to forestry, natural resources and wildlife and the purpose of this district, including but not limited to demonstration forests and conservation laboratories, educational meeting facilities and related uses including rental cabins or other lodging structures, cooking and dining facilities, retail sales or meeting supplies and gifts, in the Foothills Subarea, South Fork Valley, the Newhalem Exclave and the Baker Lake Exclave, provided the following standards are met: (1) Density shall not exceed one sleeping unit per one gross acre or a maximum of 50 beds for the entire development. (2) Each cabin shall have a maximum of three sleeping units. (3) Must be located with vehicular access fronting on paved county roads or private roads improved to county standards. (4) Front yard setback shall be 75 feet, with 100 feet side and rear yard setbacks to adjacent properties. (5) Lot coverage for all facilities, including the rental cabins, shall not exceed 20 percent, clustered on no more than 50 percent of the property. .156 Aircraft landing areas when solely for personal (aircraft based at those landing areas are owned or controlled by the landowner or tenant and subject to any limitations deemed necessary by the hearing examiner) or forest management uses; provided the centerline of any such landing area shall not be located within 500 feet of any zone boundary other than a Commercial Forestry Zone, property line, building, or structure; except that a legal affidavit from adjacent property owner(s) allowing all, or a portion, of that 500 feet as a recorded easement on their property, presented as part of a conditional use permit application, shall be acceptable. The surface of any 45 File #PLN2009-000XX March 17, 2009 Rural Forestry Lot Clustering Staff Report, Page 24 such landing area shall be grass or sod and not longer than 2,500 feet. It shall be unlighted and for daytime use only. Handling and storage of fuel and bulk chemicals associated with forest management on or near the landing area, and fuels and lubricants associated with the operation of personal use aircraft, will be stored and handled in accordance with pertinent state and county codes. Notification of conditional use permit application hearing shall go, by first class mail, to residents within 1,000 feet from any point on a proposed aircraft landing area; the applicant shall pay the cost of such mailings. 157 The operation of fur farms and kennels. 158 Major utility and communication facilities. .159 Primary or low intensity, secondary processing facilities of timber not permitted in WCC 20.42.053, including fabrication of furniture and fixtures, partitions, shelves and lockers, manufacture, processing, treatment and fabrication of lumber, millwork, miscellaneous wood products, and other wooden building, roofing and construction materials and building material yards, if screened by a fence and/or vegetation as specified in WCC 20.80.355; excluding pulp or paper mills. The conditional use provisions are applicable for proposals which include structures that exceed 4,000 square feet and employ more than 10 nonfamily members. 162 Asphalt and concrete batch plants, when within an MRL Special District. .163 The permanent alteration or removal of more than 20 percent of the lot area, excluding natural meadows, bogs, surface waters, and rock outcrops, from the production of forest products when not otherwise authorized by WCC 20.42.450. .164 Cottage industries as defined by WCC 20.97.087, excluding those allowed in WCC 20.42.13 5, and which employ not more than four people outside the family conducted in structure(s) other than the dwelling unit. Such activities will comply with all other provisions of WCC 20.36.161(1) through (5). .165 Public facilities for emergency -related health and safety purposes, such as firehalls and Washington State Department of Transportation satellite road safety facilities. 166 Shooting ranges. 185 Type I solid waste handling facilities. 186 Type II solid waste handling facilities. .187 Mitigation banks as a form of compensatory mitigation for wetland and habitat conservation area impacts when permitted in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 16.16 WCC; provided, applications for mitigation banks shall be processed as a major development project pursuant to Chapter 20.88 WCC. (Ord. 2008-018 Exh. A, 2008; Ord. 2005-068 § 2, 2005; Ord. 2004-041 § 1, 2004; Ord. 2004-026 § 1, 2004; Ord. 2004-014 § 2, 2004; Ord. 2001-012 § 1, 2001; Ord. 2000-064 § 1, 2000; Ord. 99-031, 1999; Res. 99-010 Exh. A, 1999; Ord. 98-078 Exh. File #PLN2009-000XX March 17, 2009 Rural Forestry Lot Clustering Staff Report, Page 25 A, 1998; Ord. 97-069, 1997; Ord. 96-056 Att. A §§ J2, J3, 1996; Ord. 93-076, 1993; Ord. 92- 094, 1992; Ord. 92-079, 1992; Ord. 91-013, 1991; Ord. 88-29, 1988; Ord. 86-42, 1986). 20.42.200 Prohibited uses. .201 All other uses. .202 Adult businesses. (Ord. 2008-018 Exh. A, 2008; Ord. 99-070 § 2, 1999; Ord. 92-094, 1992). 20.42.250 Minimum lot size and width. 20.42.251 Minimum lot size. (1) For the purpose of creating new residential building lots within the Forestry District, one land use density is provided. The minimum lot size requirements for new residential construction vary ereated new building lots, the minimum lot size- shall be 20 nominal acres or 1 /32 of a section. When the eluster- subdivisien method is used, the minimum lot size is based on eensideration of on site wastewater- disposah (2) Divisions of land for nonresidential purposes shall have a minimum lot size of 20 acres. (Ord. 2008-018 Exh. A, 2008; Ord. 96-056 Att. A § J4, 1996; Ord. 92-094, 1992; Ord. 86-42, 1986). 20.42.252 Maximum density and minimum lot size. Gross Density Minimum Lot Size Min. Reserve Area (Cluste Conventional Cluste Exempt Caste 1 dwelling 20 acres 1 awe 20 aGres 8"0 unit/20 acres (Ord. 2008-018 Exh. A, 2008; Ord. 92-096, 1992; Ord. 92-094, 1992; Ord. 86-42, 1986). 47 File #PLN2009-000XX Rural Forestry Lot Clustering 20.42.253 Minimum lot width and depth. March 17, 2009 Staff Report, Page 26 Width at Street Line Minimum Mean Depth Conventional Cluster Exempt Cluster 535 7V 535 100 * a 30 on cul_de_san Gn —v�rrr Width at Building Line Minimum Mean Depth Conventional GluSte Exemptduster 270 30 (Ord. 2008-018 Exh. A, 2008; Ord. 92-096, 1992; Ord. 92-094, 1992; Ord. 86-42, 1986). will 0. i'Imokm-i-C PM P Will Z File #PLN2009-000XX March 17, 2009 Rural Forestry Lot Clustering Staff Report, Page 27 0-MA ME .. [palm 0 �. a. it — family dwelling unit; b. it has developable building ing sites r-em i i g, File #PLN2009-000XX March 17, 2009 Rural Forestry Lot Clustering Staff Report, Page 28 A. l. - • -9. 20.42.330 Planned unit development. Deleted by Ord. 96-056. (Ord. 92-094, 1992; Ord. 86-42, 1986). 20.42.350 Building setbacks. Building setbacks shall be administered pursuant to WCC 20.80.200 (Setback requirements). Building setbacks for parcels of less than five nominal acres shall be administered pursuant to WCC 20.80.256(4). (Ord. 2008-018 Exh. A, 2008; Ord. 2003-029 § 1 (Att. A § 2), 2003; Ord. 99-0080, 1999; Ord. 99-0058; Ord. 92-094, 1992; Ord. 86-42, 1986). 20.42.400 Height limitations. No residential structures or buildings accessory thereto with the exception of barns and silos shall exceed a height of 35 feet. (Ord. 2008-018 Exh. A, 2008; Ord. 92-094, 1992). 20.42.450 Lot coverage. No more than 20 percent of the lot area shall be permanently altered or removed from production of forest products, excluding natural meadows, bogs, surface water and rock outcrops, unless authorized as a conditional use; or „ loss the lot is oreatedthrough the clusterin—. ^^. .^� & 3A'-GC 20.42.300 or the planned unit development provision of Chapter 20.85 WCC, in which case, no structure or combination of structures, including accessory buildings, shall occupy or cover more than 35 percent of the lot. (Ord. 2008-018 Exh. A, 2008; Ord. 92-094, 1992; Ord. 86- 42, 1986). 20.42.550 Reforestation area. Upon completion of forest harvest operations, the highest priority for reforestation shall be given to that land within 100 feet of another zone district. Reforestation shall utilize seedlings or whips and shall be consistent with the Forest Practice Act of 1974, as amended. (Ord. 2008-018 Exh. A, 2008; Ord. 92-094, 1992; Ord. 86-42, 1986). 50 File #PLN2009-000XX March 17, 2009 Rural Forestry Lot Clustering Staff Report, Page 29 20.42.650 Development criteria. (Ord. 2008-018 Exh. A, 2008; Ord. 96-056 Att. A § Al, 1996). 20.42.651 Plat language for proposed subdivisions. When a proposed subdivision, binding site plan, short subdivision or exempt land division will be located adjacent to or across a right-of-way from an existing Forestry District, 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 of such adjacent properties, or from Whatcom County, arising out of any reasonable and lawful activity on said forestry lands which occurs in the normal course of their established use. The agreement shall appear as a covenant or deed restriction upon the plat, tract or instrument of conveyance and shall run with the land. (Ord. 2008-018 Exh. A, 2008; Ord. 99-058, 1999; Ord. 92-015, 1992; Ord. 87-12, 1987; Ord. 87- 11, 1987). 20.42.652 Use of natural resources. All discretionary project permits for land on or within one-half mile of the area designated as Agriculture, Rural, Commercial Forestry or Rural Forestry or within 300 feet of an area designated as Mineral Resource Lands in the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan, or upon which farm operations are being conducted, shall be subject to the right to farm, right to practice forestry and mineral land disclosure policies contained in WCC Title 14, Use of Natural Resources. (Ord. 2008-018 Exh. A, 2008; Ord. 98-083 Exh. A § 48, 1998; Ord. 96-056 Att. A § A2, 1996; Ord. 92-094, 1992; Ord. 92-015, 1992). 20.42.653 Landscaping. Refer to WCC 20.80.300 for landscaping requirements. (Ord. 2008-018 Exh. A, 2008; Ord. 92- 094, 1992; Ord. 89-117, 1989). 20.42.654 Parking requirements. Parking shall conform to the requirements of WCC 20.80.500. However, recreation vehicles and boat parking and storage shall be limited to side and rear yards. (Ord. 2008-018 Exh. A, 2008; Ord. 92-094, 1992). 20.42.655 Livestock regulations. The keeping of livestock shall be administered pursuant to WCC 20.80.800 (Supplementary requirements). (Ord. 2008-018 Exh. A, 2008; Ord. 92-094, 1992). 20.42.656 Domestic water supplies. Domestic water supply sources shall not be located within 100 feet of the property boundary or on an adjacent property without written consent of the adjacent property owner. (Ord. 2008-018 Exh. A, 2008; Ord. 92-094, 1992; Ord. 86-42, 1986). 51 File #PLN2009-000XX March 17, 2009 Rural Forestry Lot Clustering Staff Report, Page 30 20.42.657 Drainage. All development activity within Whatcom County shall be subject to the stormwater management provisions of the Whatcom County Development Standards unless specifically exempted. No project permit shall be issued prior to meeting submittal requirements relating to stormwater management in the appropriate chapters of the Whatcom County Development Standards. (Ord. 2008-018 Exh. A, 2008; Ord. 96-056 Att. A § A2, 1996; Ord. 94-022, 1994). 20.42.900 Conditional use permit criteria. .901 The conditional uses listed in WCC 20.42.150 shall be subject to the following Forestry conditional use criteria. Said criteria listed in WCC 20.42.902 shall supersede the criteria listed in WCC 20.84.220. .902 Before approving an application for a conditional use permit, the hearing examiner shall ensure that any specific standards of the use district defining the conditional use are fulfilled and shall find adequate evidence showing that the proposed conditional use at the proposed location will: (1) Be in accordance with all applicable local and state laws, standards and regulations; (2) Be reasonably compatible with the surrounding environment and with the policies of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan; (3) Not generate traffic in excess of capacity of the public road system at reasonable safety and service levels; (4) Not create unreasonable demands for public expenditures to provide services, facilities, or utilities beyond those which are normally required for permitted uses in the Forestry District; (5) Provide entrances to public roads or private roads open to public use in accordance with applicable county or state standards; (6) Provide reasonable sound and sight buffering so as not to detract from normal use of surrounding property, public and private roads, and trails open to public use; (7) Be located a reasonable distance from areas of actual or potential natural hazard; (8) Not unreasonably contribute to actual or potential water quality or quantity problems; (9) Be designed to provide reasonable safety from fire hazard; (10) Not unreasonably interfere with any territorial or otherwise significant view from surrounding property and public roads; 52 File #PLN2009-000XX March 17, 2009 Rural Forestry Lot Clustering Staff Report, Page 31 (11) Not remove areas of native vegetation which protect shorelines and streambanks from erosion, except as necessary for such uses as culverts, bridges, boat ramps, recreation areas and stream bank stabilization projects; and (12) Include reasonable soil erosion plans necessary to prevent soil, organic debris and other pollutants from entering streams, ponds, or lakes. (Ord. 2008-018 Exh. A, 2008; Ord. 92-094, 1992). 53 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE 6 WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION March 26, 2009 Reaular Meetin on an individual basis or that the benefit of it would somehow overcome any concerns you have about it. Did you think about that issue at all? Stiles: Yes. In the residential areas family daycare homes are the only ones that are not accessory uses. Conditional use permits are required for the mini day care centers and day care centers. Stalheim: The RCW's prohibit us from treating it as anything other than a residence if they have six or fewer children. Belisle: Does anyone check these homes to make sure they are suitable? Stalheim: The Health Department regulates and I believe the larger ones are regulated by the State Depart of Health. Belisle: How many of these little day cares are out there? Stalheim: The smaller ones are purposely set up to be under the zoning radar screen. Webb: The larger ones do have to meet certain requirements. They usually start out as a small day care, do that for a while and work :up to the larger center. That's when more of the inspections come into play. The hearing was opened to the public. There was no public testimony. Work Session Mann moved to accept the recommendation for approval. Wilson seconded. Roll Call Vote: Ayes — Belisle, Hunter, Lesow, Mann, Steensma, Wilson; Nays — 0; Abstain — 0; Absent — Burdge, Menzies, Melious. The motion carried. Public Hearing File #PLN2009-00011 - Proposed amendments to the Whatcom County Code 20.42 the Rural Forestry District. The proposed changes would make the provisions from interim ordinances Ord. 2006-00045, Ord. 2006-00057, Ord. 2007-00028, Ord. 2007-00064, Ord. 2008-00018, and Ord. 2008-00045, permanent. These changes remove language referencing Lot Clustering from subsections WCC 20.42.130, 20.42.251-253, 20.42.300- 320, and 20.42.450. Lot clustering would no longer be allowed in the Rural Forestry District. David Stalheim presented the staff report. This request is based on a long history of interim and emergency ordinances by the County Council. They feel clustering in the Rural Forestry zone does not belong. Staff 54 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE 7 WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION March 26, 2009 Regular Meeting recommends approval of the amendments and also the recommendation that when time and resources allow that staff will continue to look at this issue to study the feasibility of clustering in the Rural Forestry zone. Steensma: When will that happen? Stalheim: When time allows. Not this year. Stalheim: In Growth Management there are three classes of land. Resource lands, Rural lands and Urban lands. When I First looked at this I wondered if.we are classifying Rural lands that have forestry or if it's Forest land with rural character. This is classified as Resource land. The Rural Forestry zone is intended as long term forestry lands. On October 2006 the Council adopted an emergency ordinance then every six months they renewed it as an interim ordinance that bans clustering within the Rural Forestry district. When I first got here I started looking into what was going on and why it kept being renewed. In May 2008 the issue came to the Planning Commission. You stated that there should be some additional studies done because clustering may have some potential. I took that back to the Council, who agreed to study it, but didn't fund it for this year. I then took it back to the Council asking what they -wanted to do with it and they said they would like the Planning Commission to make a recommendation to stop having interim ordinances and make it permanent. The Comprehensive Plan has quite a few goals and policies that draw different kinds of conclusions. The County Wide Planning Policies also have policies with respect to natural resource industries and the environment. The GMA also has those kinds of goals and policies. When the GMA was first passed there were no provisions for innovative techniques within resource lands. It wasn't clear. At one point there had been a series of GMHB decisions that stated you can't do cluster development within resource lands. That was problematic in some areas. The GMA was then amended to allow cluster development but it was only done for agricultural lands. I don't know if it was purposely left out of forest land or not. This is something to take into consideration. There is a feeling with the Council, and perhaps the Planning Commission, to look into this more but we don't want to keep renewing the ordinance and leave the feeling that lot clustering in the Rural Forestry should be allowed. Most people agree that the existing standards don't work. Therefore we believe at this time making this ban permanent is the best thing and we can always take this issue up again when time and resources allow. Lesow: Do I understand that we aren't budgeted for staff nor a consultant to work on this? Stalheim: That's correct. Steensma: When did the County begin clustering in Rural Forestry? 55 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE 8 WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION March 26, 2009 Regular Meeting Stalheim: It's been happening since the 1980's. Belisle: One of the things that clustering does is protect the underlying zoning. There are places that are unbuildable. Is there a way to survey the land to decide where it's best to build? Can those unbuildable areas be removed from the underlying zoning? Stalheim: What we are going to get is 20 acre lots. It may not fit the landscape well both from a development or forestry perspective. 20 acre lots are exempt from subdivision review. Steensma: Is clustering working in the Agricultural zone,?. Stalheim: They don't seem to be working for agricultural purposes. Lesow: In the staff report is a statement sayingthat by removing the lot clustering provision there are likely to be more interactions between humans and threatened and endangered species. Is there some science to back up that assertion or is that anecdotal? Stalheim: I think that's anecdotal. Lesow: In terms of managing it at a landscape level there doesn't appear to be much enforcement. Is there an enforcement rr e.chanism. through the Planning Department, to ensure that the reserve is being managed to the proper level? qi Stalheim: No. That would be a challenge. Mann: You mentioned that no one likes the current clustering ordinance. What is it that people don't like? Stalheim: There are two issues that come up. One is the ratio of the forest reserve to the development. Maybe the development size should be smaller. The other thing I have heard is there are no provisions for what happens on the reserve to make sure it's managed for forestry purposes. The hearing was opened to the public. Larry Helm, Whatcom County: I got involved in this issue about four years ago when the Iverson and Sygitowitz group was going to put a cluster on top of Squalicum Mountain, which is close to me. They ended up putting that on top of the mountain, on a flat area. There were road issues, water issues, etc. What's important to me is that I moved here for a rural lifestyle. I moved here to raise some cows on a small operation. I enjoy that. Now I have a perfectly dark valley, of no noise or anything. When that cluster goes in I've got light noise, the works. I'm back to an urban environment. When I moved there it was agreed that the land would be 5 and 20 acres. Now I'm looking at'/2 acres and 64 houses. There is a whole different attitude of people when they are on a 1/2 acre lot versus a 5 or 20 acre lot. I think there is a lot of science to that. When you put a cluster in a rural 56 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE 9 WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION March 26, 2009 ular Meetin environment you start the urban process.. People want urban services in these developments. I would encourage you to pass this. If you want urban services live in the city. Lesow: Do you consider the clustering to be helpful for the interaction between the humans and endangered species? Helm: No. There are bear, cougar, etc. barely surviving. The wildlife corridor goes over the top of the mountain, in a little saddle, where they are going to put the houses. The animals are going to go on the least grade where you are going. to want to put the roads. Mann: If you have the 32 acres of houses, with one road into it, and the rest is untouched isn't that better than having a house on every 20 acres?\ Helm: I would rather see one house per 20 acres because of the impact. If you put all of those houses in one area you have created a mini city. You block the animal:' migration. You are putting a huge amount of services in a very restricted area versus spreading it out over several hundred acres. But that's not the issue. It's the type of people you get. If you get someone who buys 20 acres he has a commitment to take care of that property. If you put someone on a 1/2 acre cluster they aren't going to do any forestry because they don't have enough land. Virginia Watson, Whatcom County: I got involved in this because of the same development Mr. Helm spoke about. I think staff did an excellent job with the staff report. One of the points in the staff report is a point I,also want to make. It is about how the State legislature says there can be clustering on agricultural land but not on forest land. The law is clear that you can't cluster on forest land so I'm not really sure why it's in the staff report to study this issue further. I understand the need to study it for the agricultural land because it's allowed there. I have a handout for you with statements from four of the County Council members stating they don't think clustering should be allowed in the Lake Whatcom watershed. Laurie Caskey-Schreiber said that cluster development gives people a false sense of being in an urban area and they then expect urban services. I have included GMA references that I feel support the ban on clustering in the rural forest zone. We are all bound by this State law. On Squalicum Mountain we do need the forest to protect the Lake Whatcom reservoir. When the project on Squalicum Mountain was first brought up the Planning Director at that time, Hal Hart, told us that building on mountain tops was going to be the next new wave. 7 out of 10 people state they want the County to retain its rural and agricultural character. As this development moves ahead every lot is going to require a well that will penetrate the aquifer that supplies the Lake Whatcom reservoir. Those wells will affect that reservoir and those houses will pollute the lake. Lesow: I see you have a petition with 238 signatures. Were these taken over a period of time? Watson: It was over a period of time. 57 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 RECORD OF PROCEEDIIVGS OF THE 10 WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION March 26, 2009 ular Meetin Mann: You can have a cluster and leave the rest as one contiguous piece of property or have the houses spread out. How is one so clearly environmentally better than the other? Watson: I don't believe the natural environment would support the full buildout. They probably won't wind up with 64 houses. I also believe that if the cluster went through that there will not be sufficient water to support it which will eventually create a public health emergency. I also think that development follows infrastructure and once that comes in the whole area will be developed. The hearing was closed to the public. Work Session Wilson moved to accept the staff recommendations. Belisle seconded. Wilson: Does the GMA actually prohibit clustering in the Rural Forestry zone? Stalheim: I think there is a valid argument that it could be interpreted that way. Lesow made a friendly amendment to vote on each of the two recommendations separately. Wilson accepted the amendment, Belisle did not accept the amendment. Hunter: While I think we should agree to the first past of this and forward it to the Council I think the second part of this is a waste of time. There. has been ample opportunity to look at this issue. Until.I am confident that State law would allow clustering in forest lands I don't see any point in trying to, promote an investigation into that. I think it should be done but the State, needs to act on this first. Lesow: I haven't heard anything from the public asking for further study of this issue. That's why I don't favor voting for the second part of this. Belisle: I'm a really strong proponent of clustering until you look at the history of it. It doesn't work. There are no design standards that protect the resource lands. I'm not sure that we, as a County, have the strength to stand up to pressure to change that. Belisle made a friendly amendment to vote on each of the two recommendations separately. Vote in favor of the first recommendation to move this forward to Council and not have the Planning Department review the clustering issue in the future. Wilson accepted the amendment. Roll Call Vote: Ayes - Belisle, Hunter, Lesow, Mann, Steensma, Wilson; Nays - 0; Abstain - 0; Absent - Burdge, Melious, Menzies. The Motion Carried. Public Hearing File# CMP2007-00014 - A proposed amendment to Chapter Four of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan and the Birch Bay Subarea Plan regarding levels of fire protection WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 2009-218 CLEARANCES Initial Date Date Received in Council Office Agenda Date Assigned to: Finance & Originator., 4/17/09 R E C E� V E D 4/28/09 Council 5/ 12/09 Finance & Division Head: APR 2 0 2009 Council Dept Head: Prosecutor. WHATCOM COUNTY Purchasin / u r 4/17/09 COUNCILExecutive: .V - 0 TITLE OP DOCUMENT: Bid 08-57 Truck Mounted Ditching Machine ATTACHMENTS: Memos from Finance and Public Works SEPA review required? ( ) Yes (x) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing ? ( ) Yes ( x ) NO SEPA review completed? ( ) Yes (x ) NO Requested Date: 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 RC W or WCC as appropriate. Be clear in explaining the intent of the action.) The Public Works is requesting approval to use the pricing from Bid 08-57 to purchase a replacement truck mounted ditching machine. The vendor, Pape' Machinery is willing to honor the 2008 pricing for a new 2009 unit. This is a planned purchase and funds are in the Equipment Services budget. COMMITTEE ACTION. COUNCIL ACTION: 4/28/2009: Held on committee 4/28/2009: Council held for two weeks. Related County Contract #: Related File Numbers: Ordinance or Resolution Number. 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.us/council. 59 WHATCOM COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Whatcom County Courthouse 311 Grand Avenue, Suite 108 Bellingham, WA 98225-4083 DDesler@co.whatcom.wa.us DEWEY G. DESLER Director DATE: 17 April 2009 TO: Pete Kremen, County Executive FROM: Brad Bennett, Administrative Services Finance Manager SUBJECT: Truck —Mounted Ditching Machine ■ Background & Purpose FINANCE/ACCOUN-rING Whatcom County Courthouse 311 Grand Avenue, Suite 503 Bellingham, WA 98225-4038 Finance@co.whatcom.wa.us BRAD BENNETT Manager Public Works is requesting approval to use the pricing from Bid 08-57 to purchase a replacement truck mounted ditching machine. The vendor, Pape' Machinery is willing to honor the 2008 bid price, which is noted below. IuF�<l��'', � 55 . ,t: � -. 3'*b s�'����,et�+�...?y � .y � . .��YE'F f@ _ �� F � � � f+`ie�i, •�; :. g1�PjY - p ('{� I� �, ,� y� }� ,.h��, ��y - ;°�•t�"�€)E.."�'^'ri.. 3ip,.'°.... ." ��„�.,rv}� r' °{ �514 �l� *` y .;..v� ■ Funding This is a planned expenditure and funds for this purchase were approved in the current Equipment Services budget. I concur with this request. Admin. Services Finance Manager Approved as recommended: County Executive Date of Council Action Administration Facilities Management Finance/Accounting Human Resources Information Technology County Residents (360) 676-6717 (360) 676-6746 (360) 676-6734 (360) 676-6802 (360) 676-7684 (360) 398-1310 Fax (360) 676-6775 Fax (360) 676-6789 Fax (360) 738-4553 Fax (360) 738-2521 Fax (360) 676-7727 TTY (360) 738-455560 EQUIPMENT SERVICES DIVISION WHATCOM COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT FRANK M. ABART Director MEMORANDUM 901 W. Smith Road Bellingham, WA 98226 Phone (360) 676-6759 Fax (360) 380-8115 Eric L. Schlehuber, Division Manager TO: Brad Bennett, AS Finance Manag r THROUGH: Frank M. Abart, PW Director FROM: Eric L. Schlehuber, PW Equipment Services Manage Mary A. Green, PW Maintenance & Operations Superintendent RE: Bid #08-57, Truck -Mounted Ditching Machine DATE: April 2, 2009 ■ Requested Action After researching the costs for a truck -mounted ditching machine, I am requesting Executive and Council approval to purchase one 2009 Gradall XL3100 Ill from the sole responsive bidder, Pape' Machinery, Inc., in the amount of $286,168.75 to replace the following: DEPT; REPLACE-I.INIT # MAKE I MODEL EST. HOURS PW I M&O 358 1989 Gradall G3WD 4X4 24,013.0 ■ Background and Purpose This unit was approved as a replacement in the 2009-2010 Equipment Rental and Revolving Capital Equipment Budget. Per Council directive to extend the life of equipment, the replacement schedule for this type of equipment is approximately 10 years. This unit is approximately 20 years old, which adheres to this directive. The above listed department will use this unit in the performance of county road maintenance. Bids were duly advertised for a truck -mounted ditching machine in 2008, which resulted in the awarding of Bid 08-57 Truck -Mounted Ditching Machine. One bid was received Tuesday, July 8, 2008. The original bid award (AB2008-317) received unanimous executiveicwuncil approval on September 9, 2008 at the Regular County Council Meeting. This contractor has been able to work with the factory to be able to honor their 2008 bid price (see attached). Current new bid pricing would be subject to an 8% increase, which equates to a savings of approximately $20,720.00 for Whatcom County. Listed below is the detailed bid tabulation for the sole responsive bid that meets minimum specifications. VENDOR MAKE f MODEL BASE PRICE.-OTAI: OP110NS SALES TAX (ga5ojo) TOTAL Pape' Machinery, Inc. 2009 Gradall XL3100 III $259,000.00 $4,750.00 $22,418.75 $286,168.75 *Options include the following: Option 1 (One 60" ditching cleaning bucket, quick change)..................................................................................................... $ 4,750.00 ■ Funding Amount and Source This amount was budgeted during the 2009-2010 Budget process. I am requesting Executive and Council approval to purchase this unit from Pape' Machinery, Inc. in Mount Vernon, Washington for the base price of $259,000.00 per unit, including total options price of $4,750.00 plus sales tax of $22,418.75, for a total of $286,168.75. Please approve this purchase and forward to the Executive and the Whatcom County Council for approval at the April 14, 2009 Whatcom County Council Meeting. Please contact Eric L. Schlehuber at extension 50607, if you have any questions or concerns. Encl. 61 Dear Whatcom County, March 31, 2009 We at Pape Machinery Inc. are pleased to offer our Gradall XL3100-111 for your consideration. Working in conjunction with the Gradall factory, Pape Machinery has been authorized to offer Whatcom County the identical pricing they enjoyed with their 2008 bid/purchase! This offer does have an order expiration date of June 01, 2009. After that, we will again be subject to current pricing at a nearly 8% increase over 2008! We welcome any questions you may have and appreciate this opportunity to help Whatcom County with their equipment needs once again. Sincerely Grant Beld Pape Machinery Inc. 800-621-7639 360-424-3291 www.papemachinery.com a BREAKER BI' TECNNOLOI fax 360-424-3296 420 E Hickox Road, Mt. Vernon, Washington 98273 JOHN DEERE HITACHI Timberjack '" .- 62 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 2009-234 CLEARANCES Initial Date Date Received in Council Office A enda Date Assigned to: Finance DGD 3/31/09 5 / 12 / 09 Originator: %f C E D Council Division Head: V MAY 0 5 2009 De L Head: Prosecutor:` `� �� W H ATC O M COUNTY COUNCIL y/ldS Purchasin /Budget: j Executive: ` J9 TITLE OFDOCUM NT.• WNN U Center for Economic Vitality Contract ATTACHMENTS. Contract SEPA review required? ( ) Yes ( x ) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing ? ( ) Yes ( x ) NO SEPA review completed? ( ) Yes ( x ) Requested Date: NO S UMMAR Y STA TEMENT OR LEGAL NO TICE LANG UA GE.- (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.) Request Authorization for the Executive to enter into a contract with the Western Washington University Center (formerly known as the Small Business Development Center) for Economic Vitality Center for the support of local business retention and expansion throughout Whatcom County. Contract is in the amount of $30,800. Budget authority was approved during the 2009.2010 budget process. COMMITTEE ACTION: COUNCIL ACTION: Related County Contract #: Related File Numbers: Ordinance or Resolution Number. 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.us/council 63 WHATCOM COUNTY �GOM COG Executive Office sPx '� tia 311 Grand Avenue Bellingham, WA 98225 (360) 676-671 7 �gSri�N6C°2 MEMORANDUM TO: Pete Kremen, County Executive FROM: Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator RE: Western Washington Economic Vitality Center DATE: April 28, 2009 Pete Kremen, County Executive Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator Enclosed are two (2) originals of Contract for Services Agreement between Western Washington Economic Vitality Center for your review and signature. ■ Background and Purpose The Western Washington University's Economic Vitality Center (formerly known as the Small Business Development Center) will provide economic development programming for all of Whatcom County. The BWEDC will provide administrative support that includes technical assistance, business research and counseling to help companies plan and adjust to changes in the marketplace. ■ Funding Amount and Source Council approved funding for this contract in the.2009/2010 Budget Process. The funding for this contract will come from the General Fund. ■ Differences from Previous Contract The contract was reduced by $14,200. for 2009. Please contact Dewey Desler at extension 50120, if you have any questions or concerns regarding the terms of this agreement. Encl. M WHATCOM CO UNTY CONTRACT INFORMATION SHEET Whatcom County Contract No. 009/0 510-5 Originating Department.- Executive Dewey Desler Contract Administrator: WWU Center for Economic Vitality Contractor's /Agency Name: Is this a New Contract? If not, is this an Amendment or Renewal to an Existing Contract? Yes X No Yes — No If yes, previous number(s): Is this a grant agreement? Yes _ No X If yes, grantor agency contract number(s) CFDA number Is this contract grant funded? Yes _ No X If yes, associated Whatcom County grant contract number(s) Is this contract the result of a RFP or Bid process? Yes _ No X If yes, RFP and Bid number(s) Contract Amount:(sum of orig contract amt and If a Professional Services Agreement is more than $15,000 or a Bid is more than any prior amendments) $35,000, please submit an Agenda Bill for Council approval and a supporting $ 30,800. memo. Any amendment that provides either a 10% increase in amount or more than $10,000, whichever is greater, must also go to Council and will need an agenda bill This Amendment Amount: $ and supporting memo. If less than these thresholds, just submit to Executive with Total Amended Amount: supporting memo for approval. Scope of Services Support County business retention and expansion activities throughout Whatcom County. Term of Contract: 9months Expiration Date: December 31, 2009 Contract Routine Steps & SiQnoff fsiFn or initial? (indicate date transmitted 1. Prepared by: TWH Date 3123109 [electronic] 2. Attorney reviewed: Date [electronic] 3. AS Finance reviewed: /��r�,� Date / electronic] 4. IT reviewed if IT related Date _ [electronic] S. Corrections made: Date [electronic] hard copy printed 6. Attorney signoff `) ,'-� Date -C;• 7. Contractor signed: ;/ Date Y-17 -,0 $. Submitted to Exec Offi e ✓ Date -0 summary via electronic; hardcopies] 9. Reviewed by DCA Date Doi 10. Council approved (i necessary) Date 11. Executive signed: Date 12. Contractor Original 13. Returned to dept; Date 14. County Original to Council Date this form may need to expand to more than one page 65 Whatcom County Contract No. COUNTy,ORIGIWAL oo 9 o,1a2's, CONTRACT FOR SERVICES AGREEMENT WESTERN WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY Western Washington University, hereinafter called Contractor, and Whatcom County, hereinafter referred to as County, agree and contract as set forth in this Agreement, including: General Conditions, pp. 4 to 9 Exhibit A (Scope of Work), pp. 10 Exhibit B (Compensation), pp. 11 . Copies of these items are attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if fully set forth herein. The term of this Agreement shall commence on the 1st day of April, 2009, and shall, unless terminated or renewed as elsewhere provided in the Agreement, terminate on the 31 st day of December, 2009. The general purpose or objective of this Agreement is to provide support for the County business retention and expansion activities throughout Whatcom County through Western Washington University's Center for Economic Vitality, as more fully and definitely described in Exhibit A hereto. The language of Exhibit A controls in case of any conflict between it and that provided here. The maximum consideration for the initial term of this agreement or for any renewal term shall not exceed $ 30,800. The Contract Number, set forth above, shall be included on all billings or correspondence in connection therewith. Contractor acknowledges and by signing this contract agrees that the Indemnification provisions set forth in Paragraphs 11.1, 21.1, 30.1, 31.2, 32.1, 34.2, and 34.3, if included, are totally and fully part of this contract and have been mutually negotiated by the parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement this _ day of CONTRACTOR: Western Washington University (See attached signature page) Contract for Services Agreement WWU Center for Economic Vitality 20 0 CONTRACTOR: WESTERN WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY Kathy Weth _ ell Interim Vice President for -Business & Financial Affairs STATE OF WASHINGTON ss. COUNTY OF W �1 c_a ) On this 11 day of q a 200� , before me personally appeared to me , known to be the Vice President for Business and Financial A aif irs, and who executed the above instrument and who acknowledged to me the act of signing and sealing thereof. NOTARY PUKIIC in nd for the State of Washington, residing at Ll LA kaki My commission expires J-7 !D APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM Assistant Attorney General Contract for Services Agreement VWVU Center for Economic Vitality 67 Approved as to form: z Prosecuting Attorney Date Approved: Accepted XWhatcom Co nt By:.. . �te Kremen, Whatcom County Executive STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss COUNTY OF WHATCOM ) On this day of , 20 , before me personally appeared Pete Kremen, to me known to be the Executive of Whatcom County, who executed the above instrument and who acknowledged to me the act of signing and sealing thereof. NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington, residing at My commission expires CONTRACTOR INFORMATION: CENTER FOR ECONOMIC VITALITY 119 North Commercial Street, Suite 195 Bellingham, WA 98225-4455 Contact Name: Tom Dorr Contact Phone: (360) 733-4014, Extension 123 Contact FAX: (360) 733-5092 Contact Email: tom.dorr@wwu.edu Contract for Services Agreement WWU Center for Economic Vitality GENERAL CONDITIONS Series 00-09: Provisions Related to Scope and Nature of Services 0.1 Scope of Services: The Contractor agrees to provide to the County services and any materials as set forth in the project narrative identified as Exhibit "A", during the agreement period. No material, labor, or facilities will be furnished by the County, unless otherwise provided for in the Agreement. Series 10-19: Provisions Related to Term and Termination 10.1 Term: Services provided by Contractor prior to or after the term of this contract shall be performed at the expense of Contractor and are not compensable under this contract unless both parties hereto agree to such provision in writing. The term of this Agreement may be extended by mutual agreement of the parties; provided, however, that the Agreement is in writing and signed by both parties. The term shall be as stated in the contract regardless of the date of signature. 10.2 Extension: Not Applicable 11.1 Termination for Default: If the Contractor defaults by failing to perform any of the obligations of the contract or becomes insolvent or is declared bankrupt or commits any act of bankruptcy or insolvency or makes an assignment for the benefit of creditors, the County may, by depositing written notice to the Contractor in the U.S. mail, first class postage prepaid, terminate the contract, and at the County's option, obtain performance of the work elsewhere. Termination shall be effective upon Contractor's receipt of the written notice, or within three (3) days of the mailing of the notice, whichever occurs first. If the contract is terminated for default, the Contractor shall not be entitled to receive any further payments under the contract until all work called for has been fully performed. Any extra cost or damage to the County resulting from such default(s) shall be deducted from any money due or coming due to the Contractor. The Contractor shall bear any extra expenses incurred by the County in completing the work, including all increased costs for completing the work, and all damage sustained, or which may be sustained by the County by reason of such default. 11.2 Termination for Reduction in Funding: In the event that funding from State, Federal or other sources is withdrawn, reduced, or limited in any way after the effective date of this Agreement, and prior to its normal completion, the County may summarily terminate this Agreement as to the funds withdrawn, reduced, or limited, notwithstanding any other termination provisions of this Agreement. If the level of funding withdrawn, reduced or limited is so great that the County deems that the continuation of the programs covered by this Agreement is no longer in the best interest of the County, the County may summarily terminate this Agreement in whole, notwithstanding any other termination provisions of this Agreement. Termination under this section shall be effective upon receipt of written notice as specified herein, or within three days of the mailing of the notice, whichever occurs first. 11.3 Termination for Public Convenience: The County may terminate the Agreement in whole or in part whenever the County determines, in its sole discretion, that such termination is in the interests of the County. Whenever the Agreement is terminated in accordance with this paragraph, the Contractor shall be entitled to payment for actual work performed at unit contract prices for completed items of work. An equitable adjustment in the contract price for partially completed items of work will be made, but such adjustment shall not include provision for loss of anticipated profit on deleted or uncompleted work, Termination of this Agreement by the County at any time during the term, whether for default or convenience, shall not constitute breach of contract by the County. Series 20-29: Provisions Related to Consideration and Payments 20.1 Accounting and Payment for Contractor Services: Payment to the Contractor for services rendered under this Agreement shall be as set forth in Exhibit "B." Where Exhibit "B" requires payments by the County, payment shall be based upon written claims supported, unless otherwise provided in Exhibit "B," by documentation of units of work actually performed and amounts earned, including, where appropriate, the actual number of days worked each month, total number of hours for the month, and the total dollar payment requested, so as to comply with municipal auditing requirements. Unless specifically stated in Exhibit "B" or approved in writing in advance by the official executing this Agreement for the County or his designee (hereinafter referred to as the "Administrative Officer") the County will not reimburse the Contractor for any costs or expenses incurred by the Contractor in the performance of this contract. Where required, the County shall, upon receipt of appropriate Contract for Services Agreement 4 WWU Center for Economic Vitality documentation, compensate the Contractor, no more often than monthly, in accordance with the County's customary procedures, pursuant to the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit "B." 21.1 Taxes: The Contractor understands and acknowledges that the County will not withhold Federal or State income taxes. Where required by State or Federal law, the Contractor authorizes the County to withhold for any taxes other than income taxes (i.e., Medicare). All compensation received by the Contractor will be reported to the Internal Revenue Service at the end of the calendar year in accordance with the applicable IRS regulations. It is the responsibility of the Contractor to make the necessary estimated tax payments throughout the year, if any, and the Contractor is solely liable for any tax obligation arising from the Contractor's performance of this Agreement. The Contractor hereby agrees to indemnify the County against any demand to pay taxes arising from the Contractor's failure to pay taxes on compensation earned pursuant to this Agreement. The County will pay sales and use taxes imposed on goods or services acquired hereunder as required by law. The Contractor must pay all other taxes, including, but not limited to, Business and Occupation Tax, taxes based on the Contractor's gross or net income, or personal property to which the County does not hold title. The County is exempt from Federal Excise Tax. 22.1 Withholding Payment: In the event the County's Administrative Officer determines that the Contractor has failed to perform any obligation under this Agreement within the times set forth in this Agreement, then the County may withhold from amounts otherwise due and payable to Contractor the amount determined by the County as necessary to cure the default, until the Administrative Officer determines that such failure to perform has been cured. Withholding under this clause shall not be deemed a breach entitling Contractor to termination or damages, provided that the County promptly gives notice in writing to the Contractor of the nature of the default or failure to perform, and in no case more than 10 days after it determines to withhold amounts otherwise due. A determination of the Administrative Officer set forth in a notice to the Contractor of the action required and/or the amount required to cure any alleged failure to perform shall be deemed conclusive, except to the extent that the Contractor acts within the times and in strict accord with the provisions of the Disputes clause of this Agreement. The County may act in accordance with any determination of the Administrative Officer which has become conclusive under this clause, without prejudice to any other remedy under the Agreement, to take all or any of the following actions: (1) cure any failure or default, (2) to pay any amount so required to be paid and to charge the same to the account of the Contractor, (3) to set off any amount so paid or incurred from amounts due or to become due the Contractor. - In the event the Contractor obtains relief upon a claim under the Disputes clause, no penalty or damages shall accrue to Contractor by reason of good faith withholding by the County under this clause. 23.1 Labor Standards: The Contractor agrees to comply with state and federal requirements, as applicable, pertaining to payment of wages and working conditions, .in accordance with RCW 39.12.040, the Prevailing Wage Act; the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990; the Davis -Bacon Act; and the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act providing for weekly payment of prevailing wages, minimum overtime pay, and providing that no laborer or mechanic shall be required to work in surroundings or under conditions which are unsanitary, hazardous, or dangerous to health and safety as determined by regulations promulgated by the Federal Secretary of Labor and the State of Washington. Series 30-39: Provisions Related to Administration of Agreement 30.1 Independent Contractor: The Contractor's services shall be furnished by the Contractor as an independent contractor, and nothing herein contained shall be construed to create a relationship of employer -employee or master -servant, but all payments made hereunder and all services performed shall be made and performed pursuant to this Agreement by the Contractor as an independent contractor. The Contractor acknowledges that the entire compensation for this Agreement is specified in Exhibit "B" and the Contractor is not entitled to any benefits including, but not limited to: vacation pay, holiday pay, sick leave pay, medical, dental, or other insurance benefits, or any other rights or privileges afforded to employees of the County. The Contractor represents that he/she/it maintains a separate place of business, serves clients other than the County, will report all income and expense accrued under this contract to the Internal Revenue Service on a Schedule C, and has a tax account with the State of Washington Department of Revenue for payment of all Vles and use a d gu�emnlfy ss and Occupation taxes collected by the State of Washington. & Contractor will defend, mand hold harmless the County, its officers, agents or employees from an loss or expense, including, Y 9Y P 9 but not limited to, settlements, judgments, setoffs, attorneys' fees or costs incurred by reason of claims or demands because of breach �Qf the provisions of this paragraph. ' Assignment and Subcontracting and Subcontracting: Not Applicable CAract for Services Agreement 5 WWU Center for Economic Vitality 70 30.3 No Guarantee of Employment: The performance of all or part of this contract by the Contractor shall not operate to vest any employment rights whatsoever and shall not be deemed to guarantee any employment of the Contractor or any employee of the Contractor or any subcontractor or any employee of any subcontractor by the County at the present time or in the future. 31.1 Ownership of Items Produced: Not Applicable 31.2 Patent/Copyright Infringement: Not Applicable 32.1 Confidentiality: The Contractor, its employees, subcontractors, and their employees shall maintain the confidentiality of all information provided by the County or acquired by the Contractor in performance of this Agreement, except upon the prior written consent of the County or an order entered by a court after having acquired jurisdiction over the County. Contractor shall immediately give to the County notice of any judicial proceeding seeking disclosure of such information. Contractor shall indemnify and hold harmless the County, its officials, agents or employees from all loss or expense, including, but not limited to, settlements, judgments, setoffs, attorneys' fees and costs resulting from Contractor's breach of this provision. 33.1 Right to Review: This contract is subject to review by any Federal, State or County auditor. The County or its designee shall have the right to review and monitor the financial and service components of this program by whatever means are deemed expedient by the Administrative Officer or by the County Auditor's Office. Such review may occur with or without notice and may include, but is not limited to, on -site inspection by County agents or employees, inspection of all records or other materials which the County deems pertinent to the Agreement and its performance, and any and all communications with or evaluations by service recipients under this Agreement. The Contractor shall preserve and maintain all financial records and records relating to the performance of work under this Agreement for three (3) years after contract termination, and shall make them available for such review, within Whatcom County, State of Washington, upon request, Contractor also agrees to notify the Administrative Officer in advance of any inspections, audits, or program review by any individual, agency, or governmental unit whose purpose is to review the services provided within the terms of this Agreement. If no advance notice is given to the Contractor, then the Contractor agrees to notify the Administrative Officer as soon as it is practical. 34.1 Proof of Insurance: The Contractor shall carry for the duration of this Agreement general liability and property damage insurance with the following minimums: Property Damage per occurrence - $500,000.00 General Liability & Property Damage for bodily injury- $1,000,000.00 34.2 Industrial Insurance Waiver: With respect to the performance of this agreement and as to claims against the County, its officers, agents and employees, the Contractor expressly waives its immunity under Title 51 of the Revised Code of Washington, the Industrial Insurance Act, for injuries to its employees and agrees that the obligations to indemnify, defend and hold harmless provided in this agreement extend to any claim brought by or on behalf of any employee of the Contractor. This waiver is mutually negotiated by the parties to this agreement. 34.3 Defense & Indemnity Agreement: The Contractor agrees to , 'tndumnffrnd save harmless the County, its appointed and elective officers and employees, from and against all loss or expense, including, but not limited to, judgments, settlements, attorneys' fees and costs by reason of any and all Kilaims and demands upon the County, its elected or appointed officials or employees for damages because of personal or bodily injury, ncluding death at any time resulting therefrom, sustained by any person or persons and on account of damage to property, including oss of use thereof, whether such injury to persons or damage to property is due to the negligence of the Contractor, its subcontractors, s successor or assigns, or its agents, servants, or employees, the County, its appointed or elected officers, employees or their agents, y except only such injury or damage as shall have been occasioned by the sel"egligence of the County or its appointed or elected `--w officials or employees. It is further provided that no liability shall attach to the County by reason of entering into this contract, except as expressly provided herein. — 35.1 Non -Discrimination in Employment: The County's policy is to provide equal opportunity in all terms, conditions and privileges of employment for all qualified applicants and employees without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, sexual orientation, disability, or veteran Contract for Services Agreement 6 WWU Center for Economic Vitality 71 status. The Contractor shall comply with all laws prohibiting discrimination against any employee or applicant for employment on the grounds of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, disability, or veteran status, except where such constitutes a bona fide occupational qualification. Furthermore, in those cases in which the Contractor is governed by such laws, the Contractor shall take affirmative action to insure that applicants are employed, and treated during employment, without regard to their race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, disability, or veteran status, except where such constitutes a bona fide occupational qualification. Such action shall include, but not be limited to: advertising, hiring, promotions, layoffs or terminations, rate of pay or other forms of compensation benefits, selection for training including apprenticeship, and participation in recreational and educational activities. In all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by them or on their behalf, the Contractor shall state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color religion, sex or national origin. The foregoing provisions shall also be binding upon any subcontractor, provided that the foregoing provision shall not apply to contracts or subcontractors for standard commercial supplies or raw materials, or to sole proprietorships with no employees. 35.2 Non -Discrimination in Client Services: The Contractor shall not discriminate on the grounds of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, sexual orientation, disability, or veteran status; or deny an individual or business any service or benefits under this Agreement; or subject an individual or business to segregation or separate treatment in any manner related to his/her/its receipt any service or services or other benefits provided under this Agreement; or deny an individual or business an opportunity to participate in any program provided by this Agreement. 36.1 Waiver of Noncompetition: Contractor irrevocably waives any existing rights which it may have, by contract or otherwise, to require another person or corporation to refrain from submitting a proposal to or performing work or providing supplies to the County, and contractor further promises that it will not in the future, directly or indirectly, induce or solicit any person or corporation to refrain from submitting a bid or proposal to or from performing work or providing supplies to the County. 36.2 Conflict of Interest: If at any time prior to commencement of, or during the term of this Agreement, Contractor or any of its employees involved in the performance of this Agreement shall have or develop an interest in the subject matter of this Agreement that is potentially in conflict with the County's interest, then Contractor shall immediately notify the County of the same. The notification of the County shall be made with sufficient specificity, to enable the County to make an informed judgment as to whether or not the County's interest may be compromised in any manner by the existence of the conflict, actual or potential. Thereafter, the County may require the Contractor to take reasonable steps to remove the conflict of interest. The County may also terminate this contract according to the provisions herein for termination. 37.1 Administration of Contract: This Agreement shall be subject to all laws, rules, and regulations of the United States of America, the State of Washington, and political subdivisions of the State of Washington. The Contractor also agrees to comply with applicable federal, state, county or municipal standards for licensing, certification and operation of facilities and programs, and accreditation and licensing of individuals. The County hereby appoints, and the Contractor hereby accepts, the Whatcom County Executive, and his or her designee, as the County's representative, hereinafter referred to as the Administrative Officer, for the purposes of administering the provisions of this Agreement, including the County's right to receive and act on all reports and documents, and any auditing performed by the County related to this Agreement. The Administrative Officer for purposes of this agreement is: Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator Whatcom County Executive's Office 311 Grand Avenue, Suite 108 Bellingham, WA 98225 37.2 Notice: Except as set forth elsewhere in the Agreement, for all purposes under this Agreement except service of process, notice shall be given by the Contractor to the County's Administrative Officer under this Agreement. Notice to the Contractor for all purposes under this Agreement shall be given to the address provided by the Contractor herein above in the "Contractor Information" section. Notice may be given by delivery or by depositing in the US Mail, first class, postage prepaid. Series 40-49: Provisions Related to Interpretation of Agreement and Resolution of Disputes Contract for Services Agreement WWU Center for Economic Vitality 72 40.1 Modifications: Either party may request changes in the Agreement. Any and all agreed modifications, to be valid and binding upon either party, shall be in writing and signed by both of the parties. 40.2 Contractor Commitments, Warranties and Representations: Not Applicable 41.1 Severability: If any term or condition of this contract or the application thereof to any person(s) or circumstances is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other terms, conditions or applications which can be given effect without the invalid term, condition or application. To this end, the terms and conditions of this contract are declared severable. 41.2 Waiver: Waiver of any breach or condition of this contract shall not be deemed a waiver of any prior or subsequent breach. No term or condition of this contract shall be held to be waived, modified or deleted except by an instrument, in writing, signed by the parties hereto. The failure of the County to insist upon strict performance of any of the covenants and agreements of this Agreement, or to exercise any option herein conferred in any one or more instances, shall not be construed to be a waiver or relinquishment of any such, or any other covenants or agreements, but the same shall be and remain in full force and effect. 42.1 Disputes: a. General: Differences between the Contractor and the County, arising under and by virtue of the Contract Documents, shall be brought to the attention of the County at the earliest possible time in order that such matters may be settled or other appropriate action promptly taken. Except for such objections as are made of record in the manner hereinafter specified and within the time limits stated, the records, orders, rulings, instructions, and decisions of the Administrative Officer shall be final and conclusive. b. Notice of Potential Claims: The Contractor shall not be entitled to additional compensation which otherwise may be payable, or to extension of time for (1) any act or failure to act by the Administrative Officer or the County, or (2) the happening of any event or occurrence, unless the Contractor has given the County a written Notice of Potential Claim within ten (10) days of the commencement of the act, failure, or event giving rise to the claim, and before final payment by the County. The written Notice of Potential Claim shall set forth the reasons for which the Contractor believes additional compensation or extension of time is due, the nature of the cost involved, and insofar as possible, the amount of the potential claim. Contractor shall keep full and complete daily records of the work performed, labor and material used, and all costs and additional time claimed to be additional. C. Detailed Claim: The Contractor shall not be entitled to claim any such additional compensation, or extension of time, unless within thirty (30) days of the accomplishment of the portion of the work from which the claim arose, and before final payment by the County, the Contractor has given the County a detailed written statement of each element of cost or other compensation requested and of all elements of additional time required, and copies of any supporting documents evidencing the amount or the extension of time claimed to be due. d. Arbitration: Other than claims for injunctive relief brought by a party hereto (which may be brought either in court or pursuant to this arbitration provision), and consistent with the provisions hereinabove, any claim, dispute or controversy between the parties under, arising out of, or related to this Agreement or otherwise, including issues of specific performance, shall be determined by arbitration in Bellingham, Washington, under the applicable American Arbitration Association (AAA) rules in effect on the date hereof, as modified by this Agreement. There shall be one arbitrator selected by the parties within ten (10) days of the arbitration demand, or if not, by the AAA or any other group having similar credentials. Any issue about whether a claim is covered by this Agreement shall be determined by the arbitrator. The arbitrator shall apply substantive law and may award injunctive relief, equitable relief (including specific performance), or any other remedy available from a judge, including expenses, costs and attorney fees to the prevailing party and pre -award interest, but shall not have the power to award punitive damages. The decision of the arbitrator shall be final and binding and an order confirming the award or judgment upon the award may be entered in any court having jurisdiction. The parties agree that the decision of the arbitrator shall be the sole and exclusive remedy between them regarding any dispute presented or pled before the arbitrator. At the request of either party made not later than forty-five (45) days after the arbitration demand, the parties agree to submit the dispute to nonbinding mediation, which shall not delay the arbitration hearing date; provided, that either party may decline to mediate and proceed with arbitration. Unless otherwise specified herein, this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of Whatcom County and the State of Washington. Contract for Services Agreement WWU Center for Economic Vitality 73 43.1 Venue and Choice of Law: In the event that any litigation should arise concerning the construction or interpretation of any of the terms of this Agreement, the venue of such action of litigation shall be in the courts of the State of Washington in and for the County of Whatcom. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Washington. 44.1 Survival: The provisions of paragraphs 11.1, 11.2, 11.3, 21.1, 22.1, 30.1, 31.1, 31.2, 32.1, 33.1, 34.2, 34,3, 36.1, 40.2, 41.2, 42.1, and 43.1, if utilized, shall survive, notwithstanding the termination or invalidity of this Agreement for any reason. 45.1 Entire Agreement: This written Agreement, comprised of the writings signed or otherwise identified and attached hereto, represents the entire Agreement between the parties and supersedes any prior oral statements, discussions or understandings between the parties. Contract for Services Agreement WWU Center for Economic Vitality 74 EXHIBIT "A" (SCOPE OF WORK) Funds will be used by Western Washington University's Small Business Development Center to provide one to one confidential customized business counseling and technical assistance to businesses in Whatcom County. Business Research will be offered to help companies plan, adjust to changes in the marketplace and /or identify business problem areas. Technical assistance will include counseling and research support in the following areas: ■ Business plan development ■ Marketing plan development • Financial and cost analysis • Export assistance • Access to capital, loan information and finance packaging • Marketing research and strategies ■ Business valuation for sale or purchase • Loan package development ■ Personnel and management issues ■ General problem solving ■ Succession Planning Business research will include: • Industry research (trends, forecasting, etc.) • Competition analysis • Target market research • Business plan review • Marketing plan review • Human Resources research • Wage/compensation research • Contact lists of competitors or customers • Demographic analysis of populations • Market saturation (how many XYZ can a community support) • Ring study (demographic information around a specific location) • Financial benchmarking In each year of this biennium program, the following measurable impacts for second stage businesses will be delivered: 1. 70 businesses served 3. 100 jobs created or saved 5. $40:1 return on investment The maximum consideration for this contract is $30,800. Billing rates will be based on: 2. 500 hours of business counseling provided 4. 500 hours of business research provided 6. 2.5 million in new capital infusion into Whatcom County Project Manger $89.75 per hour Certified Business Advisors $54.90 per hour Researcher Analysts $42.26 per hour Administrative Support $26.73 per hour This hourly rate includes administrative overhead, supplies, materials, rents, etc. Contract for Services Agreement 10 WWU Center for Economic Vitality 75 EXHIBIT "B" (COMPENSATION) The Contract Number, set forth above, shall be included on all billings. The Western Washington University's Small Business Development Center will submit invoices detailing services rendered as outlined in Exhibit A. Allowable charges include includes administrative overhead, supplies, materials, rents, etc. Services will be provided to citizens of the unincorporated areas of Whatcom County as outlined in Exhibit A. Invoices will be submitted to the Whatcom County Executive's Office. Payment will be made as reimbursement for services and invoices must document hours of service, clients served and type of service provided. Western Washington University's Small Business Development Center will submit an annual report by February 28, 2010 to include the following: • Hours of service provided • Number of clients served • Number of jobs saved • Number of jobs created • Number of jobs at risk • Number of new investments If requested by the Washington State Auditor, contractor will provide more detail as to services provided. Payment will be made no more than once per month. Maximum consideration for this contract shall be $ 30,800. Contract for Services Agreement 11 WWU Center for Economic Vitality 76 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 2009-213 CLEARANCES Initial Date Date Received in Council Office Agenda Date Assigned to: E. Stroebei Originator. �j E D V - 5/ 12 / 0 9 Finance/ Council J. Hutchings Division Head: O O 5 2009 VVNp, C®U COUNTY CIL F. Abart Dept Head: q1- lljg169MAY D. Gibson Prosecutor: 0134,01 B. Bennett Purchasing/Budget: az 9 9 P. Kremen Executive: y TITLE OF DOCUMENT: Interlocal Agreement with the Whatcom Conservation District regarding the CPAL Program ATTACHMENTS: Cover memo, Contract Information Sheet, Interlocal Agreement SEPA review required? ( ) Yes ( x ) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing? ( ) Yes ( x) No SEPA review completed? ( ) Yes ( x ) NO Requested Date: SUMMARY STATEMENT OR LEGAL NOTICE LANGUAGE. In order to reduce nutrient and bacteria loading to streams and other receiving waterbodies, the Whatcom County Critical Area Ordinance (CAO) requires property owners to; 'prepare and implement farm plans if they wish to continue agricultural practices within critical areas; Flexibility is afforded through the Conservation Program on Agricultural Lands (CPAL), which is a component of the CAO, and provides regulations and standards for agriculture in Whatcom County. Agricultural operators who do not have a valid farm plan will not qualify for this flexibility and will be subject to the development standards of the CAO. The Whatcom Conservation District has the technical expertise to provide assistance to the County in regard to the implementation of the CPAL program. Under the Revised Code of Washington, the Whatcom County Flood Control Zone District may expend revenues on watershed management actions, including water quality and habitat protection. The Conservation District and the Flood Control Zone District desire to pool their resources to create a more effective program for protection, conservation, and management of natural resources in general, and specifically critical areas. COMMITTEE ACTION: COUNCIL ACTION: Related County Contract #: Related File Numbers: Ordinance or Resolution 200711061 Number. 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.us/council. 77 WHATCOM COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT FRANK M. ABART Director MEMORANDUM NATURAL RESOURCES 322 N. Commercial, Ste. 110 Bellingham, WA 98225 Telephone: (360) 676-6876 FAX: (360) 738-2468 www. whatcomcounty. us TO: The Honorable Members of the Flood Control Zone District Board of Supervisors FROM: Frank Abart, Public Works Director #-%o THROUGH: Jon Hutchings, Assistant Director Public Works Erika Stroebel, Senior Planner- Marine Resources RE: Interlocal Agreement with the Whatcom Conservation District for CPAL DATE: April 28, 2009 Enclosed are two (2) originals of the interlocal agreement between the Whatcom Conservation District and Whatcom County Flood Control Zone District (FCZD) for your review and signature. ■ Background and Purpose Whatcom County Planning & Development Services is responsible for carrying out the goals of the County's Comprehensive Plan, the State of Washington Growth Management Act (RCW 36,70), and the Whatcom County Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) (WCC 16.16), which in total call for preserving the ecological processes and structures that sustain or support the Critical Areas, while allowing for appropriate economically beneficial or productive use of land and property, including agriculture. -these regulations provide standards and approve ongoing agricultural activities within critical areas and/or their buffers pursuant to an approved conservation program that identifies specific best management practices that conserve such areas. The CAO with its CPAL provision underwent a major revision that was completed in September 2005. While farm planning remains at the core of an alternative to prescriptive, standard buffers typical of development projects, the concept of farm plans has been refined markedly to more effectively conserve critical areas. Whatcom County Public Works is responsible for implementing programs that protect and enhance natural resources, such and water quality and fish habitat. The CAO-CPAL program is a key program in both shellfish and salmon recovery efforts. The Conservation District and the FCZD desire to pool their resources to carry out the responsibilities outlined in the Critical Areas Ordinance. -rhe scope of this contract is specific to low impact and moderate impact on -going agricultural operations. ■ Funding Amount and Source This agreement, in the amount of $85,000 for 2009 and $110,000 for 2010, will be funded through the approved 2009 FCZD budget for Natural Resources and, if budget authority is granted, the 2010 FCZD budget for Natural Resources. Please contact Erika Stroebel or Scarlet Tang at extensions 50692 or 50638 if you have any questions or concerns regarding the terms of this agreement. Enclosure WHATCOM COUNTY CONTRACT INFORMATION SHEET Whatcom County Contract No. ao© ':� pro/ / Originating Department: Public Works- Natural Resources Contract Administrator.' Erika Stroebel/ Scarlet Tan Contractor's/Agency Name: Whatcom Conservation District Is this a New Contract? If not, is this an Amendment or Renewal to an Existing Contract? Yes X No Yes _ No If yes, previous number(s): Is this a grant agreement? Yes _ No _x If yes, grantor agency contract number(s) CFDA number Is this contract grant funded? Yes _ No _X If yes, associated Whatcom County grant contract number(s) Is this contract the result of a RFP or Bid process? Yes _ No _x If yes, RFP and Bid number(s) Contract Amount. -(sum of orig contract amt If a Professional Services Agreement is more than $15, 000 or a Bid is more and any prior amendments) than $35,000, please submit an Agenda Bill for Council approval and a $195, 000 supporting memo. Any amendment that provides either a 10% increase in This Amendment Amount: amount or more than $10, 000, whichever is greater, must also go to Council $ and will need an agenda bill and supporting memo. If less than these Total Amended Amount: thresholds, just submit to Executive with supporting memo for approval. Scope of Services The County Critical Areas Ordinance requires property owners who have on- going agricultural operations to prepare and have approved a valid and current Conservation Plan or Farm Plan. This scope of work primarily involves the Whatcom Conservation District providing technical assistance to on -going agricultural small farm operators engaged in low and moderate impact activities by preparing farm plans if they wish to continue agricultural practices within critical areas or buffers and receive the benefit of increased flexibility in regard to regulatory compliance. The Conservation District and the FCZD desire to pool their resources to create a more effective program for protection, conservation, and management of natural resources, in general, and specifically critical areas. Term of Contract: Expiration Date: December 31, 2010 Contract Routing Steps & Sionoff.• [sign or initial) [indicate date transmitted) 1. Prepared by: Remy Stratton Date 4/16/09 [electronic] 2. Attorney reviewed: D111wed L. r" .;u,.. Date Olt d j [electronic] 3. AS Finance reviewed: Date [electronic] 4. IT reviewed if IT related Date [electronic] 5. Corrections made:. 6. Attorney signoff. Date [electronic] hard copy printed Date 0 0 7. Contractor signed: Date 8. Submitted to Exec Office Date [summary via electronic; hardcopies] 9. Reviewed by DCA Date 10. Council approved (if necessary) Date 11. Executive signed: Date 12. Contractor Original 13. Returned to dept; Date 14. County Original to Council Date 79 ATTORNEYREVIEW [submit via electronic transmittal] Originating Department: Public Works- Natural Resources Erika Stroebel/ Scarlet Tang Contact Person: Whatcom Conservation District Contractor's Name: First Review: OApproved As Is; Prepare Hardcopy for Signoff O Needs Revision; Attorney Comments for suggested changes: Second Review: OImplemented Attorney Corrections as Indicated OApproved; Prepare Hardcopy for Signoff OAdditional Corrections Needed, Attorney Comments for suggested changes: Please indicate any Special Dates or clauses that require calendaring. Leave this page attached to summary coversheet until final signoff by attorney. Do not leave attached when routing to Contractor for signature. :1 COO IINAL Whatcom County Contract No. ao oqo 4-1a // INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT AND WHATCOM CONSERVATION DISTRICT CONCERNING CONSERVATION PROGRAM ON AGRICULTURE LANDS (CPAL) LOW -IMPACT LIVESTOCK OPERATIONS This Interlocal Agreement ("AGREEMENT") is between the Whatcom CONSERVATION DISTRICT ("CONSERVATION DISTRICT") and Whatcom County Flood Control Zone District ("FCZD") as public agencies pursuant to the Interlocal Cooperation Act, RCW 39.34. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the CONSERVATION DISTRICT was formed in 1946 pursuant to RCW 89.08 as a public agency to undertake the conservation of renewable resources in all of Whatcom County; and WHEREAS, the CONSERVATION DISTRICT has identified the pressing need for resource conservation as well as the activities and program that should be carried out to address these needs in its long range plan and annual plan of work and; WHEREAS, Whatcom County is charged with and has planned for the protection, management and enhancement of natural resources in accordance with the requirements of the Growth Management, Watershed Planning, Salmon Recovery and Shellfish Protection Acts; and WHEREAS, under the Revised Code of Washington, the FCZD may expend revenues on watershed management actions, including water quality and habitat protection; and WHEREAS, Whatcom County Public Works and Planning and Development Services staff may act on behalf of the FCZD; and WHEREAS, the FCZD and the CONSERVATION DISTRICT desire to pool their individual and complementary resources where there is overlapping jurisdiction and interest to create synergy and result in more effective programs for protection, conservation and management of natural resources. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto mutually agree as follows: 1. Purpose and Applicability. Recognizing the need to carry out the responsibilities for which each is charged under State law, the CONSERVATION DISTRICT and FCZD consent to enter into this AGREEMENT. This serves as -the foundation for a cooperative working relationship for the purpose of protecting public health, improving water quality and fish and wildlife habitat, and promoting agricultural stewardship through the implementation of a conservation farm -planning program that includes education, technical assistance, and farm planning to low impact operations including livestock operations, as well as moderate impact activities including livestock, row crops, and berry farms. It specifically establishes FCZD financial support for the CONSERVATION DISTRICT's farm planning program as an essential component in support of Whatcom County's Critical Areas Ordinance, Title 16.16 Interlocal Agreement: CPAL Low -Impact Livestock Operations Page - 1 - v 1.0 81 related to the Conservation Program on Agricultural Lands ("CPAL"). 2. Background. The CONSERVATION DISTRICT is a non -regulatory agency that works cooperatively with landowners under guidelines established by Chapter 89.08 of the Revised Code of Washington and standards established by the U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). The CONSERVATION DISTRICT provides technical assistance and educational opportunities to residents and landowners to encourage the safeguarding of natural resources through implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs). Whatcom County Planning & Development Services is responsible for carrying out the goals of the County's comprehensive plan, the State of Washington Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70), and the Whatcom County Critical Areas Ordinance (WCC 16.16), which in total call for preserving the ecological processes and structures that sustain or support the Critical Areas, while allowing for appropriate economically beneficial or productive use of land and property, including agriculture. These regulations provide standards and approve ongoing agricultural activities within critical areas and/or their buffers pursuant to an approved conservation plan or farm plan. The CAO with its CPAL provision underwent a major revision that was completed in September of 2005. While the farm planning option remains at the core of an alternative to prescriptive, standard buffers, the concept of farm plans has been refined markedly. It includes the opportunity for farmers and livestock producers to self -assess their operations and develop farm plans for preserving the ecological processes and structures that sustain or support the Critical Areas through technical assistance from the CONSERVATION DISTRICT. This fundamental change requires the County to develop a clear pathway for farmers and livestock producers to, follow in order to achieve compliance with "standard" farm conservation plan requirements in the case of Low -Impact farm or livestock operations or "custom" farm conservation plan requirements in the case of Moderate or High -Impact farm or livestock operation. The process established by the County will consist of County - approved farm planning materials and a process that satisfies the intent of the CAO, as well as identified staff that will serve as Technical Administrator and Liaison with the CONSERVATION DISTRICT. 3. Duration. This AGREEMENT shall become effective on January 1, 2009 and shall remain in full force and effect until December 31, 2010, unless otherwise modified or terminated as provided for below in Section 'Yyf and 1 , respectively. 4. Scope of Agreement. This AGREEMENT constitutes the entire Agreement between the FCZD and the CONSERVATION DISTRICT and supersedes all proposals, oral and written, and all other communication between the parties regarding subject matter specified in Appendix A. 5. Performance. The parties agree to satisfy all aspects of this AGREEMENT in a timely and professional manner. At any such time one party cannot fulfill its responsibilities under this AGREEMENT, it shall notify the other thereof in writing, together with an explanation of why said responsibilities cannot be fulfilled. Interlocal Agreement: CPAL Low -Impact Livestock Operations Page - 2 - v 1.0 82 6. Contributions. The FCZD will contribute Eighty -Five Thousand Dollars ($85,000) it 2009 and One Hundred Ten Thousand Dollars in 2010, dependent on receiving budget authority in 2010, towards the CONSERVATION DISTRICT activities as described in Appendix A. The CONSERVATION DISTRICT will dedicate Seventy- five Thousand Dollars from its Implementation Grants towards the implementation of this AGREEMENT. 7. Payment. The FCZD agrees to reimburse the DISTRICT according to the DISTRICT'S employees' composite rates current at the time of billing, mileage at the State rate established by the Office of Financial Management and overhead. Overhead is to be calculated at the rate of 25% of employees' current composite rate. The CONSERVATION DISTRICT shall bill the FCZD for eligible project costs using a standard budget object accounting format no more than once a month, based on the following object outline: OBJECTS TOTAL ELIGIBLE COST Object 1 — Salaries and Benefits (composite rate) $145,365.00 Object 2 — Travel $ 4,430.00 Object 3 — Goods and Services $ 8,865.00 Object 4 — Overhead $ 36,340.00 Total $195,000.00* $110,000 in 2010 is dependent on Public Works receiving budget authority through the Flood Control Zone District. This will include all invoice voucher submittals and supportive documentation and shall include an accounting of time spent on tasks identified in the Appendix A. The FCZD shall remit payment within thirty (30) days of receiving a request provided the progress report has been provided as described below in "Section 8 Progress Reports". 8. Progress Reports. The CONSERVATION DISTRICT shall prepare and submit quarterly progress reports to the FCZD Financial Manager, County Executive, Board of Supervisors and Shellfish Protection District Committees. Progress reports shall cover the periods December 1 through March 31, April 1 through June 30, July 1 through September 31, and October 1 through Dec 31. A Final annual progress report will include a brief year-end report summarizing progress made during each year of the term of the AGREEMENT. A final progress report shall be submitted to the FCZD by December 31, 2010. The final progress report for the term of this AGREEMENT shall summarize activities, results, and recommendations throughout the term of this AGREEMENT. The FCZD will not process payment requests in the current period unless the progress report has been received for the previous period. At a minimum, progress reports must contain: a comparison of actual accomplishments to the objectives established for the period; the reasons for the delay if established objectives were not met; analysis and explanation of any cost overruns; and any additional pertinent information specified in this agreement. 9. Termination. Either party may terminate this AGREEMENT at any time with thirty (30) calendar day notice in writing to the other. The CONSERVATION DISTRICT will be paid for services performed to the time of termination in accordance with the current billing rates, provided that work is provided for in Appendix A. 10.Audit and Inspection. The CONSERVATION DISTRICT shall maintain records pursuant to this AGREEMENT in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and Interlocal Agreement: CPAL Low -Impact Livestock Operations v 1.0 Page - 3 - practices consistently applied. The CONSERVATION DISTRICT's records shall be subject at all reasonable times to inspection and audit by the FCZD and State auditor. The CONSERVATION DISTRICT shall preserve and make such records available to said parties until expiration of three (3) years from the date of final payment under this AGREEMENT. 11.Administration of the AGREEMENT. This AGREEMENT shall be administered by a joint board consisting of the Whatcom County Executive and the Chair of the Board of Supervisors of the Whatcom CONSERVATION DISTRICT or their designee. 12. Dispute Resolution. The parties to this AGREEMENT shall first attempt to resolve disputes informally at the staff level. In the event that the dispute cannot be resolved informally at the staff level, a dispute resolution procedure shall be followed. Each party to this AGREEMENT shall appoint one member to the Dispute Board. The members so appointed shall jointly appoint an additional member to the Dispute Board. The Dispute Board shall review the facts, terms, and applicable statutes and rules and make a determination of the dispute. The final determination regarding the dispute shall be reached by majority vote. The determination of the Dispute Board shall be binding on parties hereto. If the two appointed members of the Dispute Board cannot reach agreement in the selection of the third member of Dispute Board, then the Dispute Board will be dissolved, and the parties agree to try, in good faith, to settle the dispute by mediation through the Whatcom Dispute Resolution Center. Both parties shall share the cost for dispute resolution services equally. Each party to this AGREEMENT shall be responsible for paying for its own costs resulting from a dispute. 13. Modifications of this AGREEMENT. Modifications to this AGREEMENT shall only be made in writing and with the written consent of both parties. U.Severability. If any provision of this AGREEMENT is held invalid, the remainder of this agreement shall not be affected thereby if such remainder would then continue to serve the purposes and objectives of the AGREEMENT as determined by the FCZD. 15. Disposal of Property. This AGREEMENT does not in any manner facilitate or permit the acquisition of real or personal property by the CONSERVATION DISTRICT and there is no need to specify the manner in which such property would otherwise be disposed. 16. Rights and Remedies. In no event shall a making by the FCZD of any payment to the CONSERVATION DISTRICT constitute or be construed as a waiver by the FCZD of any breach of covenant or any default that may then exist on the part of the.CONSERVATION DISTRICT. The making of any such payment by the FCZD while any such breach or default shall exist shall in no way impair or prejudice any of the FCZD's rights, which are hereby expressly recognized, to recover payments or portions thereof, to which the CONSERVATION DISTRICT has not entitled under this AGREEMENT, or where any payments were made by mistake, or to pursue any other remedy available to the FCZD in respect to breach or default of this agreement. This AGREEMENT shall not relieve the FCZD or the CONSERVATION DISTRICT of any obligation or responsibility imposed by law except that performance pursuant to this AGREEMENT may, where appropriate, be offered in satisfaction of an obligation or Interlocal Agreement: CPAL Low -Impact Livestock Operations Page - 4 - v 1.0 84 responsibility conveyed to the FCZD or the CONSERVATION DISTRICT by law. 17.Indemnity. The CONSERVATION DISTRICT agrees to protect and hold the FCZD, its elected and appointed officials, and employees harmless from and against all claims, demands, and causes of action of any kind or character, including the cost of defense thereof, arising in favor or any person due to any actions, errors or omissions of the CONSERVATION DISTRICT or its employees in completing this AGREEMENT. The COUNTY agrees to protect and hold the CONSERVATION DISTRICT, its elected and appointed officials, and employees harmless from and against all claims, demands, and causes of action of any kind or character, including the cost of defense thereof, arising in favor or any person due to any actions, errors or omissions of the FCZD or its employees in completing this AGREEMENT. 18. Miscellaneous. No obligation in this AGREEMENT shall limit the CONSERVATION DISTRICT in fulfilling its responsibilities otherwise defined by law. No obligation in this AGREEMENT shall limit the FCZD in fulfilling its responsibilities otherwise defined by law. 19.Signatures. The undersigned representatives accept the provisions of this AGREEMENT. This AGREEMENT shall be in effect when signed by both parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this AGREEMENT as of the dates written below. Accepted and executed this day of 12009 WHATCOM CONSERVATION DISTRICT. By Jerry Van Dellen, Chairman WHATCOM COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT By: Pete Kremen, Whatcom County Executive Acting on behalf of the Whatcom County Flood Control Zone District Date: STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF On this day of , 2009 before me personally appeared to me known to be the County Executive of Whatcom County and who executed the above instrument and who acknowledged to me the act of signing and sealing thereof. NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington, residing at: Interlocal Agreement: CPAL Low -Impact Livestock Operations Page - 5 - v 1.0 My commission expires Recornmended for Approval: -; I �, dw, Frank M. Abart Date Public Works Director Approved as to form: �!_'✓GPI �,/ T�- 1 Daniel L. Gibson Date Asst. Chief Civil Deputy Prosecutor Interlocal Agreement: CPAL Low -Impact Livestock Operations Page - 6 - 1.0 86 EXHIBIT A Implementation of Whatcom County Conservation Program on Agricultural Lands (CPAL) for low -impact livestock operations This scope of services incorporates by reference and builds on the activities, products, and services provided under the previous contract. The Tasks below describe Farm Planning Program activities to be completed during the course of this AGREEMENT. Some tasks are inter - dependant. Therefore, it is necessary for the FCZD and CONSERVATION DISTRICT to agree to a work plan that prioritizes objectives and tasks and then work closely to coordinate their respective efforts. The work plan will be adaptively managed taking new circumstances and technologies into consideration and at the agreement of each party. Budget figures identified per task in this agreement are associated with the standard budget object billing format outlined in "Payment" section of the AGREEMENT. Given the nature of the tasks and acknowledged need for adaptive management, the CONSERVATION DISTRICT will be allowed flexibility to move funds between Tasks if needed. Task 1: Create and service an Effective FCZD/CONSERVATION DISTRICT Project Administration and Management Process 1.1 The FCZD and CONSERVATION DISTRICT will establish and service an effective working relationship by: a. Designating financial and project leads for the respective parties; b. Facilitating a regular schedule of communication between the County and CONSERVATION DISTRICT; c. Facilitating adaptive management of FCZD and CONSERVATION DISTRICT activities to accomplish the goals of this AGREEMENT based upon work loads, staff experiences, new circumstances and technologies and landowner needs in meeting CAO prescriptions. Deliverables: FCZD -- 1. Effective administration and management of FCZD tasks within this AGREEMENT. 2. Maintenance of all project records. 3. Prompt review and payment of properly presented vouchers. CONSERVATION DISTRICT -- 1. Effective administration and management of CONSERVATION DISTRICT tasks within this AGREEMENT. 2. Maintenance of all project records. 3. Timely submittal of all required performance items, progress reports, financial vouchers. Total Task Cost $ 20,000 Interlocal Agreement: CPAL Low -Impact Livestock Operations v 1.0 Page - 7 - Task 2: Establishing the Proactive, Systematic Process Providing a Clear CPAL Compliance Pathway to Low Impact Livestock Operations 2.1 The FCZD and CONSERVATION DISTRICT will develop, modify, and service a "Joint Work Plan" that: a. Identifies necessary elements of an effective CPAL program of low -impact livestock operations including: i. priority geographical areas, ii. independent and collaborative activities iii. standard farm conservation planning materials (checklist, workbook & fact sheets, iv. timelines for completion of program components v. a database to track landowner compliance with the CAO. b. Identifies project team members and their respective roles in implementation of the work plan, 2.2 The FCZD and CONSERVATION DISTRICT will collaboratively develop, update, and refine as mutually agreed upon CPAL materials to provide effective guidance to livestock operators electing to utilize the CPAL outreach avenue. These materials - include a planning workbook and implementation fact sheets. The ideal would be that most livestock owners could develop a sufficient farm plan with little assistance. a. The FCZD will review and revise the materials when determined to be necessary to ensure consistency with the CAO. It will adopt and publish a final version for distribution and use. b. The CONSERVATION DISTRICT will continue to evaluate and make recommendations for revisions to fact sheets and the Standard Farm Conservation Plan Workbook for Low Impact Livestock Operations. c. The CONSERVATION DISTRICT will continue to provide technical input to the FCZD to facilitate updates to the workbook and fact sheets in an approved final version. 2.3 The FCZD and CONSERVATION DISTRICT will continue to develop coordinated messages appropriate for the respective staff roles to communicate to landowners consistently about their need to comply and alternative pathways of compliance with the CAO. Deliverables: FCZD — 1 . Review modifications of, approve revisions to, publish, and distribute a Farm Conservation Planning Workbook and fact sheets in Whatcom County's name 2. Adaptively manage and implement a systematic process to ensure compliance by low impact livestock operations with the CAO 3. Adaptively manage, and revise accurate, standard messages for County staff whether making inspections, working at the counter or answering the phone. CONSERVATION DISTRICT — 1. Based on adaptive management, revise and update the Standard Farm Conservation Plan workbook and supporting fact sheets to FCZD and facilitate approval. Interlocal Agreement: CPAL Low -Impact Livestock Operations Page - 8 - v 1.0 2. Adaptively manage and work with FCZD to develop and implement a systematic process to ensure compliance by low -impact livestock operations with the CAO. 3. Adaptively manage, and revise accurate standard messages for CONSERVATION DISTRICT staff whether conducting meeting one-on-one, presenting at workshops or answering the phone. Total Task Cost $10,000 Task 3: Implementing the Program 3.1 The FCZD and CONSERVATION DISTRICT will contact low -impact livestock operators to encourage protection of critical areas, shorelines and water quality. FCZD -- a. Facilitate CAO enforcement personnel and planning staff contact of 100 landowners with livestock near critical areas and assess whether they are managing their operations in ways that guard against negative impact to the critical areas. b. Facilitate planning staff's continued effortsto process and service Farm Plan projects (approximately 200 from 2008 activities) officially on record with PDS. Facilitate planning staff services to existing farm plan cases in 2010 as well as new farm plan cases developed in 2009. These activities include monitoring of farm plan BMP implementation and functioning. c. Continue to provide information on how to achieve compliance. Information may include materials, workshops and workshop notices, cost -share opportunities, etc. d. Refer landowners to the CONSERVATION DISTRICT for technical assistance if appropriate. CONSERVATION DISTRICT - e. Plan, advertise and conduct farm management workshops and tours to promote environmental stewardship and BMP implementation. Frequency of workshops and tours will be at least twice annually in 2009 and 2010. f. Promote the farm planning program and availability of technical assistance through networking with livestock related clubs and groups and participating in public events. g. Modify as appropriate, produce, and coordinate educational BMP fact sheets, guidance materials, maps, and web -based reference materials related to the farm planning program. h. Formulate and administer program participant surveys to identify barriers and benefits to BMP implementation in order to most effectively market desired stewardship behaviors. i. Follow up with workshop attendees, including telephone consultations and site visits. j. Conduct site visits and provide ongoing technical assistance to Whatcom County landowners for farm planning upon request, including assisting agricultural operators with the preparation of farm plans and the preparation of farm plans. k. Provide assistance to the COUNTY in participating in farm plan implementation and monitoring. Interlocal Agreement: CPAL Low -Impact Livestock Operations Page - 9 - v 1.0 89 Deliverables: FCZD — 1. Provide personal landowner contact and provide relevant CPAL compliance information to landowners. 2. Document compliance of low -impact operations with the CAO. 3. Refer landowners to CONSERVATION DISTRICT for technical assistance, including the preparation of farm plans. 4. Follow up with landowners to ensure implementation of a farm plan. 5. Conduct critical area assessments to support farm planning. CONSERVATION DISTRICT - 1 . Offer and conduct workshops, printed outreach materials, web -based information, and farm tours to educate farmers about potential environmental challenges and to introduce BMPs for resource protection. 2. Provide individual site visits, fact sheets, maps, best management practice (BMP) guidance, and other technical assistance, including farm plans, as requested by landowners. Total Task Cost $ 75,000 Task 4: Development of Moderate Impact Agricultural Operations Custom Farm Conservation Plan Materials - Develop Moderate Impact Agricultural Operations Custom Farm Conservation Planning materials in order to guide and direct farm operators in complying with the requirements of the Whatcom County Critical Areas Ordinance. Work in this task shall begin in 2009. Based on FCZD cooperation and status of Task 5, Custom Farm Conservation Planning materials will be completed by Decerrlber 31, 2009. CONSERVATION DISTRICT -- 4.1 The DISTRICT will support the FCZD in developing CPAL materials and a proactive, systematic process necessary to provide a clear compliance pathway to Moderate Impact Agricultural Operations, including livestock, row crops, berry production, and manure spreading operations. 4.2 The CONSERVATION DISTRICT will prepare a 1st DRAFT planning workbook similar in format to the Standard Farm Conservation Planning Workbook for Low Impact Agricultural Operations. Additional elements could include provisions for; application of agricultural nutrients at "agronomic" rates, application of liquid manure to avoid surface water pollution, guidance for field, row, tree and berry crop farmers, pest management. COUNTY -- 4.3 The FCZD will review and approve a 1st DRAFT Custom Farm Conservation Planning Workbook for Moderate Impact Agricultural Operations for CONSERVATION DISTRICT to present to Whatcom County Agriculture Advisory Committee (see Task 5). 4.4 The FCZD, in cooperation with CONSERVATION DISTRICT, will review comments from Whatcom County Agriculture Advisory Committee on 1st DRAFT Custom Farm Conservation Planning Workbook and provide input to the CONSERVATION DISTRICT .in developing 2nd DRAFT. Interlocal Agreement: CPAL Low -Impact Livestock Operations Page - 10 - v 1.0 90 4.5 The FCZD will approve 2nd DRAFT and produce a final approved version of Custom Farm Conservation Planning Workbook. Deliverables: FCZD — 1. FCZD will provide timely and substantive response to CONSERVATION DISTRICT inquiries and requests for input. 2. FCZD will produce an approved final version of Custom Farm Conservation Planning Workbook for use by Moderate Impact Agricultural Operations. CONSERVATION DISTRICT — 1 . CONSERVATION DISTRICT will provide a 1st DRAFT Custom Farm Conservation Planning workbook for Moderate Impact Agricultural Operations to FCZD. 2. CONSERVATION DISTRICT will provide timely and substantive response to FCZD inquiries and requests for input and assistance. 3. Following completion of Task 5, CONSERVATION DISTRICT will provide 2nd DRAFT Custom Farm Conservation Planning workbook to FCZD. Total Task Cost $20,000 Task 5: Provide technical assistance to farmers referred to District by County, and to consultants interested in developing moderate impact custom farm plans. 5.1 -- Assist farm operators referred to DISTRICT by County with the development of moderate impact standard and custom farm plans that meet CPAL guidelines. CONSERVATION DISTRICT -- a. Provide guidance to farm operators in using moderate impact farm planning materials and in preparing farm plans. b. Provide information concerning BMP implementation. c. Provide guidance to farmers regarding operation and maintenance of incorporated structural tools and management systems; d. Where appropriate assist operators to develop conservation plans which incorporate USDA cost -share or incentive programs; 5.2 — Conduct one workshop to: CONSERVATION DISTRICT -- a. Assist farmers and consultants interested in completing self -assessment and developing and submitting plan to protect critical areas. Deliverables - CONSERVATION DISTRICT -- 1. Provide technical assistance to farmers referred to District by County or through contacts made by the District. 2. ,Facilitate one workshop for interested farmers and consultants to coincide with finalization of Moderate Impact Farm Planning Workbook and guidance materials. Total Task Cost $ 70,000 Interlocal Agreement: CPAL Low -Impact Livestock Operations Page - 11 - v 1.0 91 Total Contract Amount: $195,000 Interlocal Agreement: CPAL Low -Impact Livestock Operations Page - 12 - v 1.0 92 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 2009-235 CLEARANCES Initial Date Date Received in Council O ace Agenda Date Assigned to: Originator: DGD 514109 In"A E C E V MAY 0 5 2009 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL 5112109 Finance / Council Division Head: De t. Head: Prosecutor: "-' A c-'--t-us Purchasing/Bud et.• (j� S Executive: TITLE OF DOCUMENT.• Resolution to approve purchase of Antiviral Medication in response to the Swine Flu virus. ATTACHMENTS: Cover Memo and Resolution SEPA review required? ( ) Yes ( x ) NO SEPA review completed? ( ) Yes ( x ) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing ? ( ) Yes ( x ) NO Requested Date: SUMMARYSTATEMENT 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.) Resolution to approve purchase of Antiviral Medication in response to the Swine Flu Virus. COMMITTEE ACTION.• COUNCIL ACTION: Related County Contract #: Related File Numbers: Ordinance or Resolution Number: 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.aas/council. 93 WHATCOM COUNTY Health Department Memorandum TO: Pete Kremen, Executive FROM: Regina A. Delahunt, Director DATE: May 4, 2009 RE: Antiviral Resolution Regina A. Delahunt Director Greg Stern, M.D. Health Officer Because of the spread of swine flu, the federal government has declared a public health emergency thereby putting state and local emergency response plans into action. Whatcom County has responded by establishing a Unified Incident Command structure to address this rapidly emerging issue. Whatcom County Health Department is working with County DEM, City of Bellingham OEM, and St. Joseph Hospital in a unified effort to prepare for and respond to the emergence of swine flu in Whatcom County. The federal government maintains a Strategic National Stockpile (SNS) of antiviral medication sufficient to treat 15% of the U.S. population. CDC has begun releasing the stockpile of antiviral medication for treating those ill with the swine flu virus. The antiviral medications are currently being distributed through state health departments to local health jurisdictions based on population. We anticipate receiving our initial shipment this week. It will contain enough medication to treat 5% of the county population. CDC recommends that communities have on hand sufficient quantities of antiviral medication to treat 25% of their population. To that end, the federal government contracts with pharmaceutical manufactures to allow local governments to purchase additional supplies of antiviral medications at a subsidized cost to treat the additional 10% of the population as recommended by CDC. The cost to Whatcom County to purchase these additional medications is approximately $260,000. In addition we anticipate that we will need to purchase other medical supplies and services to respond to the outbreak. We are currently estimating this cost at $40,000. We are requesting the Council to authorize purchases through the attached Council Resolution to ensure that we are able to provide critical medications and supplies to the citizens of Whatcom County. ADMINISTRATION 509 Girard Street COMMUNITY HEALTH 1500 North State Street PUBLIC HEALTH DISEASE RESPONSE Bellingham, WA 98225-4005 Bellingham, WA 98225-4551 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH (360) 676-6724 ALWAYS WORKING FOR A SAFER AND (360) 676-4593 HUMAN SERVICES FAX (360) 676-6771 HEALTHIER WASHINGTON (360) 676-6762 E SPONSORED BY: Regina Hunt PROPOSED BY: Executive INDRODUCTION DATE: May 4, 2009 RESOLUTION NO RESOLUTION TO APPROVE PURCHASE OF ANTIVIRAL MEDICATIONS WHEREAS, the federal government has declared a public health emergency due to the spread of the swine flu virus in the United States and the world; and WHEREAS, Whatcom County's allocation of antiviral medication contained in the Federal Strategic National Stockpile is sufficient to treat only 15% of our county population; and WHEREAS, CDC recommends that communities have on hand sufficient quantities of antiviral medication to treat 25% of the population; and WHEREAS, there are presently limited quantities of commercially available antiviral medications in Whatcom County; and WHEREAS, additional supplies of antiviral medications are needed to effectively respond to a pandemic influenza event affecting Whatcom County protecting vulnerable individuals from serious illness and death; and WHEREAS, the federal government has arranged for limited quantities of antiviral medications to be purchased by local governments from manufacturers at a subsidized price; and WHEREAS, arrangements have been made to store, inventory, and protect -the stockpile of antiviral medications purchased following federal guidelines until they are needed; and WHEREAS, this is an emergent public health event that could have serious health and economic repercussions for the County. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Whatcom County Council that: 1. The Whatcom County Executive is authorized to purchase a stockpile of antiviral medications under the terms of the agreement that the federal government has with the pharmaceutical manufacturers, and 2. The Whatcom County Executive is authorized to purchase other necessary supplies, services, and labor to respond to a swine flu outbreak in the County, and 3. The total amount authorized for these purposes is $300,000 and, 4. The Whatcom County Executive will prepare an amendment to the budget to appropriate these expenditures. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Whatcom County Council unanimously declares its endorsement of -the purchase of antiviral medications in response to the Swine Flu virus. APPROVED this day of - 12009. 95 ATTEST: WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Dana Brown -Davis, Council Clerk Seth Fleetwood, Chair APPROVED as to form: Civil Deput;lMr_osliNting Attorney 0 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 2009-236 CLEARANCES Initial Date Date Received in Council Office Agenda Date Assigned to: Originator: Rod Lamb RL 4124109 D E (j � /J E D � �j \V/ 5/12/09 Finance & to r i 1 Division Head: Z . p MAY 0 5 2009 Department Head: t� Michael McFarlane WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL Prosecutor: S- Purchasin /Bud et:,/ ,Q S 0 Executive: TITLE OF DOC NT.• Hovander Park Maintenance Facility Professional Services Contract ATTACHMENTS: SEPA review required? ( ) Yes ( X) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing ? ( ) Yes (X ) NO SEPA review completed? ( ) Yes ( X ) NO Requested Date: SUMMARYSTATEMENT OR LEGAL NOTICE LANGUAGE: (If this item is an ordinance or requires apublic 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.) Parks requests approval of the attached contract with Carletti Architects for the Design Services for Hovander Maintenance Facility. Parks proposes to design and construct anew maintenance facility at Hovander Homestead Park. This project will replace the existing facility that is within a flood area and is inadequately sized. The maintenance facility will serve two Park regions allowing better freeway access to facilities located along the I-S corridor greatly reducing crew travel time to these facilities. Parks received nine proposals for design services on March 3r`' 2009 (RFP 09-1 S). Four firms were interviewed on Marchl8`h 2009. One firm, Carletti Architects demonstrated extensive experience with similarprojects, completing those projects within budget and also proposed a streamlined approach to project execution. Additionally, client references were contacted and those individuals provided very positive experiences working with Mr. Carletti. The attached contract with Carletti Architects begins the initial design phase of the project and includes: site evaluation, building programming, schematic architectural design and preliminary cost estimating. COMMITTEE ACTION. • COUNCIL ACTION.• Related County Contract #: Related File Numbers: Ordinance or Resolution Number: 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.us/council. 97 WHATCOM COUNTY PARKS & RECREATION DEPT. 3373 Mount Baker Highway Bellingham, WA 98226 MEMORANDUM TO: Pete Kremen, County Executive FROM: Michael McFarlan i RE: Design Services for Hovander Park Maintenance Facility DATE: April 13t" 2009 Michael McFalane Director Enclosed are two (2) originals of the design services contract for Hovander Park Maintenance Facility between Whatcom County Parks & Recreation Department and Carletti Architects, P.S. for your review and signature. ■ Background and Purpose Parks requests approval of the attached contract with Carletti Architects for the Design Services for Hovander Maintenance Facility. This contract will begin the initial design effort for the new maintenance facility. This project will replace an existing, facility that is within a flood area and is inadequately sized. The new maintenance facility will serve two Park regions and allows for better freeway access greatly reducing crew travel time to western Whatcom County parks. ■ Funding Amount and Source This project is funded with REET II, and was approved by ASR 2009-4216. The total project budget is $495,073 ■ Differences from Previous Contract This is a new contract. Please contact Michael McFarlane at extension 32072, if you have any questions or concerns regarding the terms of this agreement, Encl. WHATCOM COUNTY CONTRACT INFORMATION SHEET Whatcom County Contract No. a oo �0503 3 Originating Department: Parks & Recreation Contract Administrator: Rod Lamb Contractor's I Agency Name: Carletti Architects, P.S. Is this a New Contract? If not, is this an Amendment or Renewal to an Existing Contract? Yes X No Yes _ No If yes, previous number(s): Is this a grant agreement? Yes — No X If yes, grantor agency contract number(s) CFDA number Is this contract grant funded? Yes _ No X If yes, associated Whatcom County grant contract number(s) Is this contract the result of a RFP or Bid process? Yes X No If yes, RFP and Bid number(s) RFP 90-15 Contract Amount: (sum of orig. contract amt If a Professional Services Agreement is more than $15, 000 or a Bid is more than and any prior amendments) $35, 000, please submit an Agenda Bill for Council approval and a supporting $_28,500 This Amendment Amount: memo. Any amendment that provides either a 10% increase in amount or more than $10, 000, whichever is greater, must also go to Council and will need an agenda bill $ N/A and supporting memo. If less than these thresholds, just submit to Executive with Total Amended Amount: supporting memo for approval. $ N/A Scope of Services Preparation of schematic design drawings for a new Parks maintenance facility located at Hovander Homestead Park. The new maintenance facility will be located near the intersection of Hovander Road and Nielsen Avenue. Specific services include: site evaluation, building programming, schematic architectural design and preliminary cost estimating. Term of Contract: Commence after Expiration Date: December 315' 2009 issuance of "Notice to Proceed" Contract Routing Stevs & Signof, , !sign or initial7 findicate date transmitted 1. Prepared by: Rod Lamb Date_4124109 [electronic] 2. Attorney reviewed. _rjw Date 4125109 [electronic] 3. AS Finance reviewed: � Date 5 electronic] 4. IT reviewed if IT related"" Date [electronic] 5. Corrections made: Date [electronic] hard copy printed 6. Attorney signoff. 1 Date 7. Contractor signed: Date 8. Submitted to Exec Office ,� Date s- �{-p [summary via electronic; hardcopiesJ 9. Reviewed by DCA - Date 10. Council approved (if necessary) Date 11. Executive signed: Date 12. Contractor Original 13. Returned to dept, Date 14. County Original to Council Date this form may need to expand to more than one page this form may need to expand to more than one page COUN1 ` IGINAlo. Whatcom County Contract No. { boo C/os 033 CONTRACT FOR SERVICES AGREEMENT Design Services for Hovander Park Maintenance Facility Carletti Architects, P.S., hereinafter called Contractor, and Whatcom County, hereinafter referred to as County, agree and contract as set forth in this Agreement, including: General Conditions, pp. 3 to 7 Exhibit A (Scope of Work), p. 8 Exhibit B (Compensation), p. 9 Exhibit C (Certificate of Insurance), pp. 10 to 13 Copies of these items are attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if fully set forth herein. The term of this Agreement shall commence upon notice to proceed, and shall, unless terminated or renewed as elsewhere provided in the Agreement, terminate on the 31 st day of December, 2009. The general purpose or objective of this Agreement is to: provide architectural and civil engineering services for Hovander Park Maintenance Facility, as more fully and definitively described in Exhibit A hereto. The maximum consideration for the initial term of this agreement or for any renewal term shall not exceed $28,500. The Contract Number, set forth above, shall be included on all billings or correspondence in connection therewith. Contractor acknowledges and by signing this contract agrees that the Indemnification provisions set forth in Paragraphs 11.1, 21.1, 30.1, 31.2, 32.1, 34.2, and 34.3, if included, are totally and fully part of this contract and have been mutually nnegotiated by the parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement thi�ay. of 20 qS—. STATE OF WASHINGTON ) �_ ) ss. " COUNTY OF c� \ O 6,A ) amt—tto4t: y of v 200E before me personally appeared' C e itome known tobeth&s -'A"A- (title)of (Company) and who executed the above instrument and who acknowledged to me the act of signing and sealing thereof. BARBARA A. NIMS NOTARY PUBLIC STAT5 OF WASHINGTON COMMISSION EXPIRES MARCH 19. 2013 Contract for Services Agreement Hovander Maintenance Facility — Design Services NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washing on, residing at My commission expires (9 t3 Page 1 v 1.0 100 WHATCOM COUNTY: Recommended for Ax Date Aped as to form: Prosecuting Attorney Y. Date Approved: Accepted for Whatcom County: By: Pete Kremen, Whatcom County Executive STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss COUNTY OF WHATCOM ) On this day of , 20 _, before me personally appeared Pete Kremen, to me known to be the Executive of Whatcom County, who executed the above instrument and who acknowledged to me the act of signing and sealing thereof. NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington, residing at . My commission expires CONTRACTOR INFORMATION: Carletti Architects, P.S. (Type in Name of .Contractor/Firm) Peter J. Carletti, President (Type in Name & Title of Signatory Authorized by Firm Bylaws, if applicable) Address: 116 E. Fir Street, Suite A Mount Vernon, WA 98273 Mailing Address: Same as above Contact Name: Peter J. Carletti Contact Phone:1360) 424-0394 Contact FAX: (360) 424-5726 Contact Email: _Peter(a)carlettiarchitects. com Contract for Services Agreement Hovander Maintenance Facility — Design Services Page 2 GENERAL CONDITIONS Series 30-39: Provisions Related to Administration of Agreement 0.1 Scope of Services: The Contractor agrees to provide to the County services and any materials as set forth in the project narrative identified as Exhibit "A", during the agreement period. No material, labor, or facilities will be furnished by the County, unless otherwise provided for in the Agreement. Series 10-19: Provisions Related to Term and Termination 10.1 Term: Services provided by Contractor prior to or after the term of this contract shall be performed at the expense of Contractor and are not compensable under this contract unless both parties hereto agree to such provision in writing. The term of this Agreement may be extended by mutual agreement of the parties; provided, however, that the Agreement is in writing and signed by both parties. 10.2 Extension: Not Applicable 11.1 Termination for Default: Not Applicable 11.2 Termination for Reduction in Funding: Not Applicable 11.3 Termination for Public Convenience: The County may terminate the Agreement in whole or in part whenever the County determines, in its sole discretion, that such termination is in the interests of the County. Whenever the Agreement is terminated in accordance with this paragraph, the Contractor shall be entitled to payment for actual work performed at unit contract prices for completed items of work. An equitable adjustment in the contract price for partially completed items of work will be made, but such adjustment shall not include provision for loss of anticipated profit on deleted or uncompleted work. Termination of this Agreement by the County at any time during the term, whether for default or convenience, shall not constitute breach of contract by the County. Series 20-29: Provisions Related to Consideration and Payments 20.1 Accounting and Payment for Contractor Services: Payment to the Contractor for services rendered under this Agreement shall be as set forth in Exhibit "B." Where Exhibit "B" requires payments by the County, payment shall be based upon written claims supported, unless otherwise provided in Exhibit "B," by documentation of units of work actually performed and amounts earned, including, where appropriate, the actual number of days worked each month, total number of hours for the month, and the total dollar payment requested, so as to comply with municipal auditing requirements. Unless specifically stated in Exhibit "B" or approved in writing in advance by the official executing this Agreement for the County or his designee (hereinafter referred to as the "Administrative Officer") the County will not reimburse the Contractor for any costs or expenses incurred by the Contractor in the performance of this contract. Where required, the County shall, upon receipt of appropriate documentation, compensate the Contractor, no more often than monthly, in accordance with the County's customary procedures, pursuant to the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit "B." 21.1 Taxes: The Contractor understands and acknowledges that the County will not withhold Federal or State income taxes. Where required by State or Federal law, the Contractor authorizes the County to withhold for any taxes other than income taxes (i.e., Medicare). All compensation received by the Contractor will be reported to the Internal Revenue Service at the end of the calendar year in accordance with the applicable IRS regulations. It is the responsibility of the Contractor to make the necessary estimated tax payments throughout the year, if any, and the Contractor is solely liable for any tax obligation arising from the Contractor's performance of this Agreement. The Contractor hereby agrees to indemnify the County against any demand to pay taxes arising from the Contractor's failure to pay taxes on compensation earned pursuant to this Agreement. Contract for Services Agreement Hovander Maintenance Facility — Design Services Page 3 v 1.0 102 The County will pay sales and use taxes imposed on goods or services acquired hereunder as required by law. The Contractor must pay all other taxes, .including, but not limited to, Business and Occupation Tax, taxes based on the Contractor's gross or net income, or personal property to which the County does not hold title. The County is exempt from Federal Excise Tax. 22.1 Withholding Payment: In the event the County's Administrative Officer determines that the Contractor has failed to perform any obligation under this Agreement within the times set forth in this Agreement, then the County may withhold from amounts otherwise due and payable to Contractor the amount determined by the County as necessary to cure the default, until the Administrative Officer determines that such failure to perform has been cured. Withholding under this clause shall not be deemed a breach entitling Contractor to termination or damages, provided that the County promptly gives notice in writing to the Contractor of the nature of the default or failure to perform, and in no case more than 10 days after it determines to withhold amounts otherwise due. A determination of the Administrative Officer set forth in a notice to the Contractor of the action required and/or the amount required. to cure any alleged failure to perform shall be deemed conclusive, except to the extent that the Contractor acts within the times and in strict accord with the provisions of the Disputes clause of this Agreement. The County may act in accordance with any determination of the Administrative Officer which has become conclusive under this clause, without prejudice to any other remedy under the Agreement, to take all or any of the following actions: (1) cure any failure or default, (2) to pay any amount so required to be paid and to charge the same to the account of the Contractor, (3) to set off any amount so paid or incurred from amounts due or to become due the Contractor. In the event the Contractor obtains relief upon a claim under the Disputes clause, no penalty or damages shall accrue to Contractor by reason of good faith withholding by the County under this clause. 23.1 Labor Standards: The Contractor agrees to comply with all applicable state and federal requirements, including but not limited to those pertaining to payment of wages and working conditions, in accordance with RCW 39.12.040, the Prevailing Wage Act; the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990; the Davis -Bacon Act; and the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act providing for weekly payment of prevailing wages, minimum overtime pay, and providing that no laborer or mechanic shall be required to work in surroundings or under conditions which are unsanitary, hazardous, or dangerous to health and safety as determined by regulations promulgated by the Federal Secretary of Labor and the State of Washington. Series 30-39: Provisions Related to Administration of Agreement 30.1 Independent Contractor: The Contractor's services shall be furnished by the Contractor as an independent contractor, and nothing herein contained shall be construed to create a relationship of employer -employee or master -servant, but all payments made hereunder and all services performed shall be made and performed pursuant to this Agreement by the Contractor as an independent contractor. The Contractor acknowledges that the entire compensation for this Agreement is specified in Exhibit "B" and the Contractor is not entitled to any benefits including, but not limited to: vacation pay, holiday pay, sick leave pay, medical, dental, or other insurance benefits, or any other rights or privileges afforded to employees of the County. The Contractor represents that he/she/it maintains a separate place of business, serves clients other than the County, will report all income and expense accrued under this contract to the Internal Revenue Service on a Schedule C, and has a tax account with the State of Washington Department of Revenue for payment.of all sales and use and Business and Occupation taxes collected by the State of Washington. Contractor will defend, indemnify and hold harmless the County, its officers, agents or employees from any loss or expense, including, but not limited to, settlements, judgments, setoffs, attorneys' fees or costs incurred by reason of claims or demands because of breach of the provisions of this paragraph. 30.2 Assignment and Subcontracting: The performance of all activities contemplated by this agreement shall be accomplished by the Contractor. No portion of this contract may be assigned or subcontracted to any other individual, firm or entity without the express and prior written approval of the County. 30.3 No Guarantee of Employment: The performance of all or part of this contract by the Contractor shall not operate to vest any employment rights whatsoever and shall not be deemed to guarantee any employment of the Contractor or any employee of the Contractor or any subcontractor or any employee of any subcontractor by the County at the present time or in the future. 31.1 Ownership of Items Produced: When the Contractor creates any copyrightable materials or invents any patentable property, the Contractor may copyright or patent the same, but the County retains a royalty -free, nonexclusive and irrevocable license to reproduce, publish, recover, or otherwise use the materials or property and to authorize other governments to use the same for state or local governmental purposes. Contractor further Contract for Services Agreement Hovander Maintenance Facility - Design Services Page 4 , v 1.0 103 agrees to make research, notes, and other work products produced in the performance of this Agreement available to the County upon request. 31.2 Patent/Copyright Infringement: Not Applicable 32.1 Confidentiality: Not Applicable 33.1 Right to Review: This contract is subject to review by any Federal, State or County auditor. The County or its designee shall have the right to review and monitor the financial and service components of this program by whatever means are deemed expedient by the Administrative Officer or by the County Auditor's Office. Such review may occur with or without notice and may include, but is not limited to, on -site inspection by County agents or employees, inspection of all records or other materials which the County deems pertinent to the Agreement and its performance, and any and all communications with or evaluations by service recipients under this Agreement. The Contractor shall preserve and maintain all financial records and records relating to the performance of work under this Agreement for three (3) years after contract termination, and shall make them available for such review, within Whatcom County, State of Washington, upon request. Contractor also agrees to notify the Administrative Officer in advance of any inspections, audits, or program review by any individual, agency, or governmental unit whose purpose is to review the services provided within the terms of this Agreement. If no advance notice is given to the Contractor, then the Contractor agrees to notify the Administrative Officer as soon as it is practical. 34.1 Proof of Insurance: The Contractor shall carry for the duration of this Agreement general liability and property damage insurance with the following minimums: Property Damage per occurrence - $500,000.00 General Liability & Property Damage for bodily injury- $1,000,000.00 A certificate of such insurance, that also identifies the County as an additional insured, is attached hereto as Exhibit "C". 34.2 Industrial Insurance Waiver: With respect to the performance of this agreement and as to claims against the County, its officers, agents and employees, the Contractor expressly waives its immunity under Title 51 of the Revised Code of Washington, the Industrial Insurance Act, for injuries to its employees and agrees that the obligations to indemnify, defend and hold harmless provided in this agreement extend to any claim brought. by or on behalf of any employee of the Contractor. This waiver is mutually negotiated by the parties to this agreement. 34.3 Defense & Indemnity Agreement: The Contractor agrees to defend, indemnify and save harmless the County, its appointed and elective officers and employees, from and against all loss or expense, including, but not limited to, judgments, settlements, attorneys' fees and costs by reason of any and all claims and demands upon the County, its elected or appointed officials or employees for damages because of personal or bodily injury, including death at any time resulting therefrom, sustained by any person or persons and on account of damage to property, including loss of use thereof, whether such injury to persons or damage to property is due to the negligence of the Contractor, its subcontractors, its successor or assigns, or its agents, servants, or employees, the County, its appointed or elected officers, employees or their agents, except only such injury or damage as shall have been occasioned by the sole negligence of the County or its appointed or elected officials or employees. It is further provided that no liability shall attach to the County by reason of entering into this contract, except as expressly provided herein. 35.1 Non -Discrimination in Employment: The County's policy is to provide equal opportunity in all terms, conditions and privileges of employment for all qualified applicants and employees without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, sexual orientation, disability, or veteran status. The Contractor shall comply with all laws prohibiting discrimination against any employee or applicant for employment on the grounds of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, disability, or veteran status, except where such constitutes a bona fide occupational qualification. Furthermore, in those cases in which the Contractor is governed by such laws, the Contractor shall take affirmative action to insure that applicants are employed, and treated during employment, without regard to their race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, sexual orientation, disability, or veteran status, except where such constitutes a bona fide occupational qualification. Such action shall include, but not be limited to: advertising, hiring, promotions, layoffs or terminations, rate of pay or other forms of compensation benefits, selection for training including apprenticeship, and participation in recreational and educational activities. In all Contract for Services Agreement Hovander Maintenance Facility — Design Services Page 5 v 1.0 104 solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by them or on their behalf, the Contractor shall state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex or national origin. The foregoing provisions shall also be binding upon any subcontractor, provided that the foregoing provision shall not apply to contracts or subcontractors for standard commercial supplies or raw materials, or to sole proprietorships with no employees. 35.2 Non -Discrimination in Client Services: Not Applicable 36.1 Waiver of Noncompetition: Not Applicable 36.2 Conflict of Interest: If at any time prior to commencement of, or during the term of this Agreement, Contractor or any of its employees involved in the performance of this Agreement shall have or develop an interest in the subject matter of this Agreement that is potentially in conflict with the County's interest, then Contractor shall immediately notify the County of the same. The notification of the County shall be made with sufficient specificity to enable the County to make an informed judgment as to whether or not the County's interest may be compromised in any manner by the existence of the conflict, .actual or potential. Thereafter, the County may require the Contractor to take reasonable steps to remove the conflict of interest. The County may also terminate this contract according to the provisions herein for termination. 37.1 Administration of Contract: This Agreement shall be subject to all laws, rules, and regulations of the United States of America, the State of Washington, and political subdivisions of the State of Washington. The Contractor also agrees to comply with applicable federal, state, county or municipal standards for licensing, certification and operation of facilities and programs, and accreditation and licensing of individuals. The County hereby appoints, and the Contractor hereby accepts, the Whatcom County Executive, and his or her designee, as the County's representative, hereinafter referred to as the Administrative Officer, for the purposes of administering the provisions of this Agreement, including the County's right to receive and act on all reports and documents, and any auditing performed by the County related to this Agreement. The Administrative Officer for purposes of this agreement is: Insert here (name, job title, work address) 37.2 Notice: Except as set forth elsewhere in the Agreement, for all purposes under this Agreement except service of process, notice shall be given by the Contractor to the County's Administrative Officer under this Agreement. Notice to the Contractor for all purposes under this Agreement shall be given to the address provided by the Contractor herein above in the "Contractor Information" section. Notice may be given by delivery or by depositing in the US Mail, first class, postage prepaid. Series 40-49: Provisions Related to Interpretation of Agreement and Resolution of Disputes 40.1 Modifications: Either party may request changes in the Agreement. Any and all agreed modifications, to be valid and binding upon either party, shall be in writing and signed by both of the parties. 40.2 Contractor Commitments, Warranties and Representations: Not Applicable 41.1 Severability: If any term or condition of this contract or the application thereof to any person(s) or circumstances is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other terms, .conditions or applications which can be given effect without the invalid term, condition or application. To this end, the terms and conditions of this contract are declared severable. 41.2 Waiver: Waiver of any breach or condition of this contract shall not be deemed a waiver of any prior or subsequent breach. No term or condition of this contract shall be held to be waived, modified or deleted except by an instrument, in writing, signed by the parties hereto. The failure of the County to insist upon strict performance of any of the covenants and agreements of this Agreement, or to exercise any option herein conferred in any one or more instances, shall not be construed to be a waiver or relinquishment of any such, or any other covenants or agreements, but the same shall be and remain in full force and effect. 42.1 Disputes: Contract for Services Agreement Hovander Maintenance Facility — Design Services Page 6 v 1.0 105 a. General: Differences between the Contractor and the County, arising under and by virtue of the Contract Documents, shall be brought to the attention of the County at the earliest possible time in order that such matters may be sett[ed or other appropriate action promptly taken. Except for such objections as are made of record in the manner hereinafter specified and within the time limits stated, the records, orders, rulings, instructions, and decisions of the Administrative Officer shall be final and conclusive. Notice of Potential Claims: The Contractor shall not be entitled to additional compensation which otherwise may be payable, or to extension of time for (1) any act or failure to act by the Administrative Officer or the County, or (2) the happening of any event or occurrence, unless the Contractor has given the County a written Notice of Potential Claim within ten (10) days of the commencement of the act, failure, or event giving rise to the claim, and before final payment by the County. The written Notice of Potential Claim shall set forth the reasons for which the Contractor believes additional compensation or extension of time is due, the nature of the cost involved, and insofar as possible, the amount of the potential claim. Contractor shall keep full and complete daily records of the work performed, labor and material used, and all costs and additional time claimed to be additional. c. Detailed Claim: The Contractor shall not be entitled to claim any such additional compensation, or extension of time, unless within thirty (30) days of the accomplishment of the portion of the work from which the claim arose, and before final payment by the County, the Contractor has given the County a detailed written statement of each element of cost or other compensation requested and of all elements of additional time required, and copies of any supporting documents evidencing the amount or the extension of time claimed to be due. Arbitration: Not Applicable 43.1 Venue and Choice of Law: In the event that any litigation should arise concerning the construction or interpretation of any of the terms of this Agreement, the venue of such action of litigation shall be in the courts of the State of Washington in and for the County of Whatcom. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Washington. 44.1 Survival: The provisions of paragraphs 11.1, 11.2, 11.3 , 21.1, 22.1, 30.1, 31.1, 31.2, 32.1, 33.1, 34.2, 34.3, 36.1, 40.2, 41.2, 42.1, and 43.1, if utilized, shall survive, notwithstanding the termination or invalidity of this Agreement for any reason. 46.1 Entire Agreement: This written Agreement, comprised of the writings signed or otherwise identified and attached hereto, represents the entire Agreement between the parties and supersedes any prior oral statements, discussions or understandings between the parties. Contract for Services Agreement Hovander Maintenance Facility — Design Services Page 7 v 1.0 106 EXHIBIT "A" (SCOPE OF WORK) The Consultant shall provide the following Specified Services for each phase of service for the Project as outlined below. All architectural and engineering work shall be performed using accepted principals and practices and shall provide quality products that meet or exceed industry standards. Task 1: Evaluate Site and Building Program Task 1.1 Attend pre -design meeting with Parks personnel. Finalize work scope and establish preliminary schedule. Assemble and review existing maps, plans, documents, reports and other available information. Conduct a site visit by key project staff, take photos, and become familiar with existing conditions. Review existing park maintenance facilities. Prepare preliminary building program identifying spaces, sizes, adjacencies and physical requirements. Review program with Parks staff. Task 1.2 Site visit to document existing conditions Prepare design narrative structural report/memo regarding existing buildings and suitability to retain and re -use. Meet with Parks staff to present findings. Task 2: Evaluate Site Programming — Civil Engineering Acquire topographic survey, create base map and drawing setup. Review existing site conditions and drainage basin boundary. Critical Areas Review / Flood Elevation Research. Review stormwater options. Prepare utility improvement schedule (water, sewer, storm, natural gas, electric and phone). Prepare site constraint summary. Review geotechnical summary. Identify applicable permitting requirements Task 3: Schematic Design - Architectural Schematic code check for IBC issues Review zoning of site and requirements for setbacks, parking and other issues as related to Whatcom County requirements. Prepare massing diagram and site plan layout of building footprint(s) and positioning on site. Review massing diagram with Parks staff. Prepare preliminary site plan, floor plan(s), elevations and building sections for Parks staff review. Attend pre -application meeting with Whatcom County Planning & Development Services and City of Ferndale (if applicable). Meet with Parks staff to review design schemes (two meetings) Revise design schemes based on Parks staff review and comments. Prepare preliminary cost estimate including site work, utilities, building infrastructure, structural, mechanical, plumbing and electrical components. Review preliminary cost estimate with Parks staff. Task 4: Schematic Design — Civil Attend programming and design review meetings with Parks staff (4 meetings). Incorporate architectural site plan. Prepare preliminary water and sanitary sewer plan. Prepare preliminary stormwater plan. Prepare preliminary Stormwater Management Report. Prepare preliminary dry utility plan (natural gas, electricity, telephone) Prepare Engineer's Cost Estimate of civil/site improvements. Contract for Services Agreement Hovander Maintenance Facility — Design Services Page 8 v 1.0 107 EXHIBIT "B" (COMPENSATION) As consideration for the services provided pursuant to Exhibit A - Scope of work, the county agrees to compensate the contractor according to the hourly rates provided below. Other reasonable expenses incurred in the course of performing the duties herein shall be reimbursed. Mileage at IRS rate, other expenditures such as printing, postage and telephone charges shall be reimbursed at actual cost plus 5%. Contractor will invoice monthly. Invoices will include employee hours worked with tasks accomplished. Requests for reimbursement of expenses must be accompanied by copies of paid invoices itemizing costs incurred. Costs of alcoholic beverages are not eligible for reimbursement. Compensation shall not exceed $28,500. Any work performed prior to the effective date of this contract or continuing after the completion date of the same unless otherwise agreed upon in writing, will be at the contractor's expense. Progressive billings must be approved by the Parks Design & Development Supervisor before payment is made. The Contract Number, set forth, shall be included on all billings or correspondence in connection therewith. Hourly Rates: Principal $115.00/Hr. Project Manager I $90.00/Hr. Project Manager II $85.00/Hr. Project Designer I $90.00/Hr. Project Designer II $75.00/Hr. Space Planner $65.00/Hr. Drafter $70.00/Hr. Computer Modeling $75.00/Hr. Clerical $45.00/Hr. Contract for Services Agreement Hovander Maintenance Facility — Design Services v 1.0 Page 9 m ACOW. CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE 12/08/Is°"I'"Y) JUCER THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION nibble & Prentice, a USI Co. ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE P.O. Box 370 HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. Seattle, WA 98111 206 441-6300 INSURERS AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC # INSURED INSURERA: St Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Co 24767 Carletti Architects, P.S. INSURER B: 116 E. Fir Street, Suite A INSURER C: Mt. Vernon, WA 98273 INSURER D: INSURER E: COVERAGES THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. AGGREGATE LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. SR LTR D NS_R_ .TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER POLICY EFFECTIVE DATE MMIDO/YY POLICY EXPIRATION DATE hiMIDDIYY LIMITS GENERAL LIABILITY EACH OCCURRENCE $ COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY DAMAGE TO RENTED RE (E occurrence) $ CLAIMS MADE OCCUR MED EXP (Any one person) $ PERSONAL & ADV INJURY $ GENERAL AGGREGATE $ GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGG $ POLICY PRO LOC JECT AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT ANY AUTO (Ea accident) $ BODILY INJURY ALL OWNED AUTOS SCHEDULED AUTOS (Per person) $ BODILY INJURY $ HIRED AUTOS NON -OWNED AUTOS (Per accident) PROPERTY DAMAGE $ (Per accident) GARAGE LIABILITY AUTO ONLY - EA ACCIDENT $ OTHER THAN EA ACC $ ANY AUTO $ AUTO ONLY: AGG EXCESS/UMBRELLA LIABILITY EACH OCCURRENCE $ AGGREGATE $ OCCUR CLAIMS MADE $ $ DEDUCTIBLE RETENTION $ WORKERS COMPENSATION AND WC SLIMIT OTR- TATU$ EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVE E.L. EACH ACCIDENT $ E.L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYEE $ OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED? If yes, describe under SPECIAL PROVISIONS below E.L. DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT $ A OTHER Professional QP03811119 09/22/08 09/22/09 $2,000,000 per claim Liability $2,000,000 annl aggr. DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCATIONS / VEHICLES I EXCLUSIONS ADDED BY ENDORSEMENT / SPECIAL PROVISIONS Project: Hovander Maintenance Facility Whatcom County Parks and Recreation Attn: Rod Lamb 3373 Mt. Baker Hwy Bellingham, WA 98226 ACORD 25 (2001108) 1 of 2 #S3383482/M3222265 SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING INSURER WILL ENDEAVOR TO MAIL 4_5_ DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE LEFT, BUT FAILURE TO DO SO SHALL IMPOSE NO OBLIGATION OR LIABILITY OF ANY KIND UPON THE INSURER, ITS AGENTS OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SLHJU © ACORD CORPORATION 1988 IMPORTANT If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(ies) must be endorsed. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). DISCLAIMER The Certificate of Insurance on the reverse side of this form does not constitute a contract between the issuing insurer(s), authorized representative or producer, and the certificate holder, nor does it affirmatively or negatively amend, extend or alter the coverage afforded by the policies listed thereon. ACORD 25-S (2001108) 2 of 2 #S3383482/M3222265 AAJ& APR-14-2009 15:42 FROM:STATE FARM INSURANCE 3608551833 _ TO:913606761180 P:2/3 CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE DAM(MMMD`YM) 04.11412009 FRO IfCF1t State Farm Insurance THIS CEIi-hFICATION IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE Keith Sorestad Agency 820 Township St Sed1ro Woolley, WA 98284 HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. INSURERS AFFORDING COVERAGE I tVAIC #_ _D J INSURED INSURER A: SLafk Farm FIR And Casualty Company 2514,3 ff 25143 Carlettl ArchltlflCm P.S. rNSURER B: Stete Faun MUWSI Atrbo"blie tnsumocos Company 2517a _ 25178 116 I; Fir St Sta A Mount Vernon, WA 98273 INSURER C: v - INSURER 0: COVERAGES THE POLICI 5 OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUEWECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES, AGGREGATE LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE SEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. INS *IADDQ -.�, .. _ .. POLICY EFFECTIVE POLICY L7(PIRATII7N LTR rM51tTYFOOPINSURANCE POLICYNUMFMR DAT16(MMMD/YYYY) .DATE MJDtl/Y - . LIMITS A °X ORNERAL LIAMLITY 98-CPrQI95-9 0510712008 05/07/2009 EACH OCCURRENCE 5 2,000,000 COMMERCIAL GENORAL LJASILITY PRf A91; ES (Es ocCuhonoe 5 CLAIMS MADL 1 OCCUR MED EXP (Amrs my e peon) IL rv,000 . ETTIP�o r_Llat)Illty PERSONAL 8 ADV INJURY S _ GENERALAGGIREGATE $ 4.000.000 GEM4 AQIoREGATP LIMIT APPLIES PER PRODUCT'S - COMPIDP AGG S 98�CP-019" 05/0712008 a510712009 $ >C POLICY ° Lac B AUTOMOBILE umurY COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT S —_ ANY AUTO 262 050E 02"7 0212812009 "12812009 (Es swidem) „ ... BODILY INJURY .,, $ 250,000 ALL OWNED AUTOS X SCHFWLEOAUTOS (PK °n) BODILY INJURY HIREDAUTOS X NOWOWNFOAUTOS (PnraCCManI) - PROPERTY DAMAGE - S 1001009 (P.zr acddent) QARA(aR LIAMLITY AUTO ONLY • EAACCIDEUT S CITHERTHAN PAACC ANY AUTO 13 - ' AUTO ONLY: AGG $ =9531 UMHRFLW UA®IIJfIY EACH OCCURRENCE S $ . OCCUR �ICLAIMSMADe AGGREGATE a. DEDUCTIBLE $ VVC STATUS OTN a. RETENTION $ WORKERS COMPL°NSA110H AND ITS TORYLiMER EMPL,OYER4' UASILITY YIN ANY PROF+RICTOR/PARTNEIFJCE RCLITIVE .. , E.LEACHAOCIDENT#L.YE$ EL DISEASE - EA EMPII ExCLuDEO7 1OFPICERIMEMBSR 7 In NH) E.L DISEASE- POLICY laL.. n+aMb. umd" OTHER OMCRIPTIDN OR OPERATIONS f LOCATION$! VEHICLES ! EXCLUSIONS ADDr3J BY ENDORSEMENT 1 SPECIAL PROVISIONS certificate holder is also Additional Insured. GEKI7FIW► I t MVLVLK Whatcom Courdy Parks and Recreation Hovander Maintenance Facility 337- "punt Baker Highway Be ,tiallm, WA. 98226 SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCMDED POUCMS BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE. EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THR MSUING INSURER WILL ENDEAVOR TO MAIL 'ill DAYS WRITTEN Noms To THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE LEFT, BUT FAILURE TO DO SOSHALL L IMPOSE NO OBLIGATION OR L.IABLITY OF ANY KIND UPON THE INSURER, ITS AGENTS OR REPRESENTATIVES, A A It, R . ACORD 25 (2009101) The AOORD name and logo are regist�amd mark4 of 100W5 132849.3 044J8-2009 e"G 121 APR-14-2009 15:43 FROM:STATE FARM INSURANCE 3608551833 TO:913606761180 P:3/3 IMPORTANT If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(ies) must be endorsed. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of Such endorsement(s). If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this ortitcate does not confer rigtrts to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). DISCLAIMER This Certificate of Insurance does not constitute a contract between the issuing insurer(s), authorized representative or producer, and the certificate holder, nor does it affirmatively or negatively amend, extend or alter the coverage afforded by the policies listed thereon. ACORT3 25 WHATCOM CO UNTY CO UNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 2009-237 CLEARANCES Initial Date Date Received in Council Office Agenda Date Assigned to: Originator: MAY 0 5 2009 y' l+1IHAT O�N�O�►NTY C 5/12/09Finance/Council Division Head: Dept. Head: Prosecutor: S ' Purchasin /Bardget: � Executive: Is of TITLE OF DOC(JMENT: I Lily Point North Option to Purchase Real Estate& Real Estate Purchase & Sale Agreement ATTACHMENTS. Purchase option, purchase & sale agreement, and location map. SEPA review required? ( ) Yes ( X ) NO SEPA review completed? ( ) Yes ( ) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing? ( ) Yes ( X ) NO Requested Date: SUMMARYSTATEMENT OR LEGAL NOTICE LANGUAGE: (If this item is an ordinance or requires a public /searing, 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.) Request authorization for the County Executive to enter into a purchase option and purchase and sale agreement with The Nature Conservancy to acquire approximately 146 acres in the amount of $2,530,000 at Lily Point, Point Roberts. Final sale price subject to state and federal grant funding. COMMITTEE ACTION: COUNCIL ACTION.• Related County Contract #. Related File Numbers: Ordinance or Resolution Number. 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.us/council. 113 WHATCOM COUNTY PARKS & RECREATION DEPT. 3373 Mt. Baker Highway Bellingham WA 98226 TO: MEMORANDUM Pete Kremen, County Executive FROM: Michael McFarlane, Director RE: Option and Purchase & Sale Agreement- Lily Point North DATE: 4/30/09 Michael McFarlane Director Enclosed are two (2) originals of an Option to Purchase and Real Estate Purchase & Sale Agreement between Whatcom County and The Nature Conservancy for review and signature. ■ Background and Purpose The Whatcom County Parks & Recreation Department has been working collaboratively with the The Nature Conservancy (TNC) for the acquisition of approximately 146 acres of shoreline property adjoining the Lily Point Marine Reserve at Point Roberts. TNC purchased this property from a private developer in 2009. This parcel consists of 28 acres of uplands, 92 acres of class two tidelands and approximately 3,000 feet of waterfront on Boundary Bay. Primary access to the property is obtained by easement through the Lily Point Marine Reserve. -rhe property has been appraised at $2,550,000. ■ Funding Amount and Source The County and TNC have applied for State and Federal grants to fund acquisition of this property. Currently both parties are awaiting confirmation on the funding status. Whatcom County has applied for WWRP funds (Res. 2008-041) and ALEA funding (Res. 2008-040) through the Recreation and Conservation Office. It is proposed that TNC will sell the property to Whatcom County for $2,530,000 less any reimbursement for sellers purchase payment received from federal and state grants. Please contact Michael McFarlane at extension 32072, if you have any questions or concerns regarding the terms of this agreement, Encl. 114 WHATCOM COUNTY PARKS & RECREATION 3373 Mount Baker Highway Bellingham, WA 98226-9522 TO: FROM: DATE: RE: MICHAEL G. McFARLANE Director ROBERT J. BUNNETT Recreation & Senior Services Manager LYNNE GIVLER Parks Operations Manager MEMORANDUM Randy Watts, Chief Civil Deputy Prosecutor Michael McFarlane, Director April 30, 2009 RECEIVED MAY 0 4 2009 PETS KREMEN COUNTY EXECUTIVE Lily Point North Purchase Option and Real Estate Purchase & Sale Agreement Attached is the agenda bill with the Purchase Option and Real Estate Purchase & Sale agreement for the northern portion of Lily Point. Both the Nature Conservancy and Whatcom County have applied for grants to cover the cost of acquisition. I would like to get this on the Council's May 12th agenda to take advantage of an existing appraisal approved for our grant applications. If this meets with your approval please sign off on the agreements and forward on to the Executive's Office. Thank you. Phone (360) 733-2900 FAX (360) 676-1180 115 WHATCOM COUNTY CONTRACT INFORMATION SHEET Whatcom County Contract No. '200905 o0Z Originating Department: Parks & Recreation Contract Administrator: Michael McFarlane Contractor's I Agency Name: The Nature Conservancy Is this a New Contract? If not, is this an Amendment or Renewal to an Existing Contract? Yes X No Yes No If yes, previous number(s): Is this a grant agreement? Yes _ No X If yes, grantor agency contract number(s) CFDA number Is this contract grant funded? Yes X No If yes, associated Whatcom County grant contract number(s) Pending Is this contract the result of a RFP or Bid process? Yes No X If yes, RFP and Bid number(s) Contract Amount: (sum of orig contract amt If a Professional Services Agreement is more than $15, 000 or a Bid is more than and any prior amendments) $35, 000, please submit an Agenda Bill for Council approval and a supporting $ 2,530,0000 memo. Any amendment that provides either a 10% increase in amount or more than This Amendment Amount: $10,000, whichever is greater, must also go to Council and will need an agenda bill $ and supporting memo. If less than these thresholds, just submit to Executive with Total Amended Amount: supporting memo for approval. Scope of Services Request authorization for the County Executive to enter in to a purchase option and real estate purchase and sale agreement with The Nature Conservancy to acquire approximately 146 acres for park purposes at Lily Point in the amount of $2,530,000 less any reimbursement of the sellers purchase payment received from federal and state grants. Term of Contract: 14 months Expiration Date: 6/30/10 unless extended 1. Prepared by; opi Date &/ 3b -a 9 [electronic] 2. Attorney reviewed. Date [electronic] 3. AS Finance reviewed: Date [electronic] 4. IT reviewed if IT related Date [electronic] 5. Corrections made: Date [electronic] hard copy printed 6. Attorney signoff.• j t, , Date T Z Contractor signed: Date 8. Submitted to Exec Office ,/ Date 3 - - 0 jj /summary via electronic, hardcopies] 9. Reviewed by DCA Date 10. Council approved (if necessary) Date 11. Executive signed: Date 12. Contractor Original 13. Returned to dept, Date 14. County Original to Council Date this form may need to expand to more than one page this form may need to expand to more than one page 116 Ln ,y >.41 L C n • . ate, m T �' f f ZI LL Ln 13 ;�f �i=r�"i` _ � ,.�, - J' - is •` y z t -.} •t}'1. - � � �-. � '', o • � _ _ ate;, r,y<. * . �,�. � £. - Y - '' � - �- _ - Px:; f -�'" _'j"i' �. ten•!!- - -'�} a C y z- X Yfd``' € �'� w � � �" � • � ..dam .y���F' a'.®,-'. • � i k t ���6��� -_ ` _ — •G'-r Fed � �+ , �' ']Yl<w: r 6y1 K-ems- {�'�§-:?; =� -`V'+_ � .f t�Y,p it `, lf•<� - �i4.+. ��Zf. f � e'M•%� I 'i ,'T � • .l i � T � � ga. � "y4y •b' �� � � � �..- N C .e - i'.• e jY S'`rf H�Z �� : f'C- _ 117 ORIGINAL EX) IIBIT «g» WHATCOM COUNTY REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT CONTRACT NO. �2OD90500Z Return to: Whatcom County Parks & Recreation 3373 Mount Baker Hwy Bellingham, WA 98226 Attention: Michael McFarlane This REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT (this "Agreement") is made this day of May, 2009, by and between THE NATURE CONSERVANCY, a District of Columbia nonprofit corporation ("Seller"), and WHATCOM COUNTY, a Municipal Corporation of the State of Washington ('Buyer"), for purchase and sale of that certain real property described herein, situated in Whatcom County, Washington. RECITALS WHEREAS, Seller is the owner of certain real property at a location commonly known as Lily Point, Whatcom County Tax Parcel #405301-185135-0000 and 405301- 240200-0000, more particularly described in Section 1, below; and WHEREAS, Buyer is a municipal entity that is planning to develop a Public Park and Marine Reserve; and WHEREAS, the real property owned by Seller which is more particularly described in Section 1, below, is judged by the Buyer to be an excellent location for siting the Park and Marine Reserve; and WHEREAS, in approval of the project budget, adequate funds and authorizations to spend the same were included for property acquisitions of this nature; and WHEREAS, Buyer desires to purchase from Seller, and Seller desires to sell to Buyer the real property on the terms and conditions set forth herein; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained in this Agreement and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, Seller and Buyer agree as follows: AGREEMENT 1. Real Property. Seller agrees to sell and convey to Buyer and Buyer agrees to purchase from Seller, subject to approval by the Whatcom County Council, and subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, the real property, which is located in the County of Whatcom and State of Washington, includes approximately 146 acres, and is more particularly described as follows: Government Lot 2 of Section 1, Township 40 North, Range 3 West, Willamette Meridian, Whatcom County, Washington; EXCEPT that portion of said Government Lot 2 lying West of the existing top of Bluff and North of the South line of Lot `B' of the Sam Miller Short Plat, as per the map thereof, recorded under Whatcom County Auditor's File No. 2050702122, extended Easterly to said top of bluff, AND Lots 2 and 3 of the Point Roberts Tidelands as recorded in Volume 5 of Plats, at Page 14, Records of Whatcom County, Washington, AND That portion of Government Lot 1 of said Section 1, and that portion of Government Lot 3 of Section 12, said Township 40 North, Range 3 West, W.M., together with that portion of Lot 4 of said Point Roberts Tidelands, all lying north of the following described line: Beginning at the Southwest corner of Government Lot 1 in Section 1, said Township 40 North, Range 3 West, W.M.; thence North along the West line of said Government Lot 1 in said Section 1, a distance of 30.00 feet to Page 1 of 7 Pages 118 EXIMTT "B" REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT the beginning of the herein described line; thence South 89°57' East, 230.03 feet to a point of curvature; thence along the arc of a curve to the right having a radius of 360 feet through a central angle of 41'06'55" an arc distance of 258.34 feet to a point of inverse curvature; thence along the are of a second curve having a radius of 20 feet through a central angle of 81°26'21" an arc distance of 28.43 feet to a point of compound curvature; thence along the arc of a third curve having a radius of 250 feet through a central angle of 31'22' 10" an arc distance of 136.88 feet; thence South 72138'36" East, 60.00 feet; thence due East to the East line of said Lot 4, and the terminus of the herein described line, AND Tide Lands of the Second Class lying between the lines of mean low tide, and extreme low tide in front of and abutting Lots 2 and 3 and in front of that portion of Lot 4 described above, of said Point Roberts Tidelands, recorded in said Vol. 5 of Plats at Page 14. TOGETHER with a perpetual, non-exclusive Easement for ingress, egress, and utilities as established by instrument recorded under Auditor's File No. 2080402358, described as follows: A tract of land located within portions of Government Lot 1 of Section 1, Township 40 North, Range 3 West and Government Lot 3 of Section 12, Township 40 North, Range 3 West, W.M., Whatcom County, Washington described as follows: Beginning at an existing #3 rebar marking the Southwest comer of said Government Lot 1 of Section 1, also being the Northwest comer of said Government Lot 3 of Section 12, thence along the West line of said Government Lot 1 North 01035'28" East 30.00 feet to an existing #3 Rebar & Cap PLS#9361; thence South 88034'55" East 199.92 feet; thence parallel with the West line of said Government Lot 3 South 01026' 15" West 80.00 feet; thence North 88034'55" West 200.00 feet to the West line of said Government Lot 3; thence along said West line North 01'26' 15" East 50.00 feet to the point of beginning. Containing 15,999 square feet, more or less, and situate in Whatcom County, Washington. TOGETHER with all of Seller's right, title and interest, if any, in and to any rights, licenses, privileges, reversions and easements pertinent to the real property, including without limitation, all minerals, oil, gas and other hydrocarbon substances on and under the real property as well as all development rights, air rights, water rights, water and water stock relating to the real property and any other easements, rights of way, or appurtenances used in connection with the beneficial use and enjoyment of the real property (collectively, the "Property"). 2. Purchase Price. The total purchase price for the Property (the "Purchase Price") will be $2,530,000.00 (two million five hundred thirty thousand dollars), subject to Buyer's review and approval of a May 20, 2008 appraisal obtained and paid for by Seller. Buyer will be provided with a copy of Seller's appraisal and review appraisal. The Purchase Price will be paid to Seller in cash at closing, less any reimbursement of Seller's purchase payment that Seller has received from federal or state grants, and less Seller's share of closing costs as more fully addressed in Section 7, Closin , herein. 3. Title to Property. 3.1. Conveyance. At Closing, Seller shall convey to Buyer fee simple title to the Property by duly executed and acknowledged special warranty deed (the "Deed"), subject only to those encumbrances that Buyer approves pursuant to Section 3.3 below (the "Permitted Encumbrances"). Page 2 of 7 Pages 119 EXHIBIT `B" REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT 3.2. Preliminary Commitment. Upon execution of this Agreement, Seller authorizes Buyer to order a preliminary commitment for an owner's standard coverage policy of title insurance (or, at Buyer's election, an owner's extended coverage policy of title insurance) in the amount of the Purchase Price to be issued by the Title Company and accompanied by copies of all documents referred to in the commitment (the "Preliminary Commitment"). 3.3. Condition of Title. Buyer shall advise Seller by written notice what encumbrances to title, if any, are disapproved by Buyer ("Disapproved Encumbrances") within 10 (ten) business days of receipt of the Preliminary Commitment. All monetary encumbrances other than non -delinquent ad valorem rP operty taxes will be deemed to be disapproved. Seller will have ten (10) business days after receipt of Buyer's notice to give Buyer notice that (i) Seller will remove Disapproved Encumbrances, or (ii) Seller elects not to remove Disapproved Encumbrances. If Seller fails to give Buyer notice before the expiration of the ten (10) day period, Seller will be deemed to have elected not to remove Disapproved Encumbrances. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, Seller shall remove from title on or before the Closing Date all monetary encumbrances other than those approved by Buyer. If Seller elects not to remove any Disapproved Encumbrances, Buyer will have fifteen (15) business days to notify Seller of Buyer's election either to proceed with the purchase and take the Property subject to those encumbrances, or to terminate this Agreement. If Buyer elects to terminate this Agreement pursuant to this Section, the escrow will be terminated, all documents and funds (if any) will be returned to the party who deposited them, and neither party will have any further rights or obligations under this Agreement, except as otherwise provided for.in this Agreement. 3.4 Title Policy. Seller shall cause the Title Company to issue to Buyer at closing a standard coverage owner's policy of title insurance insuring Buyer's title to the Property in the full amount of the Purchase Price subject only to the encumbrances approved under the terms of Section 3.3 (the "Title Policy"). The Title Policy must be dated as of the Closing Date. 4. Conditions to Closine. 4.1. Risk Assessment or Inspection. The Agreement, and the transaction contemplated hereby, is subject to the Buyer's completion and satisfactory review of a risk assessment or inspection of the property, performed at the Buyer's expense and discretion, for the presence of contaminants. Condition of the Property. 5.1. Inspections. Buyer agrees that it is acquiring the Property "as is" on the date of the execution of this purchase and sale agreement, with no warranties as to its physical condition. Buyer will rely on its own inspections and evaluations of the Property, with the exception of Seller's representations and warranties listed in Section 6, below, and of written documentation, including, but not limited to any disclosures required by law, provided to it by Seller, to determine the suitability of the Property for Buyer's intended use. 6. Seller's Representations and Warranties. Seller represents and warrants to Buyer as follows: 6.1. Claims or Litigation. To the best of Seller's knowledge, there is no litigation pending or threatened against Seller (or any basis for any claim) that arises out of the ownership of the Property and that might materially and detrimentally affect (i) the use or operation of the Property for Buyer's intended use, or (ii) the ability of Seller to perform its obligations under this Agreement, or (iii) the value of the Property. 6.2. Defaults. Seller has received no notice of any default or breach by Seller under any covenants, conditions, restrictions, rights -of -way, or easements that Page 3 of 7 Pages 120 EXMI T `B" REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT may affect Seller in respect to the Property or may affect the Property or any portion thereof, and no such default or breach now exists. 6.3. Hazardous Substances. Seller has no actual knowledge of the release of or presence of any hazardous materials on, in, from or onto the Property. ("Hazardous materials" means any hazardous or toxic substance, petroleum product or wastes that are regulated or subject to cleanup authority under any state, federal or local statute, regulation or ordinance). 7. Closing. "Closing," for the purpose of this Agreement, is defined as the date that all documents are executed, the sale proceeds. are available for disbursement to the Seller, and legal title passes to the Buyer. The costs of closing, including but not limited to title insurance, fees of the Escrow Agent, and State Excise Tax shall be paid by the Buyer. The Seller and Buyer mutually agree the Closing Date will occur on or before June 30, 2010, unless both parties agree in writing to extend the closing. 8. Proration. Property taxes and assessments for the current year, water and other utility charges, if any, shall be prorated as of the Closing Date unless otherwise agreed. Buyer is a property tax exempt organization pursuant to RCW 84.36.010, and therefore Escrow Agent is directed, to the extent possible, to apply to Whatcom County for a change in tax status for the subject property, so that property taxes do not have to be collected from Buyer at closing. The Seller's share of property taxes (if any) shall be deducted by the Escrow Agent from the purchase price after receipt from the Buyer. 9. Casualty Seller shall promptly notify Buyer of any event prior to the Closing Date that causes damage to or destruction of any portion of the Property. If Buyer and Seller cannot come to an agreement regarding any such damage to or destruction of the Property, including the settlement of any insurance claims, then Buyer and Seller will each have the right to terminate this Agreement by giving written notice of termination to the other party within twenty (20) days after receipt of actual notice of such casualty loss. Upon exercise of such termination election by either party, this Agreement will terminate, and the option fee of $10.00 will be returned to Buyer. After closing and during any period of continued possession by Sellers, Sellers shall promptly notify Buyer of any damage to or destruction of any portion of the Property, and shall be liable, to the extent responsible therefore, to Buyer for the amount of any diminution in the value thereof. 10. Possession. Buyer shall be entitled to possession upon Closing. Buyer and its agents and contractors shall have a revocable license to enter onto the Property prior to Closing as reasonably required for Buyer to prepare for ownership of the Property and to conduct inspections of the Property as provided in this Agreement. Such entry, including entry into all structures, shall be conducted in a lawful, safe, and prudent manner and without causing any damage to or liens on the Property and without violating any applicable restrictions or interfering with the rights of Seller or any third parties. 11. Hold Harmless, Indemnification, and Insurance. Seller agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the Buyer, its appointed and elective officers and its employees, from and against all loss or expense, including but not limited to judgments, settlements, attomeys' fees and costs, by reason of any and all claims and demands upon the Buyer, its elected or appointed officials or its employees for damages arising from the ownership, condition, and/or operation of the property identified for sale and purchase herein up to the time when possession is delivered to the Buyer, because of personal or bodily injury, including death at any time resulting therefrom, sustained by any person or persons and on account of damage to property including loss of use thereof, whether or not such injury to persons or damage to property is due to the negligence of the Seller, its agents, successors, or assigns, except to the extent that such injury or damage shall have been occasioned by the negligence of the Buyer, or its appointed or elected officials, its employees, or its agents or contractors. It is further agreed that during any period between closing and Seller's transfer of possession to Buyer, Buyer owes Seller no duty with regard to the condition of the premises. Seller shall carry for the duration of its period of occupancy, including any salvage period during and thereafter, a policy of owner's insurance for the Property. Page 4 of 7 Pages 121 EXMIT `B" REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT 12. Events of Default. In the event Seller fails, without legal excuse, to complete the sale of the Property, Buyer may pursue any remedies available to it in law or equity, including specific performance. 13. Notices. Any notice under this Agreement must be in writing and be personally delivered or delivered by recognized overnight courier service, given by mail or via facsimile. E-mail transmission of notice shall not be effective. All notices must be addressed to the parties at the following addresses, or at such other addresses as the parties may from time to time direct in writing: Buyer: Whatcom County- Parks & Recreation Department Attn: Michael McFarlane Director 3373 Mount Baker Hwy, Bellingham, WA 98226 fax: 360.733.2900 With a copy to: Whatcom County Prosecutor's Office Attn: Randall Watts, Chief Civil Deputy Prosecutor Whatcom County Courthouse, Ste 201 Bellingham, WA 98225 fax: 360.738.2532 Seller: The Nature Conservancy Attn: Regional Counsel 1917 First Avenue Seattle, WA 98101 fax: 206.233.1628 Any notice will be deemed to have been given when personally delivered, and if delivered by courier service, one business day after deposit with the courier service, and if mailed, two business days after deposit in the U.S. mail, and if delivered by facsimile, the same day as successfully transmitted. 14. Counterparts: Faxed Signatures. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts and by different parties hereto, each of which counterpart when so executed shall have the same force and effect as if that party had signed all other counterparts. Facsimile -transmitted signatures shall be fully binding and effective for all purposes. 15. Brokers and Finders. Each party represents and warrants to the other that, to such party's knowledge, no broker, agent or finder is involved in this transaction. In the event any broker or other person makes a claim for a commission or finder's fee based upon the transaction contemplated by this Agreement, the party through whom said broker or other person makes its claim shall indemnify and hold harmless the other party from said claim and all liabilities, costs and expenses related thereto, including reasonable attorneys' fees, which may be incurred by such other party in connection with such claim. This indemnity shall survive the closing of this transaction. 16. Amendments. This Agreement may be amended or modified only by a written instrument executed by Seller and Buyer. 17. Continuation and Survival of Representations and Warranties. All representations and warranties by the respective parties contained in this Agreement or made in writing pursuant to this Agreement are intended to and will remain true and correct as of the time of Closing, will be deemed to be material and will survive the execution and delivery of this Agreement and the delivery of the Deed and transfer of title. Such representations and warranties, however, are not assignable and do not run with the land, except as may be expressly provided herein or contained in a written instrument signed by the party to be charged. 18. Governing Law. This Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. Venue for any action in law or Page 5 of 7 Pages 122 EXHWIT "B" REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT equity arising herefrom shall be in the Superior Court of the State of Washington in and for the County of Whatcom. 19. Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence of this Agreement and of all acts required to be done and performed by the parties hereto. 20. FIRPTA. The Escrow Agent is instructed to prepare a certification or equivalent that Seller is not a "foreign person" within the meaning of the Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act ("FIRPTA"), and Sellers agree to sign this certification. If Seller is a "foreign person" as the same is defined by FIRPTA, and this transaction is not otherwise exempt from FIRPTA, Escrow Agent is instructed to withhold and pay the required amount to the Internal Revenue Service. 21. Waiver. Neither Seller's nor Buyer's waiver of the breach of any covenant under this Agreement will be construed as a waiver of the breach of any other covenants or as a waiver of a subsequent breach of the same covenant. 22. Nonmerger. The terms and provisions of this Agreement, including without limitation, all indemnification obligations, will not merge in, but will survive, the closing of the transaction contemplated under the Agreement. 23. Assignment. Buyer shall not assign this Agreement without Seller's prior written consent, which consent may be withheld, given, or conditioned in Seller's sole discretion. 24. Negotiation and Construction. This Agreement and each of its terms and provisions are deemed to have been explicitly negotiated between the parties, and the language in all parts of this Agreement will, in all cases, be construed according to its fair meaning and not strictly for or against either party. 25. Additional Acts. Except as otherwise provided herein, in addition to the acts and deeds recited herein and contemplated to be performed, executed and/or delivered by any party hereto, the parties agree to perform, execute and/or deliver, or cause to be performed, executed and/or delivered, any and all such further acts, deeds and assurances, which may reasonably be required to effect the Agreement contemplated herein. 26. Entire Agreement. This Agreement, together with the Option Agreement between the parties dated , constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the purchase and sale of the Property, and supersedes all prior agreements and understandings, oral or written, between the parties relating to the subject matter of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date set forth above. BUYER: WHATCOM COUNTY, A Municipal Corporation Date: Pete Kremen, County Executive Approved as to form: Prosecuting Attorney's Office WAI Date: Randall Watts, Chi ivil Dep ty Prosecutor Page 6 of 7 Pages 123 OICHMI T "B" REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT SELLER: By: Date: Karen Anderson, Washington State Director Page 7 of 7 Pages 124 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 2 00 9-2 3 8 CLEARANCES Initial Date Date Received in Council Office Agenda Date Assigned to: DGD 4130109 5112109 Finance Originator: IIll p � n C C ll \�/ l� �' Council Division Head.• MAY 0 5 2009 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL%! Dept. Head: Prosecutor: C� ` 30 �� Purchasing/Budget: IT5 Executive: 6/ 7 vI TITLE OFDOCUAENT.0tract amendment for contract number 200602005 for a lease extension of two months to allow for the rental time between lease expiration and purchase closing date. The lease agreement is for the building located at 215 N. Commercial St. Bellingham, occupied by the Public Defenders Office. ATTACHMENTS. SEPA review required? ( ) Yes ( x ) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing ? ( ) Yes ( x ) NO SEPA review completed? ( ) Yes ( x ) Requested Date: NO SUMMARYSTATEMENT 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.) Request authorization to extend lease between Whatcom County and Peeples Enterprises, Inc for the two months between lease expiration date and purchase closing date. COMMITTEE ACTION. COUNCIL ACTION. Related County Contract #: Related File Numbers: Ordinance or Resolution Number: 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.us/council: 125 WHATCOM COUNTY CONTRACT INFORMATION SHEET Whatcom County Contract No. 200602005-2 Executive Originating De artment: Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator Contact Person: Contractor's Name: Peeples Enterprises, Inc. Is this a New Contract.- If not, is this an Amendment to an Existing Contract: Yes No X Yes X No _ If an Amendment, previous number(s): _ _200602005-2 Is this a renewal: Yes No X Contract Amount: (sum of orig. contract amt If a Professional Services Agreement is more than $1 S, 000 or a Bid is _and any prior amendments) more than $35, 000, please submit an Agenda Bill for Council approval $ $435, 600. and a supporting memo. Any amendment that provides either a 10% This Amendment Amount: increase in amount or more than $10, 000, whichever is greater, must also $ $21 700 go to Council and will need an agenda bill and supporting memo. If less Total AmendedAmount: than these thresholds, just submit to Executive with supporting memo for $_ $457, 300. approval. Scope of Services: This amendment is to extend the lease by an additional two months. Whatcom County has exercised the option to purchase the building which is scheduled to close in July, two months after the lease expires. Nature of Contract Amount: (Check one) Fixed Amount X _ Not to Exceed _ _ Open Ended Term of Contract: 3 year — 2 months Expiration Date: 06130109 Renewal Option: Yes No X Last Renewal Expires: Special dates or clauses that require calendaring: Contract Routing Steps & Signor [sign or initial] )indicate date transmitted) 1. Prepared by: TWH Date_ 4127109 [electronic] 2. Attorney reviewed: Daniel L. Gibson Date_04127109 [electronic] _ 3. AS -Finance reviewed 6,0e*uv11 Date 1�&jlpy, [electronic] 4. Corrections made: Date [electronic] hard copy printed 5. Attorney signoff Daniel L. Gibson Date_04127109 [electronic] 6. Contractor signed: Date 7. Submitted to Exec. Office: Date [summary via electronic; hardcopies] 8. Reviewed by DCA: Date 9. Council approved (if necessary) Date 10. Executive signed: Date 11. Contractor Original returned to department: Date 12. County Original to Council Date this form may need to expand to more than one page 126 WHATCOM COUNTY Administrative Services 311 Grand Avenue Bellingham, WA 98225 360-676-6717 MEMORANDUM TO: Pete Kremen, County Executive FROM: Tawni Helms, Administrative Supervisor RE: Peeples Enterprises, Inc. DATE: 4/27/09 Dewey Desler Director Enclosed are two (2) originals of the contract amendment for contract number 200602005-2 between Whatcom County and Peeples Enterprises, Inc. for your review and signature. ■ Background and Purpose Whatcom County has pursued its option to purchase the building located at 215 North Commercial Street. As requested by Mr. Peeples the closing date for the purchase is scheduled for July 1, 2009. The current lease agreement expires on 4/30/09. ■ Funding Amount and Source The amount for the additional two months of rent for the building has been incorporated into the approved 2009/2010 budget. ■ Differences from Previous Contract Two month lease extension for rent between lease expiration date and scheduled closing date for purchase of building. Please contact Tawni Helms at extension 50124, if you have any questions or concerns regarding the terms of this agreement. Encl. 127 Whatcom County Contract No. Amendment No. 2 200602005-2 Whatcom County Contract No. 200602005 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND PEEPLES ENTERPRISES, INC. THIS AMENDMENT is to the Contract between Whatcom County and Peeples Enterprises. Inc., dated 5/1/09 and designated "Whatcom County Contract No. 200602005-2 ". In consideration of the mutual benefits to be derived, the parties agree to the following: This Amendment extends the term of this Agreement through 6/30/09 , and increases the maximum consideration by $ 21,700. to a total consideration of $ 457,300. . The extension allows for two additional months of rent to be paid until the scheduled purchase closing date of July 1, 2009 whereby any residual costs will be included in the closing documents. Unless specifically amended by this agreement, all other terms and conditions of the original contract shall remain in full force and effect. This Amendment takes effect: 5/1/09 , regardless of the date of signature. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Whatcom County and Peeples Enterprises, Inc. have executed this Amendment on the date and year below written. DATED this � ' day of V� %� , 2001 r LESSOR: Jam6s,Y. Peeples, President Peepl s Enterprises, Inc. STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF WHATCOM ) On thi&/-A of 200A before me personally appeared Enterprises. Inc. aexecuted theglppwjastrument and who •�,•'C'pTHY4'.i. rj CO NOTq13ygpm OT RY PU LIC G 'A %A PUBLIC2 k F bF 27 ' foo ,� Al known to be the Pies ent of the Peeples act ofhanina .and ealino thereof. for the State of Washington, resid��-27ZV at .. My commission expires 128 WHATCOM COUNTY: Approved as to form: p4—L, �k AN7 � Prosecuting Attorne Date Approved: Accepted for Whatcom County: By: Pete Kremen, Whatcom County Executive STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss COUNTY OF WHATCOM ) On this day of , 2009, before me personally appeared Pete Kremen, to me known to be the Executive of Whatcom County, who executed the above instrument and who acknowledged to me the act of signing and sealing thereof. NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington, residing at . My commission expires CONTRACTOR INFORMATION: Peeples Enterprises, Inc James Y. Peeples, President 1021 Coronado Avenue Bellingham, WA 98229 Contact Name: James Y. Peeples 129 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 2009-239 CLEARANCES firikal Date Date Received in Council Office Agenda Date Assigned to: Originator: K!��, p R ] MAY 0 5 2009 5/12/2009 Finance/Council Division Head.-,� Aar-ylzej TAW �1 Z9 l� Dept. Head.- oN�3o�0y Prosecutor.• WHATCOM COUNTY Purchasing/Budget: `36 COUNCIL Executive: J�✓L J TITLE OF DOCUMENT: Construction Contract Award — Mosquito Lake Road Middle Fork Bridge No. 140 Rehabilitation CRP #904019; Federal Aid No. BHS-37XX (001) ATTACHMENTS: 1. Memo 2. Resolution amending County Road Project (CRP) Number and Award Construction Contract 3. Approval to Award Construction Contract endorsed by Executive 4. Project Summary and Vicinity Map 130 WHATCOM COUNTY JOSEPH P. RUTAN, P.E. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT °°M c°a Assistant Director/County Engineer s Z� 2011 Young St., Suite 201 FRANK M. ABART_ Bellingham, WA 98225-4052 Director -O�' Phone: (360) 715-7450 9SI��NG� Fax: (360) 715-7451 MEMORANDUM To: The Honorable Pete Kremen, Whatcom County Executive and The Honorable Members of the Whatcom County Council Through: Frank M. Abart, Director 0/01 From: Joseph P. Rutan, P.E., Assistant Director/County Engineer P j.Kvr�►� Chris C. Brueske, P.E., Engineering Manag� Date: April 27, 2009 Re: Mosquito Lake Road Middle Fork Bridge No. 140 Rehabilitation CRP No. 904019 - Federal Aid No. BHS-37XX (001) Construction Contract Award Attached for your review and signature is the standard construction contract award package for the Mosquito Lake Road Middle Fork Bridge No. 140 Rehabilitation project. Said package consists of an agenda bill, resolution amending the CRP and awarding the contract, approval of contract award form endorsed by the Executive, project summary and vicinity map, project cost breakdown, tabulation of all bids, and the low bid proposal. Requested Action Public Works respectfully requests that the County Council authorize the County Executive to enter into a contract for the subject project to the low bidder, Tiger Construction Ltd in the amount of $2,232,062.20 including all taxes. This recommendation is based on a review of six (6) bids received. Background and Purpose Bid proposals for the project were opened at 2:30 p.m. on Thursday, April 24, 2009. The project is listed as Item No. 7 on the 2009 Annual Construction Program that was adopted by the Council on September 23, 2008. Funding Amount and Source Federal BRAC funds provide for 100% of the bridge construction costs. Please contact Chris Brueske at extension 50617 if you have any questions or concerns regarding the terms of this agreement. In accordance with W.C.C. 3.08.230, I concur with this recommendation: Chris Mohnkern, urchasing Coordinator Date 131 1:206106> y 9 11�A INTRODUCED: RESOLUTION NO. AMENDING COUNTY ROAD PROJECT NO. 904019 AND AUTHORIZING ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR THE AWARD OF A CONTRACT FOR "MOSQUITO LAKE ROAD MIDDLE FORK BRIDGE NO. 140 REHABILITATION PROJECT" WHEREAS, this project is included in the officially adopted 2009 Annual Construction Program as Item No. 7; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Whatcom County Council: That CRP #904019 is formally amended to include the construction of the Mosquito Lake Road Middle Fork Bridge No. 140 Rehabilitation Project; The Contract for this project is awarded to Tiger Construction Ltd, in the amount of their bid of $2,232,062.20. An appropriation from the officially adopted Road Fund Budget and based on the County Road Engineer's estimate is hereby made in the amounts and for the purposes shown: PURPOSE AMOUNT OF APPROPRIATION Preliminary Engineering $ 450,000 Right -of -Way $ 0 Construction Contract $2,232,062 Construction Eng. / Testing / Contingency $ 378,500 Total $3,060,562 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the construction is to be accomplished by Contract in accordance with RCW 36.77.020 et. seq. APPROVED this day of , 20_. WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL Dana Brown -Davis, Clerk of the Council APPROVED AS TO FORM: Daniel Gibson, Asst. Chief Civil Deputy Prosecutor WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Seth Fleetwood, Council Chair 132 WHATCOM COUNTY JOSEPH P. RUTAN, P.E. P PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT °°M °o Assistant Director/County Engineer 3 , h.. Z< 2011 Young St., Suite 201 Bellingham, WA 98225-4052 FRANK M. ABART Director �q- - �oPhone: (360) 715-7450 SN�NG Fax: (360) 715-7451 Mosquito Lake Road Middle Fork Bridge No. 140 Rehabilitation CRP 904019 APPROVAL FOR CONTRACT AWARD Approval is hereby granted to award the Contract as follows: Project: Mosquito Lake Road Bridge No. 140 Rehabilitation; CRP #904019 To: Tiger Construction Ltd In the amount of their bid proposal $2,232.062.20 including all taxes. Whatcom County Executive Aprroving Authority Daniel L. Gibson Asst. Chief Civil Deputy Prosecutor Date C/ 3a nog DaYe 133 Whatcom County Public Works 2009 Annual Construction Program Project Narrative Mosquito Lake Road - Middle Fork Bridge #140 - CRP #904019 2009 Annual Construction Program Construction Funding Year(s): 2009 Project Narrative: The Mosquito Lake Road Middle Fork Bridge #140 is located 16 miles northeast of Bellingham and 4 miles east of Van Zandt in Section 13, T38N, R5E. This is a bridge rehabilitation project that includes re- placement of the bridge deck and both approach spans. Also included are the installation of new guardrails on the bridge, installation of scour protection and repainting of all structural steel. This project is listed #10 on the 2009-2014 Six Year Transportation Program. New Construction Features: Total Width N/A Lane Width N/A Bike Lane Width N/A Curb / Gutter N/A Sidewalk N/A Project Status: Design and Permitting will be completed in 2008. Construction will occur in 2009. Project Funding: 2009 Total Federal / State Local ***See Detailed Project Cost Breakdown*** Total Environmental Permitting (Agencies/Permits): HPA, Sec. 404 Clean Water Act, Shorelines, SEPA, CLR/CAO, Sec 401 Water Quality Certification Right -of -Way Acquisition ($ Estimate): N/A Day Labor ($ Estimate): To Be Determined �/AMS DEMIN6-- , 1RUG �O a Creek \ o w e c \ o x NTS \ m \ VAN ZANDT Pot�e� i 0 POTTER SCHORNBUSH i� RD. LIND to U POTTER + o 1"� RD. N yPi S tens GT. o Gr. Mosquito ,� p Lake z �O -` o r' 6 S QC s / Clipper Jorgensen -ran ling lake I:Wnnual Road Construction Progrann\2009 Project Narratives\10 Mosquito Lake Road, Middle Fork Bridge #140 Narrative Final 09.doc 134 WHATCOM COUNTY JOSEPH P. RUTAN, P.E. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Assistant Director/County Engnineer �poM 00 2011 Young St.. Suite 201 FRANK M. ARART Bellingham. WA 982254052 Director g -0 ' Phone: (360) 715-7450 _ 3U Fax: (360) 715-7451 IN G� Project Cost Breakdown Mosquito Lake Road Middle Fork Bridge No. 140 Rehabilitation CRP #904019 Funding Source Whatcom County Federal Funds TOTAL Preliminary Engineering $0 $450,000 $450,000 Right of Way $0 $0 $0 Contract $0 $2,232,062 $2,232,062 Construction Engineering, Testing, Mitigation, and Contingency $0 $378,500 $378,500 Total $0 $3,060,562 $3,060,562 MLR Pmiect Cost 8makdown.xls 135 Eo dN o e� V) N N c_ $ •E a m a O 32 m C O ram+ ceems// 40 r 'O m 0 O 0 0 O O O o O O 0 0 O O O O O O 0 e O O O o O O 0 0 O O 0 0 O O 0 0 O O 0$ P o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0$ 0 o g O ¢� o O 0 0 O O 0 0 0 O O O r y. Z F O p pp 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N O Q O 0 0 0 0 O IAA 0 N M �D G G O S O O pp O S pp S O Q GGGGGG C S 0 O pp p 0 0 ttD� G O op 0 8 N O G 0 0 O O O O 0 0 O O O O 0 0 f? tD G O 0 0 O O O O 0 0 m O O G 0 S O O G O O O O p�j pp O N C O n 0 0 0 0 ttOO 0 0 0 0 0 0 tthh VQ O F O S O CI O NW NW NN W NM N pOo O N N N QQ (O A (NO O �- N NW O O O IA A N A N r0 c w Z z a $ a o o$ O O V1 p o a O o o 0 p8OO 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O O o U)ma 0 0 Od m o uj O ¢O Vj o 0 4l 0 0 O CG 0 0 CU1 G J LL J J -j J J ppill N J LL N � S J O ppN N O N O S O S J J IL LL J a d3' 1A 19 � IA N IA NK � � M M M f9 IA M W o O O o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 o O 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 O o 0 0 O o 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 g o$$ O o o o 0 00 o ......... O O o 0 0 o O o 0 0 O o op N O g o N o r M fpp 0 O 0 0 O O 0 0 O N O N O O o 66080 p S t�f top 0 N N S 0 Q O OQD S N O O O n S N N e- S �O(I N N 11�� M O N m O S �'^ O O O O O pppp N C n O 19 0 S O m N S� 0 N O M O. O S O p tN Q M S r S O N(( Z F O O H opO N CI NW NK NW W S n Cm'l 5 NM tli MW 'W MM NM S �I N f9 ui Z W uG O N O p OO O!In9 ON O!f9V O Of9 O 0Nm0 C< N S¢ f6O0/ aS OO JO O NN S O (7 JLL4J UJ JN J LC YNm ;JJ t2 j N m09 OM j f9 IA M f0 N _SWM ITT; 1A M FA � (9 to Hi f9 fA f9 pp O O O O OI n O O 0 0 N 0 0O 'Mm 0 N0 0 00 NQmM 0O0 0OOO 0OS mmnD OMmNN G] 1� 0 NOI 0n RT 0Q(V t oN�n N m D 60i 6 NM0 ONNO mNn OOO vOO MO O0O O0OfQO N0OOnD N0OOnD O N0O NN mN i N NON. m NN MM0QOnp K0 SOOW McQr m Z O r t U fN d m Uj Ul tIR N N a N N �" O N r fU S S S r 00I M n m N (�% f/1 ¢ O a fA O U o ) M a u? m r N O r 0 m J Y. J J J y M� J tN IL M� j O J m6 fV N n� MM mM N� O� J J IL M Q IL J J lL n� N J N O J m Q S OW T N J ... 0 0 0 O O 0 0 ..... 0 0 0 0 BOBS 0 0 0 O S S O O O O N O O O O ... O O 0.8 O 0 ..... 0000 0 0 0 S ... 0 0 0 0 m o 0 o N m S f Ofpp O ig S Q OQ O N O O O O G O tN(J O N O� N r G r O O O S S O O O C G O N O C O N O O O Q G G O O C G N r O N m R N Oml W O yFi o 00000Mu�oNM C S NW m» fA N» n�Q N» C w m w nM NFA en NtA N» N»K m» N» NMI w w 2 Fl f9 w in NM M !» V Nn in e9 O U r f9fA O O 0 0 o p a O o d O o Q o N 0 0 o d 0 8 o Or ... o 0 0 0 O 0 o 0 . 0 0 6 0 0 6 $- d J LL J J J Q J U: 11 1� S J n m N N O ip N a J J LL ppN r IL J N J f9 IL J S J nu'i W N 0 a n J A f9 f9 H N9 di � O N F9 < f9 f9 f9 IA 4! 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ��.... O I G O 0 0 O O 0 0 Q O 0 N 6. O M N byp M o O N S (G O O N G O O O Cm9 tN7 V O R N O O W f00 O O N S O O O O N a S N C 0 O �mll (O O S O IL7 O N O G O N O O O N m W O O N V p Cp S N N $$� Z 2 O r (A b9 NN Nf9 NN b9 fA M th N t9 f9 V bi b9 N b9 N Q �M(1 O f9 � 19 NM MW I sA f9 -I mM QW OM N bM9 f9 O w t9 t9 w V V �Fy N N O O m 00q P O OOOOp O O O O S O O uj OROOSO O O O O OO O N O O 0 OOOOO 0 0 0 0 m m a J LL J J N V) J IL N N J O lA m 0 NW n S FA O N M N m N N 43 fA J V3 J IL M fy IL J J N LL M 19 J y d) J N N V T f9 f9 lN�l f9 QM J f9 iA M 0 O 0 0 O O 0 0 O O 0 0 N O 0 0 O O 0 0 O O 0 0 O N 0 0 O O 0 0 O O 0 0 O O 0 0 O O 0 0 N O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I. 6 Z ...... O Q O O p p O O O O 0 M O N M .... O- O m n �- O �(j M M N O W M C O m W O <G 060. M O Q Q m O R fA C Q Q O M O O N O m O O O O O Q O O iV N M m Q O O O N O N tG G N Q n N O N O 0 0 N _O M 10fI o M O m .... QQ g M m O N U) p 0 Z F {O m O N O N N M) O) M Mf N Mi IA t9 19 t V1 W a N m m Yi f9 n N m M M M N m f9 f9 O O O O N N CO i9 N M) O N M m �9 N f9 Hi r ci N fA fA U (7 C U F ZZ > a mamN J LL J N J J O N Om¢fG J 0 N IL 0 0 O O uj O NfA 0 N E66 J 0 �(1 O mON c O 0 0 O N m OW 0 0 N v 0 S ID fD n N M p n O ^W H O mmaNcO¢mMm¢ FA J J LL O O O N N f9 � IL J O O m J t9 O m IL N � O m O J � O 0 mQNNm J NK O O 0 0 f9 FA O O 0 0 m (p J f9 f9 r 0 O 0 0 O O 0 0 O O 0 0 O O 0 0 O O 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 O O O O O O O O O 00 0 O 0 00 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a, M o o 00 0 o O o S vi ci r o h o 00 00 0 O 0 0$ O o O ui o o c o 0 0 OI 0 0 0 0 o c o 0 0 0 0 o c o 0 <� (q F � M N 0 0 O i9 0 0 t7 m O_ O Nf9 N C'l f9 N IA O m< b! O b9 M O 19 m OJ Q m m f9 N n 0 MM 0 0 N e9 O wO f9 �M O 19 f9 O O CI f9 O N N N t9 O O N N IA fA Ol Q N N 19 IA OI O N N O m 1A H C 0 lu O in O pp N Ul m O O m P U1 o U) O m 0 0 o O O m a J IL J J J O J rM LC O N N J N S O N O S H N OI NM NM � J J IL M m IL J S J IL 4 J N NM J O.. S V J -L � Q y f9 1A FA FA FA Hi fA FA f9 U14 U)(N fp}, J J U)a} U J U: U TiUIY}aLL U U J 66 1ILL QaQr J 111111 1L1 LLI r U U mmmjw ¢zo 4. O r I.. aNa LL J vi¢ILL Q J IL J vi(r J= Vi LLO}OON J N r U r r J dmmm°mo M mOp O PN s gmNmgmS P1 j- 'a -j L J J .J NJ � s QJ � jLC N�IL J J IL n j ¢ z F m r F a v O w J a w P w a m za. O J J N a Z a w R ya m LL Wpr m (t Z O ¢¢ SS m Zmmm7 m mrO U) Ir W O> ¢ zzQUZ O 0 a ¢OmO Om qJ ¢r m(O U m m y W }OU, = j wLLm OpW owZV Q U�1-Z O w¢ co mZr>U) ¢ UOmw_>ZZOZmmO¢LLQa ]¢OmaO=UWmwwN>mxrLLwm mZa m IL wz U z WZ OWRWOpZ muIr U) FrrD Zd HU Ye m J 2 LL r OWW WU oU7ZwU zO 0 OU 0.mZZ0 7 z Z arLLO¢mg WLLZmmYN W 0LLO Ir a OQ Q Zo O0=aOrO w X w i =m wgJoov, rmwco UZ Omm>3m O O¢aO� OOx OK0 Z �¢ a¢ aO rZF Zm m wOOxz¢ y W �wLL ww K m mmULLLLOwLLLLwOUWmWU 7 UwUOa z m W mWm r a 0UOlw 00 J u. N d 1-1-ITITITI, o m mo �- N MVNN N NNNNN N N MM MM Q M MMM M Q< Q M Q t 136 Eo dN O Nf N N .s a ca m IL O m C O w 3 wems/ CD T O o S O O o o O O O ... O o o O O o 0 O O 0 0 O O 0 0 O O o 0 O 0 O O 0 0 O 0 O 0 F .� Z �ee� ppQ G O O C S S .6 G G g O O O O G C O O pNp1� G f� 0 G 88 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N O pOo WH w = o 0 0 0 o S S o o p o S o S? S 1/1 1A J J N 1/1 J J O O O N J O O O p C S O G O O Uj J O G p p O O S It O QO tlNl H R 21 N H 0 o O O S S In o A O 0 0 O O 0 0 O O 0 S O 0 0 O O 0 0 O O 0 0 O O 0 0 O O 0 0 O O o O In N O O O O H S O NO C O cl O i Oi A F `H rH H o Q 19 OpyH Q- �� 3- m H O :ZO .: W Hi F Z o N m 0 0 O p 0 0 A S 0 0 O Ci o CD J p o 0 o T S c o (7 y J J J J jp H H J H "t In y H t0 N l7 O H GO H O D N H V O1 (MO H O N N O A 0 0 0 Op n O 0mD W N tp 001 10 O S V S 1� N N fV In t✓I m N N IA t•'l l7 of T O A N O W f0 fG A G m r�Hry H HHen ODH u� HH N AH H m ryH '' t+i ���w� Q) - N - It) w o z V H H F t U m m m m V O om N� al rn�ml�m�m ��pp A l7 ED N® fli�rnov�� In N N O (n o O� roiv OG JJ ANJryMN In�MJM'4m pNj SRO H H 111111...... r O O O O O O 0 0 O O O ..... O O O O 0- a ---RR O N OD O f0 O O m O O O O O 00 N O ... O G O N CC1I A O O O C O O 0 0 O .... O O O C �a A 10 O O O O A O m 0 moo O O O O O O 1(I O O O O O O O O O ... O O C G O O O C N O M O] O O F oo F ea QNNh IA O H N H H - H H N H H r O H H O Ol H H H 0H 1 o. H 0 O o 0 N O N _ QQ i9 M O 0 H HH `� HenH of G O U $- a m m M 1/1 N po p M o g G N S S S S o o O N m 6 m o 0 G S O 0$ S 0 S o S O O 0 N -.I J J J It) H H J H O N OH H G O MH O N H R J O 'H S H p O tl09 H p m H ry O O O O O O O O N O A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 1� FF Z o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 <+i o p oo 0 N Moll O O 0 0 a O m 0 0 N O 0 0 O Q o 0 0 0 0 0 y la. a It) O AH N N O H m O H H A O H n O_ 1G qq MH W O M H n m 0 V 1p t0 M S N O tNp N (O m rOp < N N Q Z 0 H Hei HH NH vH HH H HRcli H m H V y1 S S^ S S o o S o$ o S J fM0- H f9 H H H H H OH H H H V H 0 665 o p O p o A 0 O p 0 0 p O 0 0 p o 0 0 p o 0 0 p 0 0 o p 0 0 O Q.B. 0 0 0 0 0 O N FF Z S. S O N N. o N N r N S O N N S p O O O iA F f (n O fD N N lz aG N N O - W O O OD lh (� P O N fO t0 N.. N O N .. N M N M m 1tp M p Z�� (ND 1� QQm U w w H z U Vl bi UI 6i o M 0 0 U) 0 o tO+j [Q[yy S o N N 0 0 c0') p 11j O 0 0 p p 0 o G O S 4 'O N S C J J J J 1p H H J H H NH W H H N J m H 1'p m y H' a cq m H O O 0 0 O O 0 0 O O 0 0 O O 0 0 O 0 S 00 0 0 0 0 ...... 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O O Q o 0 0 0 0 0< o o 0 0 O m o A t0 m oo 0 O O O 0 0 O O < 1� 0 0 O A O.. pp o 0 m 1!J 0 6 0 0 N 6 0 0 0 6 6 0 00 6 6 O O O 0 O O N F `� N O H c0 H N N H H H H lA m H N. H d3 Oi t0 H H H V 00 H O A N H N O (O M (O H N tp M O 6l O H M lnH N W P H J J J J lV O N pp N S to O 0 (h O p 0 N 0 O F O R 1A O N N Y1 N la J 1p m fQ9 Di M J 16 c6 J J LC LL= J `.(y q q N J QH w N QH Q a J o w IL m m O ¢ z O o� U m yew w z5 w 4 m U O O w H 1- m m I V 7 0 Y W Q M W O Z coo 0 QOw w U' a z z U a z z U y O p 1nIF co zz Z w o z f z z mmm F a w Q w O m m F- � K� y J a � QJ_Q O m ¢J_ a m K Q_J K z aa ww M m z o f waa000z�ommow:l f J m m m m = O m LL LL O O z } O w z-o Z m O, m }�a a a Q » a > m �momma-o a rn 3 maJw�N000 U' (7ww mC�Ooo O1q a0 �zw¢a4a¢Mali I�i wug�ir&r z� awa m m g a a a a m m m m m m m w w?? m d IFFS In (O p A (O 01 O Q NFri, N N In N la N N N N O N m Zp m fp tD G 5 I E o - 5 5 ES Z � 5 p NIy F e $ zai < S Q 3 0 0 a � u 137 BID PROPOSAL FOR MOSQUITO LAKE ROAD MIDDLE FORK BRIDGE NO. 140 REHABILITATION CRP NO.904019 FEDERAL AID NO. BHS-37XX(001) Date April 21, 2009 TO: Whatcom County Executive and Council Whatcom County Courthouse 311 Grand Avenue Bellingham, Washington 98225 Gentlepersons: This certifies that the Undersigned: has examined the location of the project site and the conditions of work; and has carefully read and thoroughly understands the contract documents entitled: "Mosquito Lake Road Middle Fork Bridge No. 140 Rehabilitation," Whatcom County, Washington, including the "Bid Procedures and Conditions," "Specifications and Conditions," "Contract Forms," "Construction Plans," and "Appendix," governing the work embraced in this project, and the method by which payment will be made for said work. The Undersigned hereby proposes to undertake and complete the work embraced in this project in accordance with said contract documents, and agrees to accept as payment for said work, the schedule of lump sum and unit prices as set forth in the "Bid" below. The Undersigned acknowledges that payment will be based on the actual work performed and material used as measured or provided for in accordance with the said contract documents, and that no additional compensation will be allowed for any taxes not included in each lump sum or unit price, and that the basis for payment will be the actual work performed and measured or provided for in accordance with the said contract documents. The Undersigned certifies that it is not currently disqualified from bidding on any public works contract under RCW 39.06.010 or RCW 39.12.065(3). MOSQUITO LAKE ROAD MIDDLE FORK BRIDGE NO. 140 REHABILITATION CRP NO.904019 -9- 138 MOSQUITO LAKE ROAD MIDDLE FORK BRIDGE NO. 140 REHABILITATION CRP#904019 Bid Proposal Form Bidder: TIGER CONSTRUCTION LTD owl�e�''��jTn �a7 b �'�Y� � �., � t�'C / '}�i ;� N ? � k�i %L'S.� a��? y fr� '`4 'ti+ y'i'c )) K��1� Sk��� � xSY 5 1. 1'➢h^�=� � .r'f..e)` v�1�F1��Sx, Y , d7,.,.M £xR x'.v. �,:...r m. ,Y,.? . •is' :..,..., ,..-7 .n!.-. �.r .�"z: E,,, :,f..., �S?�sa ,i .:.,. s r,y};�`55�e:'r`?��-.? ....F' .�..; � .K :..;. _� .:?>4-> PREPARATION 1 LUMP MOBILIZATION L.S. L.S. yO 96, SUM { 2 FORCE UNANTICIPATED SITE WORK F.A. F.A. $ 100,000.00 ACCOUNT 3 LUMP TYPE B PROGRESS SCHEDULE L.S. L.S. SUM ��00 4 LUMP MOBILE OFFICE L.S. L.S. o0 SUM60 5 LUMP REMOVAL OF STRUCTURES AND L.S. L.S. SUM OBSTRUCTIONS 6 CUBIC ROADWAY EXCAVATION INCL. HAUL 209 S sr 3a YARD per C.Y. 7 LUMP CLEARING AND GRUBBING L.S. L.S. 3 = SUM 8 FORCE ROADSIDE CLEANUP F.A. F.A. $ 5,000.00 ACCOUNT 9 CUBIC STRUCTURE EXCAVATION CLASS A 110 ---� �6 0 5 YARD INCL. HAUL per C.Y. 10 CUBIC STRUCTURE EXCAVATION CLASS B 47 Soo co �� 7� YARD INCL. HAUL per C.Y. III 0 11 CUBIC ROCK EXCAVATION 13 3D` 1 Dy YARD per C.Y. 12 LUMP SHORING OR EXTRA EXCAVATION L.S. L.S. vo SUM CLASS A 13 CUBIC CONTROLLED DENSITY FILL 59 s0 YARD per C.Y. STRUCTURE 14 CUBIC GRAVEL BACKFILL FOR WALLS 42 50 00 9n3 — YARD per C.Y. I 15 EACH FURNISHING AND DRIVING CAST IN 1 I 9, 0�02 15 a PLACE CONC. TEST PILE 16 IN DIAMETER per EACH 16 LINEAR FURNISH CAST IN PLACE CONCRETE 82 FOOT IPILING 16 IN DIAMETER I FA 10 3 Z6, MOSQUITO LAKE ROAD MIDDLE FORK BRIDGE NO.140 REHABILITATION Bid Proposal Form CRP#904019 Bidder: TIGER CONSTRUCTION LTD \i �.��flt`L?{ps:�gFfi� 4��{� t IVY W} } � * S�S'Rill"�} a 3 fy r Y- ti F ^�: 1�' 7 r rs� n� .i. g era �h�� ors f '/�'i�t ��������;��.. iJ t�5 .' ._i' _9.: t-ll�� �F'J' �"C� q "X'r. �.T.. h• ciR Y 17 EACH DRIVING CAST IN PLACE CONCRETE 3 00 00 2751' PILING 16 IN DIAMETER per EACH 18 EACH PERMANENT GROUND ANCHORS 8 r ✓ 7 1 � C? per EACH ) 19 EACH PERMANENT GROUND ANCHOR 8 I 06 rqys oc PERFORMANCE TEST per EACH ) 20 CUBIC CONCRETE CLASS 4000 FOR 69 00 � e rC,Y. YARD SUBSTRUCTURE G 21 CUBIC CONCRETE CLASS 4000D FOR 50 rn YARD SUPERSTRUCTURE per C.Y. 22 LB EPDXY -COATED ST. REINF. BAR FOR 1,950 SUPERSTRUCTURE per LB 23 LB ST. REINF. BAR FOR SUBSTRUCTURE 12,800 0 _7� per LB J 1 7 24 LB EPDXY -COATED ST. REINF. BAR FOR 1,500 I ! 05 I 5op— SUBSTRUCTURE per LB 25 LUMP CLEANING AND PAINTING BRIDGE L.S. L.S. qQ0, SUM 26 LUMP CONTAINMENT OF ABRASIVES L.S. L.S. 00 SUM v �Y 27 FORCE TESTING AND DISPOSAL OF F.A. F.A. $ 10,000.00 ACCOUNT CONTAINMENT WASTE SURFACING 28 TON CRUSHED SURFACING BASE COURSE 226 CO per TO P V 29 TON COMMERCIAL HMA 144 cc j OPL, t 3 per TON 'y 30 FORCE ANTI -STRIPPING ADDITIVE F.A. F.A. $ 2,000.00 ACCOUNT EROSION CONTROL AND PLANTING 31 L.S. SPCC PLAN L.S. L.S. b%+�86 vv �r 32 DAY ESC LEAD 12 KeSrDAF— %1 / IVA 11 140 MOSQUITO LAKE ROAD MIDDLE FORK BRI[DGE NO. 140 REHABILITATION Bid Proposal Form CRP#904019 Bidder. TIGER CONSTRUCTION LTD -91M X., ........... R, � . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 LUMP SEEDING AND FERTILIZING L.S. L.S. SUM 34 FORCE EROSION/WATER POLLUTION CONTROL F.A. F.A. 10,000.00 ACCOUNT 36 LINEAR Sur FENCE 780 I FOOT per L.F. TRAFFIC 36 L.S. PROJECT TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL L.S. L.S. 37 HOUR OTHER TRAFFIC CONTROL LABOR '100 C6 per HR 38 L.S. TRAFFIC CONTROL SUPERVISOR L.S. L.S. 39 SQUARE CONSTRUCTION SIGNS CLASS A 2510 OD j Y.— FOOT per S.F. OTHER 40 TON QUARRY SPALLS 98 0 7 -c' cd per TON ob 41 CUBIC RIVER COBBLES 91 i.5 YARD per C.Y. 42 TON HEAVY LOOSE RIPRAP 733 � iso 07) 95 per TON 43 TON FILTER BLANKET 114 er —7,06 0-0 per T000 N 44 L.S. STRUCTURE SURVEYING L.S. L.S. 2; �0 (DO 45 L.S. ROADWAY SURVEYING L.S. L.S. 60 46 L.S. STREAM DIVERSION L.S. L.S. 47 L.S. LANE RUMBLE STRIP L.S.S. L.S. 0 48 L.S. PERMANENT SIGNING L.S. L.S. 001 5 11F 12 MOSQUITO LAKE ROAD MIDDLE FORK BRIDGE NO.140 REHABILITATION Bid Proposal Form CRP#904019 Bidder: TIGER CONSTRUCTION LTD a ITE!i� �+$�R�YTir%� v rnl�nc��l �' C �2a ls,�� `tYO i,13��r�tAC��Fef :� IYICKvatni f r ` .� -. re e 1 E, 50 �l �✓y rQl�A1i1"f7Y = sue{ i1Y F�a7V1[CJ Z ��yy ��a� a ,> vxl ��+IV ._ 49 LINEAR PAINT LINE 939 FOOT per L.F. ) of 50 LINEAR PAINTED STOP LINE 16 D6 Od FOOT per L.F. 51 HOUR TRAINING 600 of co per HOUR 52 LUMP PAINT SYSTEM WARRANTY BOND 1 L.S. �?01 SUM 53 EACH GUARDRAIL POST ROCK SOCKET 18 1 3 per EACH , '( 54 LINEAR BEAM GUARDRAIL TYPE 1 188 j3f��_ q 3 �y06 FOOT per L.F. 55 EACH BEAM GUARDRAIL TRANSITION SECTION 4 (� TYPE 1 per EACH j 56 EACH BEAM GUARDRAIL NON -FLARED 3 01 Od ` 7S TERMINAL per EACH VVV 57 EACH BEAM GUARDRAIL ANCHOR TYPE 1 1j,~�' 00 EACH 58 LINEAR BRIDGE RAILING TRUSS 676 QOer I �OO 0 FOOT per L.F. 1� 59 LINEAR BRIDGE RAILING APPROACH SPAN 186 1-)per 1 F, OOT L.F. ✓ SUPERSTRUCTURE % 60 LUMP SUPERSTRUCTURE MOSQUITO LAKE L.S. L.S. SUM ROAD BRIDGE NO, 140 61 SQUARE STEEL GRID BRIDGE DECKING 5,395 / FOOT per S.F. t 62 EACH END FLOOR BEAM 2 t per EACH 63 EACH INTERIOR FLOOR BEAM 15 STRENGTHENING per EACHj lll...11l J 64 LINEAR INTERIOR FLOOR BEAM 200 c)c (� FOOT IREHABILITATION perL.F. 65 EACH TRUSS DIAGONAL 16 per EACH 13 z, 0 0 R �3�Z 7 1A2 MOSQUITO LAKE ROAD MIDDLE FORK BRIDGE NO. 140 REHABILITATION CRP#904019 Bid Proposal Form Bidder. TIGER CONSTRUCTION LTD ou c gg, 14 0 21 U 66 EACH SEISMIC ISOLATION BEARING. 4 y�� per �ACH -7 7v X 96 67 LINEAR EXPANSION JOINT 33 3 w 0j, FOOT per L.F. TOTAL BID AMOUNT Items 1-67) (Bid $ V )0 14 143 NON -COLLUSION DECLARATION MOSQUITO LAKE ROAD MIDDLE FORK BRIDGE NO.140 REHABILITATION CRP NO.904019 FEDERAL AID NO. BHS-37XX(001) I, by signing the proposal, hereby declare, under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the following statements are true and correct: 1. That the undersigned person(s), firm, association or corporation has (have) not, either directly or indirectly, entered into any agreement, participated in any collusion, or otherwise taken any action in restraint of free competitive bidding in connection with the project for which this proposal is submitted. 2. That by signing the signature page of this proposal, I am deemed to have signed and have agreed to the provisions of this declaration. NOTICE TO ALL BIDDERS To report bid rigging activities call: 1-800-424-9071 The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) operates the above toll free "hotline" Monday tluough Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time. Anyone with knowledge of possible bid rigging, bidder collusion, or other fraudulent activities should use the "hotline" to report such activities. The "hotline" is part of USDOT's continuing effort to identify and investigate highway construction contract fraud and abuse, and is operated under the direction of the USDOT Inspector General. All information will be treated confidentially and caller anonymity will be respected. MOSQUITO LAKE ROAD MIDDLE FORK BRIDGE NO, 140 REHABILITATION CRP NO.904019 -15- 144 BIDDER IDENTIFICATION The name of the Bidder submitting this proposal, the address and phone number to which all communications concerned with this proposal shall be made, and the number which has been assigned indicating the Bidder is licensed to do business in the State of Washington are as follows: Firm Name: TIGER CONSTRUCTION LTD Address. 6280 EVERSON GOSHEN ROAD EVERSON, WA 98267 . Telephone: 360-966-7252 Contractor's WA Registration Number: TIGERCL121MA Contractor's WA UBI Number: 601 090 108 Contractor's WA Employment Security Department Number: 650767 00 7 Contractor's WA Excise Tax Registration Number: 601 090 108 The Firm submitting this proposal is a: Sole Proprietorship Partnership X Corporation The names and titles of the principal officers of the corporation submitting this proposal, or of the partnership, or of all persons interested in this proposal as principals are as follows: KEN ISENHART PRESIDENT STEVE ISENHART SCOTT ISENHART MARSHA ISENHART VICE PRESIDENT TREASURER SECRETARY NOTE: Signatures of this proposal must be identified above. Failure to identify the Signatories will be cause for considering the proposal irregular and for subsequent rejection of the bid. MOSQUITO LAKE ROAD MIDDLE FORK BRIDGE NO. 140 REHABILITATION CRP NO.904019 16- 145 BID PROPOSAL SIGNATURE AND ADDENDUM ACKNOWLEDGMENT The bidder is hereby advised that by signature of this proposal he/she is deemed to have acknowledged all requirements and signed all certificates contained herein. The undersigned hereby agrees to pay labor not less than the prevailing rates of wages or less than the hourly minimum rate of wages as specified in the Specifications and Conditions for this project. CASH CASH CERTIFIED CHECK PROPOSAL BOND ❑ IN THE AMOUNT OF FN U 1 h1�i/_17.� ($ ) PAYABLE TO WHATCOM COUNTY IN THE AMOUNT OF 5% OF THE BID. Receipt is hereby acknowledged by addendum(s) No.(s) 1 , 2 , & SIGNATURE OF UTHORIZ OFF IAL(S) (PROPOSAL MUST BE SIGNED) KEN ISENHART, PRESIDEET FIRM NAME: TIGER CONSTRUCTION, LTD STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF WHATCOM ) On this 2 1 ST day of, 200 9 , before me personally appeared N N (Seal) KE I SE HART to me personally known to be the person described in and who exegjj2Lte above instrument and who acknowledged to me the act of signing thereof JENNIFER K LAUTENBACH NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF WASHINGTON QTARY PUBLIC, in and for the COMMISSION EXPIRES State of Washington, residing at: FVCKO, kW4 MAY 29, 2012 My Commission Expires: 5.29 ZQ12 This proposal form is not transferable and any alteration of the firm's name entered hereon without prior permission from Whatcom County will be cause for considering the proposal irregular and for subsequent rejection of the bid. MOSQUITO LAKE ROAD MIDDLE FORK BRIDGE NO. 140 REHABILITATION CRP NO.904019 -17- 146 WHATCOM COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS SUBCONTRACTOR LIST Prepared in Compliance with RCW 39.30.060 as amended. TO BE SUBMITTED WITH THE BID PROPOSAL Project Name: MOSQUITO LAKE ROAD MIDDLE FORK BRIDGE NO. 140 REHABILITATION CRP 90419 Failure to list subcontractors who are proposed to perform work of heating, ventilation and air conditioning, plumbing as described in Chapter 19.106 RCW, and electrical work as described in Chapter 19.28 RCW, will result in your bid being nonresponsive and therefore void. Subcontractor(s) that are proposed to perform work of heating, ventilation and air conditioning, plumbing as described in Chapter 1&106 RCW, and electrical work as described in Chapter 19.28 RCW must be listed below. The work to be performed is to be listed below the subcontractor'(s) name. If no subcontractor is listed below, the bidder acknowledges that it does not intend to use any subcontractor to perform those items of work. Subcontractor Name Work to be Perfonned ec�-4-ri �ni Subcontractor Name Work to be Performed MOSQUrrO LAKE ROAD MIDDLE FORK BRIDGE Na 140 REHABILITATION CRP 1,10.904019 -19- 147 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 2009-240 CLEARANCES Initial Date Date Received in Council O ace Agenda Date Assigned to: Originator., 4/30/09 ((U� III E C E� V E D MAY 0 5 2009 5/12/09 Finance & council Division Head: Dept. HeadProsecutor: W H ATC O M COUNTY !! COUNCIL Purchasin /Bud et: 4/30 09 Executive: TITLE OF DOC MENT. Approval to Award Bid 09-36 for Annual Hot Mix Asphalt Prelevel Projects ATTACHMENTS: Memos from Finance and Public Works SEPA review required? ( ) Yes ( x) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing ? ( ) Yes ( x) NO SEPA review completed? ( ) Yes (x ) NO Requested Date: 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.) Public Works Maintenance & Operations is requesting approval award bid 09-36 and enter into a contract for the annual asphalt prelevel projects at various county locations. Three bids were received and Public Works would like to award to the low bidder, Associated Asphalt, Inc. in the amount of $491,860.00. Funds for this purchase were approved in the current budget. COMMITTEE ACTION: COUNCIL ACTION: Related County Contract #. Related File Numbers: Ordinance or Resolution Number. 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.us/council. im WHATCOM COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Whatcom County Courthouse 311 Grand Avenue, Suite 108 Bellingham, WA 98225-4083 DDesler@co.whatcom.wa.us DEWEY G. DESLER Director FINANCE/ACCOUNTING Whatcom County Courthouse 311 Grand Avenue, Suite 503 Bellingham, WA 98225-4038 Finance@co.whatcom.wa. us BRAD BENNETT Manager DATE: 30 April 2009 TO: Pete Kremen, County Executive FROM: Brad Bennett, AS Finance Manager SUBJECT: Bid Award 09-36, Annual Hot Mix Asphalt Prelevel Projects Background Bids have been advertised and received for the annual hot mix asphalt prelevel projects. Three bids were received on Tuesday April 14. A detailed tabulation is included. VENDQ, ' T0,7ALAIQItIyT, , Associated Asphalt 491,860.00 Whatcom Builders 496,250.00 Granite Northwest 528,271.00 Public Works Maintenance & Operations is requesting approval to award the bid and enter into contract with low bidder, Associated Asphalt, Inc. in the amount of $491,860.00. Funding This is a planned project and funds were approved in the current budget I concur with this recommendation Approved as recommended County Executive Date of Council Action Administration Facilities Management Finance/Accounting Human Resources Information Technology County Residents (360) 676-6717 (360) 676-6746 (360) 676-6734 (360) 676-6802 (360) 676-7684 (360) 398-1310 Fax (360) 676-6775 Fax (360) 676-6789 Fax (360) 738-4553 Fax (360) 738-2521 Fax (360) 676-7727 TTY (360) 738-45IP49 MAINTENANCE Ft OPERATIONS DIVISION WHATCOM COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT FRANK M. ABART Director ,,C,O M CO �4Sh1 N GtGr MEMORANDUM 901 W. Smith Road Bellingham, WA 98226 Phone (360) 676-6759 Fax (360) 676-6879 Mary A. Green, Superintendent TO: Brad Bennett, AS Finance Manager THROUGH: Frank M. Abart, PW Director 11d FROM: Mary A. Green, PW Maintenance & Operations Superintendent RE: Bid #09-36, 2009 Hot Mix Asphalt Prelevel at Miscellaneous Locations DATE: April 21, 2009 ■ Requested Action Approval requested to award the bid and subsequent contract for the 2009 Hot Mix Asphalt Pre;,;vel at Miscellaneous Locations to the lowest responsive bidder, Associated Asphalt, Inc. in Ferndale, in the amount of $491,860.00. ■ Background and Purpose Bids were duly advertised and submitted for the annual hot mix asphalt prelevel at miscellaneous locations. As part of the annual maintenance and repair on various county roads and on county road projects, the Public Works Maintenance and Operations Division contracts out the preleveling project. "three bid responses were received Tuesday, April 14, 2009. See attached bid tabulation listing in further detail the three bid responses received along with the Engineer's estimate. Factoring in costs for mobilization, signing and traffic control, pavement repair, seeded lawn installation, and hot mix asphalt prelevel 3/8", Associated Asphalt, Inc. is the overall lowest responsive bidder for the 2009 Hot Mix Asphalt Prelevel Project. ■ Funding Amount and Source Adequate funds exist within the 2009 Budget Road Fund Expenditure. These are regularly budgeted expenditures for preleveling, which is used on an annual basis as needed and has been budgeted during the 2009-2010 Budget process. Please approve this purchase and forward to the Executive and the Whatcom County Council for approval at the May 12, 2009 Whatcom County Council Meeting. Please contact Mary A. Green at extension 50657 or Eric L. Schlehuber at extension 50607, if you have any questions or concerns. Encl. 150 w c> O i CD =)7 o_ N co CD 0. m w� S O O_ o D o =� N N O O �• CO a' CD C o CD m o 3 CD a m 0 w w a a w m 0. O V1 CD a (D N CD 0 U) 0 m N d 4L1 m D N N N• 23 N 2 m 0 17 O c 70 O m 0_ m CD N D a C CD m ol< m o � CD N � O m m a)o 3 0 c D !A N a 0 0 C CD m � CD �. v m � w �• O O o CD v C CD 0 ca.c y N OO O O c N o m 0 � a � fD 0 0 CD_ � v 80 C O � O S CD w 3 0 c 0 O 3 CD m cn CD CD iU (D w 7 Q a Cl) CD 41 C (D 6 Q a 0 a O 0 N 0 a CD (D n 4U N W O a I z -1 cn a w N p m cn o rn O O CDD z m z m w z o 0 m w co a m CD co —1 co r' c a c v n co C) o 0 CD _ 0= C7 0_ iv c C m grg 33 N rA to to rA to cn CD a o c _. [Lr1 m CO CO o o O o O = W cn o C:> O o m --r Q o D o N EA to co (A co co 3 Cil cnCD N N O y cn O .a,. r . D Oo co CD 0 CD 0 CD 0 o iDo 0 0 0 0 0 fA to (A to (A cn o :-4CD 0 o o T O o T CD o= o 0 cn 0 o o .m. n 0 0 O D 0 c o cn o � a 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 o o O O o O O o o 0 to <A U1 O '= m O O j OO _. n. 7-1 cn O O = C:) :m o y o y o c C-n N o 11 Z: tyv EA to rA Cn — O O O O C) rn o o c�ii o 0 0 0 0 0 IA v9 69 .69 to - ... cn o a .76.. C -. rn iv o o m o O - m w o o:n' O o m` . _ n o O EA Ea <A to vl to .ic co 41 N'4 o 0 p 0 C:) 0 o r. CO) 0 0 0 0 O 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0. CD h O C.D C,J LA N O O CU O S X N 3 .=r Ci CD (D O C U) r- O 0 a1 O N 0 0 Z 151 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 2009-241 CLEARANCES Initial Date Date Received in Council Office Agenda Date Assigned to: DeeE 514109 5112109 Finance Originator: "' IE C E" Il M E D Council Division Head: MAY 0 5 2009 Dept. Head: Prosecutor: WHATCOM COUNTY Purchasin Bud et: 6ffp} COUNCIL Executive: 1` 7 TITLE OF DOCO WENT: Amendment #1 Site Selection Process for Whatcom County Adult Corrections Facilities and Sheriff's Headquarters Project ATTACHMENTS: SEPA review required? ( ) Yes ( ) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing? ( ) Yes ( ) NO SEPA review completed? ( ) Yes ( ) NO Requested Date: SUMMARYSTATEMENT OR LEGAL NOTICE LANGUAGE. Amendment #1 Site Selection Process for Whatcom County Adult Corrections Facilities and Sheriffs Headquarters Project; expands the scope of work to include wetlands delineation at both of the final candidate sites (Sites 4 and 5). As a result of the determination that both sites were equally viable it is recommended that an EIS process take place for both sites. This will allow for a more thorough and accurate assessment of the properties necessary to make the final determination of the preferred site. COMMITTEE ACTION: COUNCIL ACTION: Related County Contract #: Related File Numbers: Ordinance or Resolution Number: 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.us/council, 152 WHATCOM COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE SEVICES Whatcom County Courthouse 311 Grand Ave, Suite 108 Bellingham, WA 98225-4083 Ddesler@co.whatcom.wa.us DEWEY G. DESLER Director MEMORANDUM TO: Dewey Desler, Administrative Services FROM: Michael Russell, Facilities Manager DATE: May 1, 2009 RE: HDR Amendment #1 — Jail Siting FACILITIES MANAGEMENT 316 Lottie Street Bellingham, WA 98225-4010 Phone: 360.676.6746 Fax: 360.676.6789 Facilities@co.whatcom.wa. us MICHAEL RUSSELL Facilities Manager Attached are two (2) originals of amendment #1 to the contract between Whatcom County and HDR Engineering, Inc. for Site Selection Services for Whatcom County Adult Corrections Facilities and Sheriff's Headquarters Project for your review and signature. Background and Purpose In 2007 Whatcom County entered into a contract with HDR for preliminary Jail Siting work that included; project management, development of a site master plan, facility needs assessment, evaluation of candidate sites, and the eventual identification of a preferred site. Utilizing a scoring matrix that included land valuation, community impact, physical characteristics, proximity to existing infrastructure, land use, environmental constraints and several more, two properties were determined to be equally viable. The original contract 200711045 included costs for one Environment Impact Study on the preferred property. As a result of the equally viable determination for two sites it is recommended that both of them (Site 4 and 5) go through the EIS process to provide Administration and Council more thorough site information necessary to accurately assess and determine a preferred location. Funding Amount and Source Funding required for this amendment is $69,305.00. Budget Authority for the additional costs in this amendment will be requested from the corrections tax fund in June. • Difference from Previous Contract This project is a one-time agreement. Please contact Michael Russell at extension 50575, if you have any questions. 153 WHATCOM COUNTY CONTRACT INFORMATION SHEET Whatcom County Contract No. a00-7110y5-1 Originating Department: AS -Facilities Management Contract Administrator: Michael Russell, Facilities Manager Contractor's /A en Name: HDR, Inc. Is this a New Contract? If not, is this an Amendment or Renewal to an Existing Contract? Yes _ No X Yes X No If yes, previous number(s): _200711045 Is this a grant agreement? Yes No X If yes, grantor agency contract number(s) _ CFDA number Is this contract grant funded? Yes _ No X If yes, associated Whatcom County grant contract number(s) Is this contract the result of a RFP or Bid process? Yes _ No X If yes, RFP and Bid number(s) Contract Amount: (sum of orig contract If a Professional Services Agreement is more than $15, 000 or a Bid is amt and any prior amendments) more than $35, 000, please submit an Agenda Bill for Council $ 695, 701.00 approval and a supporting memo. Any amendment that provides This Amendment Amount: either a 10% increase in amount or more than $10, 000, whichever is $ 69,305.00 greater, must also go to Council and will need an agenda bill and Total Amended Amount: supporting memo. If less than these thresholds; just submit to $ 765, 006 00 Executive with supporting memo for approval. Scope of Services Contract between HDR, Inc. and Whatcom County for delineation of wetlands at both of the final candidate sites (Sites 4 and 5) instead of originally proposed preferred site. Whatcom County Adult Corrections Facilities & Sherds Headquarters Project Term of Contract. Expiration Date: January 1, 2010 Last Renewal Expires: January 1, 2013 1. Prepared by: 2. Attorney reviewed. - 3. AS Finance reviewed: 4. IT reviewed if IT related 5. Corrections made: 6. Attorney signoff.• `— 7. Contractor signed: 8. Submitted to Exec Office s 9. Reviewed by DCA 10. Council approved (if necessary) IL Executive signed. 12. Contractor Original 13. Returned to dept,• 14. County Original to Council Date •ilo-c► [electronic] Date -.2 [electronic] Date electronic] Date _ [electronic] Date [electronic] hard copyprinted Date- 9 Date Date 5-1- U 9 [summary via electronic; hardcopies] Date Date Date Date Date this form may need to expand to more than one page 154 Whatcom County Contract No. CoUNV ORIGINAL a00-7110gS -r Contract Amendment #1 Site Selection Process for Whatcom County Adult Corrections Facilities and Sheriffs Headquarters Project This AMENDMENT is to the Contract made between Whatcom County and HDR Engineering, Inc. dated December 3, 2007 and designated "Whatcom County Contract No. 200711045". In consideration of the mutual benefits to derived, the parties agree to the following: This amendment expands the scope of work to include wetlands delineation at both of the final candidate sites (Sites 4 and 5) instead of the originally proposed preferred site alone as stated in the attached expanded Scope of Work, Exhibit "A". The total amount for this amendment is an additional $69,305.00 as described in Exhibit "B new contract total will be in the amount of $765,006.00 plus applicable Washington State Sales Tax. Unless specifically amended by this agreement all other terms and conditions of the original contract shall remain in full force and effect. This Amendment takes effect as stated. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement this 4-1'day of200 9 David Peters, Office HDR Engineering, Ir STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF VI h ) ;e► A i;•.V 0. owr puft% On this `1 day of �'!� , 200 4 , before me personally appeared David Peters to me know to be the Office Manager at HDR Engineering, Inc. and who executed the above instrument and who acknowWged to me the act of signing and sealing thereof. Amendment # 1 - HDR Engineering, Inc. Site Selection Process for Whatcom County Adult Corrections Facilities and Sheriffs Headquarters Project NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington, residing at \ SSaa uA ► N My commission expires 155 WHATCOM COUNTY: Approved as to form: Prosecdag'Aftor6if Date Approved: Accepted for Whatcom County: By: Pete Kremen, Whatcom County Executive STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF On this day of , 200_, before me personally appeared Pete Kremen to me know to be the Executive of Whatcom County, and who executed the above instrument and who acknowledged to me the act of signing and sealing thereof. CONTRACTOR INFORMATION: HDR Engineering, Inc. Address: 500108"h Ave., N.E. #1200 Bellevue, WA 98004-5549 Mailing Address: 5001080, Ave., N.E. #1200 Bellevue, WA 98004-5549 Contact Name: Hams Falken, PE Contact Phone: 425.450.6200 Contact Fax: 425.453.7107 Email: Amendment # 1 - HDR Engineering, Inc. Site Selection Process for Whatcom County Adult Corrections Facilities and Sheriffs Headquarters Project NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington, residing at . My commission expires 2 156 Harsuelna.aol.com Exhibit A Scope of Work Whatcom County Adult Corrections Facilities and Sheriffs Headquarters Project Contract Amendment No.1 Introduction HDR Engineering, Inc. (HDR), ahs been requested to delineate wetlands at both of the final candidate sites (Sites 4 and 5) instead of the originally -proposed preferred site alone. The delineation requires specialized staff to conduct detailed wetland studies on the additional site (Site 4) as well on the access easement/rights-of-way associated with that site. Although this scope primarily addressees that need, it also includes the analysis of wetlands and streams along areas where roadway improvements are expected for each of the two final candidate sites. These areas could not have been anticipated at the time of HDR's original scope because the project sites had not yet been selected. Provision is also included for special meetingsibriefings with County Staff/County Council and property owners regarding this work as well as the overall siting/EIS process. Task-1— Meetings with County StaWCounty Council HDR will be available to the County on an as -needed basis to plan and present up to five informational meetings/briefings to specifically address the site selection process. As the work progressed through February 2009, it became clear that property owners of two final candidate sites may request detailed updates on site -specific features. This task provides funding for those meetingsibriefings with County Staff and/or the County Council and the appropriate property owner. It is assumed that the HDR team members attending will be Harris Falkin (Project Manager), Mike Stimac (Deputy Project Manager) and Mike Witter (Natural Sciences Lead). However, in all cases, the Whatcom County Facilities Manager will identify meeting requirements and designate who from HDR should participate. Task-2 — Wetland Delineation Field Work HDR will identify and delineate wetlands within the study area for Site 4. The study area will include all land potentially affected by the construction and operation of the proposed facility along with land affected by the infrastructure improvements required to develop the site. This study area will account for construction limits, temporary construction easements, potential construction staging areas, and impacts to upland buffers of nearby wetlands. Wetlands will be delineated according to methods described in the 1997.Washington. State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual and the 2006 Western Mountain and Valleys Regional Supplement of the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. These methods require qualified biologist have access to the land being investigated, where they intend to excavate shallow soil pits to observe soil conditions and hydrologic parameters. Wetland boundaries will be flagged with high visibility plastic flagging. A map showing the flagged areas will be provided to the surveyors upon completion of the flagging work. Streams within 200-feet of the project boundary will be identified and the ordinary high water mark will be flagged with sequentially -numbered high visibility plastic flagging. Amendment # 1 - HDR Engineering, Inc. Site Selection Process for Whatcom County Adult Corrections Facilities and Sheriff s Headquarters Project 3 157 HDR will help convene and coordinate review of the site with regulatory agencies. HDR will work with Whatcom County Planning and Development Services to identify appropriate reviewers, initiate field verifications, and prepare meeting notes for review and finalization. Assumptions: 1. The right to enter the study area will be granted in writing prior to the initiation of field work, and written documentation concerning the right to enter the property will be provided by the property owner in a timely manner. 2. The County will perform the survey work. Task-3 -- Data Analysis and Report Preparation Wetlands identified will be rated according to the 2004 Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington. Wetland scientist will also complete a regulatory review of the identified wetlands which will analyze how local, state, and federal regulations would affect proposed project actions. Streams identified will be characterized and stream buffers determined for each identified stream. Wetland and stream impacts will be calculated using engineering estimates of cut and fill conceptual -level design information for the project. Wetland buffer impacts will also be calculated. A set of drawings will be prepared that overlay the proposed project improvements on the identified wetland and stream areas and their buffers. Other maps that may be required to complete the rating or analyze project effects will be done in GIS to an accuracy level needed for the analysis. A draft and final report will be prepared upon completion of the field work and data analysis. The report will clearly discuss stream and wetland resources within the study area, identify project impacts associated with the project improvements, discuss how these physical impacts may affect watershed level functions and values, and identify conceptual mitigation options. The report will not identify mitigation sites, or provide detailed mitigation plans. Those tasks are best completed when all parties are better informed as to the amount and type of mitigation may be expected from the project. This information could also lead to slight design changes that eliminate impacts or result in detailed mitigation siting and design. Amendment #1 - HDR Engineering, Inc. Site Selection Process for Whatcom County Adult Corrections Facilities and Sheriff s Headquarters Project 4 158 Exhibit "B" 2-Apr-09 Whatcom County Adult Corrections Facilities & Sheriff's Headquarters Project Contract Amendment No. 1: Cost Estimate HDR Labor Labor Rate Hours FOR EACH TASK Total Hours Cost 1 2 3 M Stimac M. Witter L. Danielski M. Dalzell I. Johansen 76.50 55.97 34.40 23.82 38.58 40 40 80 140 20 10 2 8 40 20 10 42 128 180 40 20 $3,213 $7,164 $6,192 $953 $772 Total Hours Subtotal Direct Labor Overhead @ F-1.75 80 5,299 9,273 250 10,156 17,773 80 2,839 4,968 410 $18,294 $18,294 $32,014 Total HDR Labor Costs 14,572 27,929 7,807 $50,308 HDR Expenses 1 2 3 Expenses 91 Miscellaneous 92 Travel 93 Mapping/Photos/Surveys 95 Printing Drawings 95 Copying 96 Telephone/FAX 97 Tech Chrg per Lbr Hr 3.70 Expense Admin Fee 0.00 200 296 500 500 1,600 100 925 100 296 $700 $1,600 $100 $0 $100 $0 $1,517 $500 Total HDR Expenses 996 3,125 396 $4,517 TOTAL HDR LABOR AND EXP 15,568 31,054 8,203 $54,825 Sub -consultant Labor $/Hr 1 2 3 Hours Sub Labor Falkin Consulting, Inc. 140.00 60 60 $8,400 Total Sub -consultant Labor Cost $8,400 60 $8,400 Sub -consultant Expenses 1 2 3 Sub Ex enses Falken Consulting, Inc. 600 $600 Total Sub -Consulting Expenses 600 $600 TOTAL SUBCONSULTANTS 9,000 $9,000 HDR Sub -consultant Admin 0.05 450 $450 Subtotal Cost by Task 25,018 $64,275 FEE % Tot Cost Wee) 0.100 1,457 $5,031 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST AND`FEE 1 2 3 TOTAL 26,475 33,847 8,984 $69,305 Amendment #1 - HDR Engineering, Inc. Site Selection Process for Whatcom County Adult Corrections Facilities and Sheriffs Headquarters Project 159 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 2009-242 CLEARANCES Initial Date Date Received in Council Office Agenda Date 5/12/09 Assigned to: DGD 3116109 Finance Originator: 2 L� D MAY 0 5 2009 Council Division Head: Dept. Head: Prosecutor: "W UATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL Purchasing/Budget: Jd S Executive: TITLE OF DOCUMENT: Bellingham Whatcom Economic Development Council Contract ATTACHMENTS: Memorandum, Contract for Services SEPA review required? ( ) Yes ( x ) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing ? ( ) Yes ( x ) NO SEPA review completed? ( ) Yes ( x ) Requested Date: NO SUMMARYSTATEMENT 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.) REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH BELLINGHAM WHATCOM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL FOR THE ADMINISTRA TIVE SUPPORT TO WHATCOMCOUNTY'S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INVESTMENTS (EDI) PROGRAMAS WELL AS PROVIDE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMMING FOR ALL OF WHATCOM COUNTY. CONTRACT ISIN THEAMOUNT OF $45,000. COMMITTEE ACTION: COUNCIL ACTION. Related County Contract #: Related File Numbers. Ordinance or Resolution Number. 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 160 WHATCOM COUNTY Executive Office �P4GOM C`1 311 Grand Avenue Bellingham, WA 98225 (360) 676-6717 ti "1NGEC MEMORANDUM TO: Pete Kremen, County Executive FROM: Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator RE: Bellingham Whatcom Economic Development DATE: March 19, 2009 Pete Kremen, County Executive Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator Enclosed are two (2) originals of Contract for Services Agreement between Bellingham Whatcom Economic Development for your review and signature. ■ Background and Purpose The Bellingham Whatcorni Economic Development Council (BWEDC) will provide economic development programming for all of Whatcom County. The BWEDC will �rS� provide administrative support to Whatcom County's Economic Development Investments (EDI) program. ■ Funding Amount and Source Council approved funding for this contract in the 2009/2010 Budget Process. The funding for this contract will come from the EDI fund. ■ Differences from Previous Contract The entire amount o#.this contract will be paid out of fflthe EDI fund instead -of -the fw a A ��4 .W , I L Please contact r, .� eF at exten&ie wiz^, if you have any questions or concerns regarding the terms of this agreement. Encl. 161 WHATCOM COUNTY CONTRACT INFORMATION SHEET Whatcom County Contract No. r,20090301-7 Originating Department: Executive Contact Person: Dewey Desler. Contractor's Name: Bellingham Whatcom Economic Development Council Is this a New Contract? If not, is this an Amendment to an Existing Contract? Yes X No _ Yes No If an Amendment, previous number(s): Is this a renewal? Yes No Contract Amount:(sum of orig contract amt If a Professional Services Agreement is more than $15,000 or a Bid is more and any prior amendments) than $35,000, please submit an Agenda Bill for Council approval and a $45,000 supporting memo. Any amendment that provides either a 10% increase in This Amendment Amount: amount or more than $10,000, whichever is greater, must also go to Council $ and will need an agenda bill and supporting memo. If less than these Total Amended Amount: thresholds, just submit to Executive with supporting memo for approval. Scope of Services The Economic Development Council (EDC) will provide economic development programming for all of Whatcom County that will promote a more diversified economic base, additional employment opportunities, and greater prosperity. In addition, the EDC will provide administrative support to Whatcom County's Economic Development Investments (EDI) program. Nature of Contract Amt: ( Check one) Fixed Amount Not to Exceed X Open Ended Term of Contract: 1 year Expiration Date: 12/31/2009 Renewal Option Yes No X Last Renewal Expires: Special Dates or clauses that require calendaring: Contract Touring Steps & Signoff Indicate Date Transmitted 1. Prepared By: 2. Attorney Reviewed: 3. AS -Finance Reviewed: 4. Corrections Made: 5. Attorney Signoff: 6. Contractor Signed: 7. Submitted to Exec. Office: 8. Reviewed by DCA: 9. Council Approved If Necessary: 10. Executive Signed: 11. Contractor Original Returned to Dept. 12. County Original to Council: WYK Date: Date: Date: Date: Date: Date: Date: Date: Date: Date: Date: Date: 1 /26/09 3-/ 1, -o 2-15 -o9 162 UTY �I lNAL Whatcom County Contract No. �J f`! 2009 03y17 CONTRACT FOR SERVICES AGREEMENT Bellingham Whatcom Economic Development Council, hereinafter called Contractor, and Whatcom County, hereinafter referred to as County, agree and contract as set forth in this Agreement, including: General Conditions, pp. 3 to 8, Exhibit A (Scope of Work), pp. 9, Exhibit B (Compensation), pp. 10. Copies of these items are attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if fully set forth herein. The term of this Agreement shall commence on the 1 sc day of March, 2009, and shall, unless terminated or renewed as elsewhere provided in the Agreement, terminate on the 315t day of December, 2009. The general purpose or objective of this Agreement is to promote and attract industrial and commercial entities to Whatcom County and provide support to the Whatcom County Economic Development Investment program, as more fully and definitively described in Exhibit A hereto. The language of Exhibit A controls in case of any conflict between it and that provided here. The maximum consideration for the initial term of this agreement or for any renewal term shall not exceed $45,000.00. The Contract Number, set forth above, shall be included on all billings or correspondence in connection therewith. Contractor acknowledges and by signing this contract agrees that the Indemnification provisions set forth in Paragraphs 11.1, 21.1, 30.1, 31.2, 32.1, 34.2, and 34.3, if included, are totally and fully part of this contract and have been mutually negotiated by the parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement this 10. day of YY'*, 2G'►J 1200 9. CONTRACTOR: BELLING TCOM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Ray Trzynk , ar hair STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF WHATCOM ) On this 16 day of 200 5 , before me personally appeared Ray Trzynka, to me known to be the Board Chair of Bellingham Whatcom Economic Development Council and who executed the above instrument and who acknowledged to me the act of signing and sealing thereof. NOTARY PUBL C in and for the State of Washington, residing at �".,My commission expires /z-3i--10 Contract for Services Agreement Bellingham Whatcom Economic Development Council Page 1 163 WHATCOM COUNTY: Approved as to form: Prosecuting Attornk .. Date Approved: Accepted for Whatcom County: By: Pete Kremen, Whatcom County Executive STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss COUNTY OF WHATCOM ) On this day of , 200^ before me personally appeared Pete Kremen, to me known to be the Executive of Whatcom County, who executed the above instrument and who acknowledged to me the act of signing and sealing thereof. NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington, residing at . My commission expires CONTRACTOR INFORMATION: Bellingham Whatcom Economic Development Council Nancy Jordan, Interim Executive Director Ray Trzynka, Board Chair Address: PO Box 2803 Bellingham, WA 98227 Contact Name: Nancy Jordan Contact Phone: 360.676.4255 Contact FAX: 360.647-9413 Contact Email: nancy@bwedc.orgg Contract for Services Agreement Bellingham Whatcom Economic Development Council Page 2 164 GENERAL CONDITIONS Series 00-09: Provisions Related to Scope and Nature of Services 0.1 Scope of Services: The Contractor agrees to provide to the County services and any materials as set forth in the project narrative identified as Exhibit "A", during the agreement period. No material, labor, or facilities will be furnished by the County, unless otherwise provided for in the Agreement. Series 10-19: Provisions Related to Term and Termination 10.1 Term: Services provided by Contractor prior to or after the term of this contract shall be performed at the expense of Contractor and are not compensable under this contract unless both parties hereto agree to such provision in writing. The term of this Agreement may be extended by mutual agreement of the parties; provided, however, that the Agreement is in writing and signed by both parties. The term shall be as stated in the contract regardless of the date of signature. 10.2 Extension: Not Applicable 11.1 Termination for Default: If the Contractor defaults by failing to perform any of the obligations of the contract or becomes insolvent or is declared bankrupt or commits any act of bankruptcy or insolvency or makes an assignment for the benefit of creditors, the County may, by depositing written notice to the Contractor in the U.S. mail, first class postage prepaid, terminate the contract, and at the County's option, obtain performance of the work elsewhere, Termination shall be effective upon Contractor's receipt of the written notice, or within three (3) days of the mailing of the notice, whichever occurs first. If the contract is terminated for default, the Contractor shall not be entitled to receive any further payments under the contract until all work called for has been fully performed. Any extra cost or damage to the County resulting from such default(s) shall be deducted from any money due or coming due to the Contractor. The Contractor shall bear any extra expenses incurred by the County in completing the work, including all increased costs for completing the work, and all damage sustained, or which may be sustained by the County by reason of such default. 11.2 Termination for Reduction in Funding: In the event that funding from State, Federal or other sources is withdrawn, reduced, or limited in any way after the effective date of this Agreement, and prior to its normal completion, the County may summarily terminate this Agreement as to the funds withdrawn, reduced, or limited, notwithstanding any other termination provisions of this Agreement. If the level of funding withdrawn, reduced or limited is so great that the County deems that the continuation of the programs covered by this Agreement is no longer in the best interest of the County, the County may summarily terminate this Agreement in whole, notwithstanding any other termination provisions of this Agreement. Termination under this section shall be effective upon receipt of written notice as specified herein, or within three days of the mailing of the notice, whichever occurs first. 11.3 Termination for Public Convenience: The County may terminate the Agreement in whole or in part whenever the County determines, in its sole discretion, that such termination is in the interests of the County. Whenever the Agreement is terminated in accordance with this paragraph, the Contractor shall be entitled to payment for actual work performed at unit contract prices for completed items of work. An equitable adjustment in the contract price for partially completed items of work will be made, but such adjustment shall not include provision for loss of anticipated profit on deleted or uncompleted work. Termination of this Agreement by the County at any time during the term, whether for default or convenience, shall not constitute breach of contract by the County. Series 20-29: Provisions Related to -Consideration and Payments 20.1 Accounting and Payment for Contractor Services: Payment to the Contractor for services rendered under this Agreement shall be as set forth in Exhibit "B." Where Exhibit "B" requires payments by the County, payment shall be based upon written claims supported, unless otherwise provided in Exhibit 13," by documentation of units of work actually performed and amounts earned; including, where appropriate, the actual number of days worked each month, total number of hours for the month, and the total dollar payment requested, so as to comply with municipal auditing requirements. Unless specifically stated in Exhibit "B" or approved in writing in advance by the official executing this Agreement for the County or his designee (hereinafter referred to as the "Administrative Officer") the County will not reimburse the Contractor for any costs or expenses Contract for Services Agreement Bellingham Whatcom Economic Development Council Page 3 165 incurred by the Contractor in the performance of this contract. Where required, the County shall, upon receipt of appropriate documentation, compensate the Contractor, no more often than monthly, in accordance with the County's customary procedures, pursuant to the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit "B." 21.1 Taxes: The Contractor understands and acknowledges that the County will not withhold Federal or State income taxes. Where required by State or Federal law, the Contractor authorizes the County to withhold for any taxes other than income taxes (i.e., Medicare). All compensation received by the Contractor will be reported to the Internal Revenue Service at the end of the calendar year in accordance with the applicable IRS regulations. It is the responsibility of the Contractor to make the necessary. estimated tax payments throughout the year, if any, and the Contractor is solely liable for any tax obligation arising from the Contractor's performance of this Agreement. The Contractor hereby agrees to indemnify the County against any demand to pay taxes arising from the Contractor's failure to pay taxes on compensation earned pursuant to this Agreement. The County will pay sales and use taxes imposed on goods or services acquired hereunder as required by law. The Contractor must pay all other taxes, including, but not limited to, Business and Occupation Tax, taxes based on the Contractor's gross or net income, or personal property to which the County does not hold title. The County is exempt from Federal Excise Tax. 22.1 Withholding Payment: In the event the County's Administrative Officer determines that the Contractor has failed to perform any obligation under this Agreement within the times set forth in this Agreement, then the County may withhold from amounts otherwise due and payable to Contractor the amount determined by the County as necessary to cure the default, until the Administrative Officer determines that such failure to perform has been cured. Withholding under this clause shall not be deemed a breach entitling Contractor to termination or damages, provided that the County promptly gives notice in writing to the Contractor of the nature of the default or failure to perform, and in no case more than 10 days after it determines to withhold amounts otherwise due. A determination of the Administrative Officer set forth in a notice to the Contractor of the action required and/or the amount required to cure any alleged failure to perform shall be deemed conclusive, except to the extent that the Contractor acts within the times and in strict accord with the provisions of the Disputes clause of this Agreement, The County may act in accordance with any determination of the Administrative Officer which has become conclusive under this clause, without prejudice to any other remedy under the Agreement, to take all or any of the following actions: (1) cure any failure or default, (2) to pay any amount so required to be paid and to charge the same to the account of the Contractor, (3) to set off any amount so paid or incurred from amounts due or to become due the Contractor. In the event the Contractor obtains relief upon a claim under the Disputes clause, no penalty or damages shall accrue to Contractor by reason of good faith withholding by the County under this clause. 23.1 Labor Standards: The Contractor agrees to comply with state and federal requirements, as applicable, pertaining to payment of wages and working conditions, in accordance with RCW 39.12.040, the Prevailing Wage Act; the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990; the Davis -Bacon Act; and the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act providing for weekly payment of prevailing wages, minimum overtime pay, and providing that no laborer or mechanic shall be required to work in surroundings or under conditions which are unsanitary, hazardous, or dangerous to health and safety as determined by regulations promulgated by the Federal Secretary of Labor and the State of Washington. Series 30-39: Provisions Related to Administration of Agreement 30.1 Independent Contractor: The Contractor's services shall be furnished by the Contractor as an independent contractor, and nothing herein contained shall be construed to create a relationship of employer -employee or master -servant, but all payments made hereunder and all services performed shall be made and performed pursuant to this Agreement by the Contractor as an independent contractor. The Contractor acknowledges that the entire compensation for this Agreement is specified in Exhibit "B" and the Contractor is not entitled to any benefits including, but not limited to: vacation pay, holiday pay, sick leave pay, medical, dental, or other insurance benefits, or any other rights or privileges afforded to employees of the County. The Contractor represents that he/she/it maintains a separate place of business, serves clients other than the County, will report all income and expense accrued under this contract to the Internal Revenue Service on a Schedule C, and has a tax account with the State of Washington Department of Revenue for payment of all sales and use and Business and Occupation taxes collected by the State of Washington. Contractor will defend, indemnify and hold harmless the County, its officers, agents or employees from any loss or expense, including, but not limited to, settlements, judgments, setoffs, attorneys' fees or costs incurred by reason of claims or demands because of breach of the provisions of this paragraph. Contract for Services Agreement Bellingham Whatcom Economic Development Council Page 4 166 30.2 Assignment and Subcontracting: The performance of all activities contemplated by this agreement shall be accomplished by the Contractor. No portion of this contract may be assigned or subcontracted to any other individual, firm or entity without the express and prior written approval of the County. 30.3 No Guarantee of Employment: The performance of all or part of this contract by the Contractor shall not operate to vest any employment rights whatsoever and shall not be deemed to guarantee any employment of the Contractor or any employee of the Contractor or any subcontractor or any employee of any subcontractor by the County at the present time or in the future. 31.1 Ownership of Items Produced: Not Applicable 31.2 Patent/Copyright Infringement: Not Applicable 32.1 Confidentiality: The Contractor, its employees, subcontractors, and their employees shall maintain the confidentiality of all information provided by the County or acquired by the Contractor in performance of this Agreement, except upon the prior written consent of the County or an order entered by a court after having acquired jurisdiction over the County. Contractor shall immediately give to the County notice of any judicial proceeding seeking disclosure of such information. Contractor shall indemnify and hold harmless the County, its officials, agents or employees from all loss or expense, including, but not limited to, settlements, judgments, setoffs, attorneys' fees and costs resulting from Contractor's breach of this provision. 33.1 Right to Review: This contract is subject to review by any Federal, State or County auditor. The County or its designee shall have the right to review and monitor the financial and service components of this program by whatever means are deemed expedient by the Administrative Officer or by the County Auditor's Office. Such review may occur with or without notice and may include, but is not limited to, on -site inspection by County agents or employees, inspection of all records or other materials which the County deems pertinent to the Agreement and its performance, and any and all communications with or evaluations by service recipients under this Agreement. The Contractor shall preserve and maintain all financial records and records relating to the performance of work under this Agreement for three (3) years after contract termination, and shall make them available for such review, within Whatcom County, State of Washington, upon request. Contractor also agrees to notify the Administrative Officer in advance of any inspections, audits, or program review by any individual, agency, or governmental unit whose purpose is to review the services provided within the terms of this Agreement. If no advance notice is given to the Contractor, then the Contractor agrees to notify the Administrative Officer as soon as it is practical. 34.1 Proof of Insurance: The Contractor shall carry for the duration of this Agreement general liability and property damage insurance with the following minimums: Property Damage per occurrence - $500,000.00 General Liability & Property Damage for bodily injury- $1,000,000.00 34.2 Industrial Insurance Waiver: With respect to the performance of this agreement and as to claims against the County, its officers, agents and employees, the Contractor expressly waives its immunity under Title 51 of the Revised Code of Washington, the Industrial Insurance Act, for injuries to its employees and agrees that the obligations to indemnify, defend and hold harmless provided in this agreement extend to any claim brought by or on behalf of any employee of the Contractor. This waiver is mutually negotiated by the parties to this agreement. 34.3 Defense & Indemnity Agreement: The Contractor agrees to defend, indemnify and save harmless the County, its appointed and elective officers and employees, from and against all loss or expense, including, but not limited to, judgments, settlements, attorneys' fees and costs by reason of any and all claims and demands upon the County, its elected or appointed officials or employees for damages because of personal or bodily injury, including death at any time resulting therefrom, sustained by any person or persons and on account of damage to property, including loss of use thereof, whether such injury to persons or damage to property is due to the negligence of the Contractor, its subcontractors, its successor or assigns, or its agents, servants, or employees, the County, its appointed or elected officers, employees or their agents, except only such injury or damage as shall have been occasioned by the sole negligence of the County or its appointed or elected officials or employees. It is further provided that no liability shall attach to the County by reason of entering into this contract, except as expressly provided herein. Contract for Services Agreement Bellingham Whatcom Economic Development Council Page 5 167 35.1 Non -Discrimination in Employment: The County's policy is to provide equal opportunity in all terms, conditions and privileges of employment for all qualified applicants and employees without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, disability, or veteran status. The Contractor shall comply with all laws prohibiting discrimination against any employee or applicant for employment on the grounds of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, sexual orientation, disability, or veteran status, except where such constitutes a bona fide occupational qualification. Furthermore, in those cases in which the Contractor is governed by such laws, the Contractor shall take affirmative action to insure that applicants are employed, and treated during employment, without regard to their race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, disability, or veteran status, except where such constitutes a bona fide occupational qualification. Such action shall include, but not be limited to: advertising, hiring, promotions, layoffs or terminations, rate of pay or other forms of compensation benefits, selection for training including apprenticeship, and participation in recreational and educational activities. In all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by them or on their behalf, the Contractor shall state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color religion, sex or national origin. The foregoing provisions shall also be binding upon any subcontractor, provided that the foregoing provision shall not apply to contracts or subcontractors for standard commercial supplies or raw materials, or to sole proprietorships with no employees. 35.2 Non -Discrimination in Client Services: The Contractor shall not discriminate on the grounds of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, sexual orientation, disability, or veteran status; or deny an individual or business any service or benefits under this Agreement;_ or subject an individual or business to segregation or separate treatment in any manner related to his/her/its receipt any service or services or other benefits provided under this Agreement; or deny an individual or business an opportunity to participate in any program provided by this Agreement. 36.1 Waiver of Noncompetition: Contractor irrevocably waives any existing rights which it may have, by contract or otherwise, to require another person or corporation to refrain from submitting a proposal to or performing work or providing supplies to the County, and contractor further promises that it will not in the future, directly or indirectly, induce or solicit any person or corporation to refrain from submitting a bid or proposal to or from performing work or providing supplies to the County. 36.2 Conflict of Interest: If at any time prior to commencement of, or during the term of this Agreement, Contractor or any of its employees involved in. the performance of this Agreement shall have or develop an interest in the subject matter of this Agreement that is potentially in conflict with the County's interest, then Contractor shall immediately notify the County of the same. The notification of the County shall be made with sufficient specificity to enable the County to make an informed judgment as to whether or not the County's interest may be compromised in any manner by the existence of the conflict, actual or potential. Thereafter, the County may require the Contractor to take reasonable steps to remove the conflict of interest. The County may also terminate this contract according to the provisions herein for termination. 37.1 Administration of Contract: This Agreement shall be subject to all laws, rules, and. regulations of the United States of America, the State of Washington, and political subdivisions of the State of Washington. The Contractor also agrees to comply with applicable federal, state, county or municipal standards. for licensing, certification and operation of facilities and programs, and accreditation and licensing of individuals. The County hereby appoints, and the Contractor hereby accepts, the Whatcom County Executive, and his or her designee, as the County's representative, hereinafter referred to as the Administrative Officer, for the purposes of administering the provisions of this Agreement, including the County's right to receive and act on all reports and documents, and any auditing performed by the County related to this Agreement. The Administrative Officer for purposes of this agreement is: Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator Whatcom County Executive's Office 311 Grand Avenue, Suite 108 Bellingham, WA 98225 37.2 Notice: Contract for Services Agreement Bellingham Whatcom Economic Development Council Page 6 Except as set forth elsewhere in the Agreement, for all purposes under this Agreement except service of process, notice shall be given by the Contractor to the County's Administrative Officer under this Agreement, Notice to the Contractor for all purposes under this Agreement shall be given to the address provided by the Contractor herein above in the "Contractor Information" section. Notice may be given by delivery or by depositing in the US Mail, first class, postage prepaid. Series 40-49: Provisions Related to Interpretation of Agreement and Resolution of Disputes 40.1 Modifications: Either party may request changes in the Agreement. Any and all agreed modifications, to be valid and binding upon either party, shall be 'in writing and signed by both of the parties. 40.2 Contractor Commitments, Warranties and Representations: Not Applicable 41.1 Severability: If any term or condition of this contract or the application thereof to any person(s) or circumstances is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other terms, conditions or applications which can be given effect without the invalid term, condition or application. To this end, the terms and conditions of this contract are declared severable. 41.2 Waiver: Waiver of any breach or condition of this contract shall not be deemed a waiver of any prior or subsequent breach. No term or condition of this contract shall be held to be waived, modified or deleted except by an instrument, in writing, signed by the parties hereto. The failure of the County to insist upon strict performance of any of the covenants and agreements of this Agreement, or to exercise any option herein conferred in any one or more instances, shall not be construed to be a waiver or relinquishment of any such, or any other covenants or agreements, but the same shall be and remain in full force and effect. 42.1 Disputes: a. General: Differences between the Contractor and the County, arising under and by virtue of the Contract Documents, shall be brought to the attention of the County at the earliest possible time in order that such matters may be settled or other appropriate action promptly taken. Except for such objections as are made of record in the manner hereinafter specified and within the time limits stated, the records, orders, rulings, instructions, and decisions of the Administrative Officer shall be final and conclusive. Notice of Potential Claims: The Contractor shall not be entitled to additional compensation which otherwise may be payable, or to extension of time for (1) any act or failure to act by the Administrative Officer or the County, or (2) the happening of any event or occurrence, unless the Contractor has given the County a written Notice of Potential Claim within ten (10) days of the commencement of the act, failure, or event giving rise to the claim, and before final payment by the County. The written Notice of Potential Claim shall set forth the reasons for which the Contractor believes additional compensation or extension of time is due, the nature of the cost involved, and insofar as possible, the amount of the potential claim. Contractor shall keep full and complete daily records of the work performed, labor and material used, and all costs and additional time claimed to be additional, c. Detailed Claim: The Contractor shall not be entitled to claim any such additional compensation, or extension of time, unless within thirty (30) days of the accomplishment of the portion of the work from which the claim arose, and before final payment by the County, the Contractor has given the County a detailed written statement of each element of cost or other compensation requested and of all elements of additional time required, and copies of any supporting documents evidencing the amount or the extension of time claimed to be due. Arbitration: Other than claims for injunctive relief brought by a party hereto (which may be brought either in court or pursuant to this arbitration provision), and consistent with the provisions hereinabove, any claim, dispute or controversy between the parties under, arising out of, or related to this Agreement or otherwise, including issues of specific performance, shall be determined by arbitration in Bellingham, Washington, under the applicable American Arbitration Association (AAA) rules in effect on,the date hereof, as modified by this Agreement. There shall be one arbitrator selected by the parties within ten (10) days of the arbitration demand, or if not, by the AAA or any other group having similar credentials. Any issue about whether a claim is covered by this Agreement shall be determined by the arbitrator. The arbitrator shall apply substantive law and may award injunctive relief, equitable relief (including specific performance), or any other remedy available from a judge, including expenses, costs and attorney fees to the prevailing party and pre -award interest, but shall not have the power to award punitive damages. The decision of the arbitrator shall be final and binding and an order confirming the award or judgment upon the award may be entered in any court having jurisdiction. The parties agree that the decision of the Contract for Services Agreement Bellingham Whatcom Economic Development Council Page 7 169 arbitrator shall be the sole and exclusive remedy between them regarding any dispute presented or pled before the arbitrator. At the request of either party made not later than forty-five (45) days after the arbitration demand, the parties agree to submit the dispute to nonbinding mediation, which shall not delay the arbitration hearing date; provided, that either party may decline to mediate and proceed with arbitration. Unless otherwise specified herein, this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of Whatcom County and the State of Washington. 43.1 Venue and Choice of Law: In the event that any litigation should arise concerning the construction or interpretation of any of the terms of this Agreement, the venue of such action of litigation shall be in the courts of the State of Washington in and for the County of Whatcom. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Washington. 44.1 Survival The provisions of paragraphs 11.1, 11.2, 11.3 , 21.1, 22.1, 30.1, 31.1, 31.2, 32.1, 33.1, 34.2, 34.3, 36.1, 40.2, 41.2, 42.1, and 43.1, if utilized, shall survive, notwithstanding the termination or invalidity of this Agreement for any reason. 45.1 Entire Agreement: This written Agreement, comprised of the writings signed or otherwise identified and attached hereto, represents the entire Agreement between the parties and supersedes any prior oral statements, discussions or understandings between the parties. Contract for Services Agreement Bellingham Whatcom Economic Development Council Page 8 170 EXHIBIT "A" (SCOPE OF WORK) The Bellingham Whatcom Economic Development Council (BWEDC) shall provide economic development programming for all of Whatcom County. The County understands that it will receive economic development benefits from the BWEDC's efforts. Such benefits include a more diversified economic base, additional employment opportunities and greater prosperity. The economic development program shall consist of an annual program of work drafted by the BWEDC Board of Directors. The BWEDC shall maintain a professional staff to carry out an economic development program in Whatcom County. During the term of the Contract, the BWEDC will dedicate its best efforts to carry out such program. As additional consideration, beyond its general mission of economic development in Whatcom County, the BWEDC shall dedicate its professional and support staff to specific objectives outlined below: 1. Provide administrative support to Whatcom County's Economic Development Investments (EDI) program. Specifically: • Participate on the EDI Board. • Market the county's EDI program to eligible organizations and interested businesses. • Provide assistance to communities and organizations in Whatcom County with the preparation of applications for EDI grants and loans as well as other related federal and state grants and loans. 2. Work with the Whatcom County Administration to ensure that EDI loans and grants are based on sound contracting procedures and assist the County to assure that projects are adequately monitored. 3. Complete regular updates to the Whatcom County Community Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) project list. 4. Work with Economic Development Practitioners' and others such as the City of Bellingham, the Partnership for Sustainable Economy, Whatcom Farm Friends, Technology Alliance Group (TAG), the Coalition for Healthy Communities, Sustainable Connections, Commercial Realtors and other organizations, sector or cluster groups concerned with economic development in Whatcom County. 5. Provide business retention, expansion and/or relocation technical assistance for local and inbound companies. Specifically: . • Work with regional economic development partners on efforts such as the cluster -based approach to economic development. • Provide Whatcom County with information on the status of local business various sectors/industries, providing insights on their overall health and feedback on local business climate issues. • Support the County's efforts to prepare industrial sites and public facilities. • Advise the County, when requested, regarding industrial, commercial and natural resource sector needs relative to the preparation of land use designation and urban development policies. • Advise the County, when requested, on ways to mitigate development impacts from proposed manufacturing or non -retail expansion projects. • Advise the County, when requested, regarding public service planning for industrial, commercial and natural resource areas, including comments on streets, roads, water, sewer, and other public facilities. Assure development and update of a regional economic strategy. Invoices will include hours and type of service provided. Allowable charges include: Administrative Support $35 per hour Consultation, Analysis, Technical Support $75 per hour Community & Regional Development $75 per hour Intern/Work Study/Grad Student Service $20 per hour Web updates Actual cost — receipt must be included with invoice if consultant used The EDC will: ■ Provide quarterly status reports to the EDI Board on EDI program activities, accomplishments, emerging problems and proposed changes designed to improve the EDI program. ■ Provide yearly updates to the Community Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) Project List, and will assist with other projects as requested. ■ Maintain a written record of BWEDC activities and results, and submit an annual report that highlights the programs accomplishments as well as documenting issues and opportunities confronting the program. The BWEDC will also submit an annual written report to be delivered by February of each year. Such report shall contain a description of accomplishments under the applicable scope of services provision of the Contract. Specifically, each annual report shall indicate the number and types of companies interested in locating in the Whatcom County area, the amount of new investment, retention of investment, and new jobs. The annual report will also address the BWEDC community and regional development activities, marketing outreach, including potential jobs and investment, and key trends and/or needs that drive the company's location decision. ' The EDC Economic Practitioner's includes: NW Workforce Development Council, Whatcom Council of Governments, Bellingham Whatcom Chamber of Commerce, Downtown Renaissance Network, WWU Center for Economic and Business Research, WWU Small Business Development Center, Port of Bellingham, Bellingham Technical College, Whatcom County Tourism, and the EDC. Contract for Services Agreement Bellingham Whatcom Economic Development Council Page 9 171 EXHIBIT "B" (COMPENSATION) Maximum consideration for this contract shall be $45,000. Of this maximum consideration, a total of $25,000 of EDI funds shall be used to specifically support items 1 and 2, and 3 identified in Exhibit A and projects with a direct relationship to the EDI program. The Bellingham/Whatcom County Economic Development Council (EDC) shall invoice for services as outlined in Exhibit A. Payment is for reimbursement only and will be made no more frequently than once per month. Invoices will include billable hours and type of service provided as outlined in Exhibit A. Contract for Services Agreement Bellingham Whatcom Economic Development Council Page 10 172 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 2009-243 CLEARANCES Initial Date Date Received in Council Office Agenda Date Assi ned to: Originator: Alex Cleanthous n�� F /30 5112109 Planning and Development R E C E �V E D Committee Division Head.• MAY 0 5 2009 Dept. Head: DavidStalheim / � i1 H AT C ®M COUNTY Prosecutor: Royce Buckingham li �! 1 i COUNCIL Purchasing/Budget: Brad Bennett Executive: Pete Kremen b TITLE OFDOCUMENT. Bellingham Urban Fringe Subarea Plan Planning Commission Recommended Land Use Policies from November 2006 ATTACHMENTS: (1) Recommended Bellingham Urban Fringe Subarea Plan Land Use Policies (2) November 2006 Planning Commission recommended land use policies for the Bellingham Urban Fringe Subarea (3) Public Comments SEPA review required? Yes ( ) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing? ( ) Yes (x ) NO SEPA review completed? Yes ( ) NO Requested Date: 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.) A committee discussion on November 2006 Planning Commission recommended policies for the Bellingham Urban Fringe Subarea plan. COMMITTEEACTION. COUNCIL ACTION: Related County Contract #: Related File Numbers: Ordinance or Resolution Number: Please Note: Once adopted and signed, ordinances and resolutions are available for viewing andprinting on the County's website at: www.co.whatcom.wa.us/council. 1:\Planning Division\Long Range Planning\Comp Plan Amendments\Comp Plan 2008\CMP2008-0001 - Bellingham Subarea Plan\Council - PC Recommended policies\PC Recommended Policies agendabill.doc 173 WHATCOM COUNTY David Stalheim Planning & Development Services �`°M °O� Director 5280 Northwest Drive 3� `ys Bellingham, WA 98226-9097 J.E. `"Sam" Ryan 360-676-6907, TN 800-833-6384 ``gs,c°`' Assistant Director 360-738-2525 Fax MEMORANDUM TO: Whatcom County Council Members THROUGH: David Stalheim FROM: Wain Harrison, Long Range Planning Supervisor Alex Cleanthous, Planner A6Y DATE: April 30, 2009 SUBJECT: Bellingham Urban Fringe Subarea Plan — Land Use Policies The Planning Commission on Nov 9, 2006 forwarded a recommendation of approval on an update to the Bellingham Urban Fringe Subarea plan's land use. The planning commission held over 40 public hearings through the update process. These recommended policies have not yet gone before the County Council. On March 12, 2009 the Planning Commission held a public hearing on proposed subarea plan amendments to comply with the WWGMHB order. Planning staff has been preparing to bring the Council the Planning Commission recommended policies along with the amendments to the Subarea plan to comply with the WWGMHB order. At the public hearing the Planning Commission received testimony with concern that this is not the appropriate time to take forward the recommended land use policies from 2006. The recommended land use policies were an attachment to the staff report at the March 12, 2009 public hearing. Concern was raised from the public that in the three year time span between the Planning Commission's recommendations of the policies, that changes in Whatcom County warrant staff and elected officials revisiting the policies. Whatcom County received a letter from the City of Bellingham regarding the update process to the Bellingham Subarea Plan. The letter expressed interest in seeing Whatcom County comply with the WWGMHB order but did not support adoption of the Planning Commission recommended land use policies. The recommendation in the letter from the City of Bellingham is to send back the policies to staff for further discussions. Whatcom County planning staff is currently evaluating the Urban Growth Areas within its jurisdiction. Because of the voiced concern over the proposed land use policies, it may be feasible to combine the Subarea Plan land use policy update with the UGA evaluation process. Staff is requesting direction on this issue: 1) Should staff bring forward to the Council the Planning Commission recommended 2006 land use policies? 2) Should staff review the policies in conjunction with the UGA review and update to the County Wide Planning Policy processes? Office (360) 676-6907 County (360) 380-8110 FAX (360) 738-2525 174 Whatcom County Planning Commission Land Use Policies -Final Recommendations From the November 9, 2006 Work Session BELLINGHAM SUBAREA PLAN: Chapter IV. LAND USE GOALS AND POLICIES A. Land Use Alternatives Considered/EIS process .............. 2 B. Intergovernmental Coordination and Cooperation (IG)........ 2 C. Urban Form(UF)........................................................4 D. Development Review and Design Criteria (DR).................6 E. Annexation(AN).........................................................7 F. Urban Services and Facilities(SF).................................8 G. Urban Growth Area (UGA)...........................................9 Short Term and Long Term Planning Areas................9 H. Land Use Designations and Policies (LU).......................12 1. General Land Use Goals and Policies ...................... 2. Residential Designations ....................................... • Single -Family Residential .................................. • Multi -Family Residential .................................... 1. Commercial Designations ....................................... • Neighborhood Commercial ................................ • Auto Commercial ............................................. 2. Industrial Designations .......................................... • Heavy Impact Industrial .................................... • Light Impact Industrial ...................................... • Gateway Industrial .......................................... 3. Institutional Designations ....................................... • Airport Operations ............................................ Public Recreation ............................................. 4. Urban Centers ...................................................... • Neighborhood Urban Centers ............................. • Pocket Urban Centers ....................................... 5. Rural ......:........ • County -wide Planning Policies ........................... • Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan ................ • Suburban Enclaves ........ • Bellingham Subarea ......................................... 6. Resource Lands .................................................... • Agriculture...................................................... • Rural Forestry ................................................. Bellingham Urban Growth.Area Analysis Areas ................ Northwest Analysis Area ......................................... • West Central Analysis Area ...................................... • North Central Analysis Area ...................................... • East Central Analysis Area ....................................... • Northeast Analysis Area ........................................... • Geneva Analysis Area ............................................. • Southeast Analysis Area ............................... I.......... Five -Year Review Areas, docketed comprehensive plan amendments, areas for additional consideration and individual requests. -1- I:\Planning Division\Long Range Planning\Comp Plan Amendments\Comp Plan 2008\CMP2008-0001 - Bellingham Subarea Plan\For Website\Exhibit C Nov 6 PC LU Policies.doc 175 Whatcom County Planning Commission Land Use Policies -Final Recommendations From the November 9, 2006 Work Session A. Land Use Alternatives Considered/EIS Process The Bellingham Subarea Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement published July 1, 2004 examines four growth alternatives for a twenty-year planning period. 1. NO ACTION .Under this alternative, the forecasted 20-year population and employment growth would be accommodated on vacant and underused lands within existing city and UGA boundaries. Current zoning, environmental and development regulations would not change. The No Action alternative is required by SEPA for analysis purposes. New residential and commercial development would occur on available vacant land or through redevelopment. 2. INFILL "Infill", in terms of land use planning, is the process of developing vacant or under -used land within existing urban areas that are already largely developed. Under this alternative, the City's existing UGA boundaries would accommodate the expected land demand for housing and employment over the next 20-years. All neighborhoods in the Greater Bellingham Area would be expected to accommodate some additional housing under this alternative. This alternative emphasizes concentrating new development on land within the existing boundaries of the City of Bellingham and the UGA to accommodate projected population growth. New zoning and regulatory mechanisms would be established to increase zoning density in the City of Bellingham and the existing UGA, and to encourage infill and emphasize residential development in areas close to employment and service centers for more compact growth. 3. ADJUSTED (EXPANDED) UGA Expand the UGA boundaries to accommodate projected population growth. Under this alternative, land inside the current City and UGA boundaries would retain existing zoning and residential densities. Much of the projected population growth would be accommodated in areas that would be added to Bellingham's UGA and rezoned for urban densities and uses. Alternative 3 examines. several areas outside the existing UGA boundary for potential inclusion in the UGA and rezones to urban densities. 4. INFILL AND ADJUSTED (EXPANDED) UGA Increase density in the City of Bellingham and the existing UGA, and adjust the UGA boundaries to provide more area to accommodate projected population. Under this alternative, the net projected population growth would be .addressed by a combination of zoning revisions in both the City and the existing UGA to allow/require higher residential densities along with an expansion of the UGA boundary. This alternative would create a more compact urban area surrounded by high to medium to low densities radiating out from the urban core. B. Intergovernmental Coordination and Cooperation (IG) Planning under the Growth Management Act needs to occur in a coordinated and -2- I:\Planning Division\Long Range Planning\Comp Plan Amendments\Comp Plan 2008\CMP2008-0001 - Bellingham Subarea Plan\For Website\Exhibit C Nov 6 PC LU Policies.doc 176 Whatcom County Planning Commission Land Use Policies -Final Recommendations From the November 9, 2006 Work Session comprehensive manner that draws on the cooperation of the affected jurisdictions. Whatcom County and the City of Bellingham have coordinated efforts to develop this subarea plan. This section lists goals and policies to achieve common goals and establishes a framework for cooperation between Whatcom county and the City of Bellingham. Goal IG-1: To ensure cooperation between Whatcom County and the City of Bellingham in directing and managing growth and development in and adjacent to Bellingham's Urban Growth Area. Goal IG-2: To ensure that a full range of urban services is provided in the UGA at adopted levels of service at the time of annexation. These services include, but are not limited to sewer, water, stormwater, fire, police, transportation, park, recreation and open space. Policy IG-1: Whatcom County and the City of Bellingham will designate land uses in Whatcom County's Bellingham Subarea consistent with the Growth Management Act, County -wide Planning Policies, the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan, the Bellingham Comprehensive Plan, and other agency plans applicable to the planning area (such as Bellingham International Airport Master Plan and Whatcom Transit Authority Strategic Plan.) Policy IG-2: Whatcom County will work with the City of Bellingham on the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program to determine the terms of incentives and the sending and receiving areas in the County and the City, thereby reducing development rights in the Lake Whatcom Watershed and other areas as designated in -the TDR program. Policy IG-3: The City of Bellingham shall identify appropriate sending and receiving areas in the City for the TDR program. Policy IG-4: The City of Bellingham and Whatcom County will cooperate and coordinate with special purpose districts and other governmental agencies to ensure efficient provision of urban services. Policy IG-5: The City of Bellingham and Whatcom County will amend the 1997 Interlocal Agreement in a timely manner to address: 1. Annexation • Require a timetable for annexation of all existing service extension zones within the UGA. • Require annexation at the same time as or before extending City services. • Criteria for orderly annexation with logical boundaries. • Economic balance among commercial, industrial, residential and other lands within the UGA. • Fiscal analysis and capital facilities plans addressing impacts to infrastructure -3- lAPlanning Division\Long Range Planning\Comp Plan Amendments\Comp Plan 2008\CMP2008-0001 - Bellingham Subarea PlanTor Website\Exhibit C Nov 6 PC LU Policies.doc 177 Whatcom County Planning Commission Land Use Policies -Final Recommendations From the November 9, 2006 Work Session and environmental systems within and adjacent to the UGA. 2. Tax Revenue Sharing and Cost Allocation • A methodology for sharing and allocating costs and revenues prior to and after annexation. • Prior to annexation there shall be allocations of costs and revenues between the City of Bellingham and Whatcom County for construction of capital facilities in the Subarea to accommodate urban levels of growth prior to annexation. • Apportion the needs of the City of Bellingham, Whatcom County, and special purpose districts when planning for transition of services and annexation within the UGA. 3_ Urban Services and Infrastructure • Assurance of adequate public services including transportation, parks; stormwater, schools and administrative services. • Establish timetable for delivery of Urban Services • Requirements to annex areas zoned for urban densities at the same time as, or before, extension of or delivery of urban services. • A strategy to guide transition of services from the County or from other rural service providers (such as fire and utility districts) to City services. 4. Growth Management in UGAs Prior to Annexations • Joint City/County Master Plans and Capital Facilities for the UGA. The plans should: o Establish procedures that protect the interests of both the City and the County o Recommend that City development standards and adopted levels of service apply in the UGA. 5. Critical Areas Protection 6. Parks and Open Space Desianation and Manaaement • Link green belts and open space 7. Stormwater Facilities Management 8. Transfer of Development Rights 9. Rural Development • Establish development requirements in Bellingham's UGA that preserve land for future development and urbanization. • Implement appropriate strategies to manage growth in rural and resource areas. 10. Land Supply Monitoring G. Urban Form (UF) Establishing appropriate urban form standards is crucial to managing growth and creating desirable neighborhoods. Coordinating strategies to address urban form is -4- lAPlanning Division\Long Range Planning\Comp Plan Amendments\Comp Plan 2008\CMP2008-0001 - Bellingham Subarea Plan\For Website\Exhibit C Nov 6 PC LU Policies.doc 178 Whatcom County Planning Commission Land Use Policies -Final Recommendations From the November 9, 2006 Work Session necessary to achieve both City and County policies and to meet the goals of the GMA. Goal UFA: To ensure logical, contiguous, orderly development in urban areas in a mariner that promotes urban densities, prevents sprawl and leapfrog development within the UGA, and assures•the cost-effective provision of services. Goal OF-2: To ensure the most efficient use of resources to prevent urban sprawl and adverse economic and environmental impacts. Goal OF-3: To ensure that the City of Bellingham and its UGA are meeting infill, density, and housing targets, with the intention that. the City of Bellingham should infill prior to development in its UGA. Policy UFA : Whatcom County and the City of Bellingham shall develop options for addressing ongoing land supply monitoring needs, including timelines, jurisdiction and staff responsibilities, a protocol for initiating further studies regarding Bellingham's land supply, a protocol for amending the urban growth area, and any other relevant issues. The County and City shall adopt a "Buildable Lands Program" as outlined in RCW 36.70A.215, that reviews and monitors land supply. Policy LIF-2: In accordance with the Bellingham Comprehensive Plan and Growth Forum Strategy Action Step 7, the City of Bellingham will monitor and evaluate its progress in achieving infill planning and development objectives on an annual basis. Policy OF-3: The City of Bellingham and Whatcom County will monitor and report annually to their respective Planning Commissions and Councils on land supply. The reports should provide current data and analysis on at least the following: • The number, type and location of housing units permitted in the City of Bellingham and in the UGA (Short Term Planning Area) • The net density of infill that is occurring • The affordability of the housing produced Policy OF-4: Whatcom County will work with the City of Bellingham to study and identify appropriate areas for neighborhood parks, trails, open space, schools and other public facilities to make higher density in Bellingham's UGA more attractive. Policy OF-5: Consider adjustments to the UGA boundaries only if projected growth cannot be accommodated inside Bellingham and the UGA through infill and rezones. Policy OF-6: Any adjustment of the UGA boundary will minimize impacts on agricultural, forestry, .and mineral resource lands, watersheds, water resources, and critical areas. Policy . OF-7: Impacts on City and County road networks., parks, recreation, open space facilities, schools, urban sewer, water, police, fire protection, and emergency -5- I:\Planning Division\Long Range Planning\Comp Plan Amendments\Comp Plan 2008\CMP2008-0001 - Bellingham Subarea Plan\For Website\Exhibit C Nov 6 PC LU Policies.doc 179 Whatcom County Planning Commission Land Use Policies -Final Recommendations From the November 9, 2006 Work Session services shall be identified with mitigation and financing plan in place before Whatcom County approves any expansion or enlargement of Bellingham's UGA and/or city boundaries. This plan shall analyze the cost effectiveness of providing urban services to areas considered for addition to the UGA. D. Development Review and Design Criteria (DR) Consistency and quality in Development Review is key to implementing local control over community design, while achieving Growth Management Act goals. Community design ensures, as much as possible, that new development reinforces the community's identity and design preferences. Community design can be thought of as those elements of the city that convey the visual impressions of that environment and give the city its "character." The elements of community design can be grouped into several broad categories: • The natural setting of the City • The physical development • The public infrastructure (the visible part— streets, sidewalks, and overhead utilities) Goal DR-1: To ensure consistency and predictability in the process of development review and land use permitting. Goal DR-2: To provide for a single permitting authority for urban development.and one set of development regulations, standards, guidelines and other requirements in the Urban Growth Area. Goal DR-3: To ensure that future development complements the role of Bellingham's downtown and waterfront as the focal points of the community, while also preserving community identity in Bellingham's varied, unique neighborhoods. Goal DR-4: Mixed -use neighborhoods will define the new urban fabric of the community. Locate higher density housing and commercial/ office/ public services in a number of "urban centers". The neighborhood and pocket -sized centers will become neighborhood focal points with neighborhood oriented retail and service businesses, transit stops and neighborhood parks or other public facilities. Where feasible, trails will connect the centers to nearby housing, parks and schools. Policy DR-1: Urban levels of development in Bellingham's UGA shall not be permitted without annexation to the City and provision of a full range of urban services. Policy DR-2: In areas where utility extensions have already occurred as of the date of adoption of this plan, require all new urban development in the UGA to comply with the current version of Bellingham's development standards and design guidelines. Policy DR-3: Retain Rural and Resource lands in the Bellingham Subarea under Whatcom County jurisdiction for permit and development purposes. . -6- I:\Planning Division\Long Range Planning\Comp Plan Amendments\Comp Plan 2008\CMP2008-0001 - Bellingham Subarea Plan\For Website\Exhibit C Nov 6 PC LU Policies.doc im Whatcom County Planning Commission Land Use Policies -Final Recommendations From the November 9, 2006 Work Session Policy DR-4: Use flexible design standards to enhance the character of individual neighborhoods. Policy DR-5: Establish design guidelines and site irnprovement standards through the City's Master Plan process for urban center development. Policy DR-6: Adopt incentives to include functional open space, and preserve resource lands in Bellingham's Subarea. Policy DR-7: Encourage residential, commercial, and industrial development along existing and future public transit lines. Policy DR-8: Implement Low -Impact Development techniques that minimize irrlpervious surfaces and treat runoff to protect water resources and watershed hydrology. Low - Impact Development protects and uses onsite natural features, with engineered, small- scale stormwater controls, to maintain pre -development watershed hydrologic functions. E. Annexation (AN) The GMA states, "In general, cities are the units of local government most appropriate to provide urban services." Large portions of the existing UGA have urban levels of development enabled by the extension of sewer and water services. Whatcom County and special districts provide the majority of the urban services in these areas, except for sewer and water. It is appropriate to annex these areas in a timely manner into the City of Bellingham so that citizens can enjoy a full range of urban services at adopted urban levels, as intended by the GMA. Goal ANA: To assure the most cost-effective provision of urban services and infrastructure (including future maintenance and replacement costs), to prevent sprawl, and to strengthen Bellingham and Whatcom County's tax base. Goal AN-2: To maintain the County's role in providing regional planning for rural and natural resource protection. Goal AN-3: To assure that urban growth areas that are provided urban levels of service and are currently urban in nature are under the land use and environmental jurisdiction of the City of Bellingham. Goal AN-4: To direct projected growth into established urban areas prior to moving into areas more rural in nature. Goal AN-5: To assure that areas being considered for annexation have been master planned as outlined below. -7- 1APlanning Division\Long Range Planning\Comp Plan Amendments\Comp Plan 2008\CMP2008-0001 - Bellingham Subarea Plan\For Website\Exhibit C Nov 6 PC LU Policies.doc 181 Whatcom County Planning Commission Land Use Policies -Final Recommendations From the November 9, 2006 Work Session Policy AN-1: Before approving an annexation, the City of Bellingham shall provide the area with a master plan to address: • Regional environmental impacts and mitigation. • Regional transportation network impacts and mitigation. • Capital facilities levels of service. • Future mix and location of land uses. • Timing and financing of infrastructure provision, including but not limited to, public sewer and water, stormwater, transportation, and parks. • Timing and financing of public services, including but not limited to police, fire protection, emergency services, parks, recreation, open space, and schools. • Residential, commercial, and industrial design guidelines and standards. Policy AN-2: Annexation shall occur at the same time as, or before, the City of Bellingham extends any utility service zones. Policy AN-3: Allow exceptions to .annexation policies only to protect public health, safety, and welfare, to reduce density within the Lake Whatcom watershed, or as agreed to by the County Council. Policy AN-4: Plan annexation and utility extensions to allow for a predictable progression of development, and prevent leapfrog development. Policy AN-5: The City of Bellingham, Whatcom County and special purpose districts will develop interlocal agreements prior to and upon annexation. Policy AN-6: The Interlocal Agreement shall establish a timeline for the annexation of all existing service extension zones within the UGA through the interlocal agreement, and prior to annexation of any "5 year review area." The annexations shall occur prior to expansion of the UGA. F. Urban Services and Facilities (SF) Planning urban services and facilities in the UGA is key to managing growth, preventing sprawl, and providing cost-effective service. Effective provision of services and facilities is essential to quality of life, for residents in both the County and the City. Goal SF-1: To provide the UGA with a full range of urban services upon annexation. Goal SF-2: To provide the necessary capital facilities and services for Bellingham's existing and future population without decreasing levels of service (LOS) below adopted standards. Goal SF-3: To resolve service planning and revenue sharing issues between jurisdictions and special purpose districts. -8- lAPlanning Division\Long Range Planning\Comp Plan Amendments\Comp Plan 2008\CMP2008-0001 - Bellingham Subarea Plan\For Website\Exhibit C Nov 6 PC LU Policies.doc 182 Whatcom County Planning Commission Land Use Policies -Final Recommendations From the November 9, 2006 Work Session Policy SF-1: At the time of annexation, the City of Bellingham will be the primary provider of urban services and facilities, including but not limited to sewer, water, stormwater, roads, police, fire protection, emergency services, parks, recreation and open space. Policy SF-2: Plan annexations and utility extensions that allow for a predictable progression of development and prevent leapfrog development. Policy SF-3: The City of Bellingham and Whatcom County will cooperate and coordinate with special purpose districts and other government agencies to ensure efficient provision of a full range of urban services in the UGA. Policy SF-4: Where service extensions exist, the City of Bellingham, Whatcom County and special purpose districts will coordinate plans to manage growth in Bellingham's UGA, and will develop interlocal agreements to transition service provisions to the City as urban development occurs. G. Urban Growth Area (UGA) This section establishes a tiered urban growth area to address the GMA, which stipulates, "an urban growth area may include territory that is located outside of a city only if such territory is characterized by urban growth." These characteristics include adequate existing public facilities and service capacities to serve such development, or existing and prospective public facilities that are provided by either public or private resources. Further, the goals 'and policies implement the GMA Legislative Finding that "It is in the public interest that citizens, communities, local governments and the private sector cooperate and coordinate with one another in comprehensive land use planning." Phased Urban Growth Areas - Short Term and Long Term Planning Areas The concept of Short Term and Long Term Planning Areas in Whatcom County UGA is discussed in the 2005 Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan beginning on page 2-16, in Goal 2-S and policies 2S-1 through 2S-3. It is consistent with the Visions for Bellingham Goal Statement VB-2, the Bellingham Growth Forum policy recommendations (GF Action Step 20), and the Whatcom County County -Wide Planning Policy D.3. Goal UGA-1: To promote infill and density goals within the City of Bellingham, and to encourage redevelopment. Goal UGA-2: To achieve orderly, logical development patterns and efficient land use. Goal UGA-3: To provide facilities and services that are necessary to achieve attractive, high quality urban development in a cost effective manner. Goal UGA-4: To maximize density and in -fill objectives, minimize sprawl and -9- lAPlanning Division\Long Range Planning\Comp Plan Amendments\Comp Plan 2008\CMP2008-0001 - Bellingham Subarea Plan\For Website\Exhibit C Nov 6 PC LU Policies.doc 183 Whatcom County Planning Commission Land Use Policies -Final Recommendations From the November 9, 2006 Work Session development, and ensure the efficient. use of infrastructure by phasing growth through a phased or tiered UGA. Policy UGA-1: The City of Bellingham and Whatcom County shall use the following criteria, which should be achieved to the extent possible, to evaluate proposed changes to Bellingham's UGA: • Inclusion of sufficient developable land to accommodate Bellingham's 20- year forecasted population growth. • Inclusion of land adjacent to the City that is characterized by urban development. • Provision for urban services and utilities to be provided in a cost-effective manner during the 20-year planning period. • Acknowledgement of historic urban development patterns. • Adhesion to parcel and ownership boundaries and, in some cases, natural features as appropriate. • Land use designation that permits urban levels of development while minimizing adverse impacts to resource lands and environmentally sensitive areas. Policy UGA-2: Each tier of the UGA shall accommodate approximately ten years of the adopted 20-year population projection. Policy UGA-3: A ten-year transportation and capital facilities plan will be developed prior to conversion of a UGA tier from Long Term to Short Term Planning Area. Policy UGA-4: Tier 1 Current Urban Growth Area - Short -Term Planning Area • Tier 1 is characterized by urban development and has existing public utility capacity. Tier 1 consists of some areas within the UGA established in 1997. • Require annexation prior to the extension of utilities. Utility extensions and urban levels of development may occur upon annexation. • Amend the interlocal agreement and establish a program to annex areas already within a utility service zone as of 2005. • Require use of TDRs as a prerequisite for annexation, as per Bellingham City Council policy. (Lake Whatcom Watershed and other areas as designated in the TDR program). • Monitor -the buildable land supply to determine the need to add land from the Long - Term Planning Area to the Short -Term Planning Area. • Prohibit subdivision of land without urban services into parcels smaller than 10 acres. • Tier 1 shall have sufficient capacity to accommodate at least ten years of the .adopted twenty-year population forecast. Policy UGA-5: Tier 2 Intermediate Urban Growth Area - Long -Term Planning Area • Tier 2 is characterized by urban development, and has existing public utility capacity. Tier 2 consists of the remaining areas within the UGA established in.1997 -10- I:\Planning Division\Long Range Planning\Comp Plan Amendments\Comp Plan 2008\CMP2008-0001 - Bellingham Subarea Plan\For Website\Exhibit C Nov 6 PC LU Policies.doc im Whatcom County Planning Commission Land Use Policies -Final Recommendations From the November 9, 2006 Work Session not included in Tier 1. • Prohibit annexation, utility extensions (except for public health emergencies) and urban development until rezoned to a Short -Term Planning Area. • Designate as Rural with a maximum density of one dwelling per 10 acres until rezoned to a Short-term planning area. • Prohibit subdivision into parcels smaller than 10 acres. • Require the following for proposed rezones of Intermediate Urban Growth Areas (Long -Term) to Current (Short -Term) Urban Growth Areas: o Adoption of a revised interlocal agreement. o Adoption of a land supply monitoring program. o Adoption of regulations for Urban Villages as outlined in the Bellingham Growth ForLlm policy recommendations. o Adoption of master plans of the area that address parks, open space, stormwater, critical areas and habitats, transportation routes and general neighborhood layout. o Adoption of both a capital facilities plan and a transportation improvement plan that addresses impacts and infrastructure requirements on a subarea scale. o Implementation by the City of Bellingham of reasonable measures to require increased densities, infill, and redevelopment where appropriate. These measures shall include: ❑ Allowing one accessory dwelling unit per residence in all single family neighborhoods consistent with City rules ❑ Establishing minimum densities in all planning areas and limiting single family residences in multi -family zones o Eliminating off street parking requirements for all residential development. o Implementation by the City of Bellingham of measures to require increased densities, infill and redevelopment where appropriate. These measures could include: o Efficient use of industrial and commercial land. o Planned Unit Development standards. o Transferable development rights. ❑ Increased density where appropriate (upzones). ❑ Modification of development standards for building heights, street and right-of-way, setbacks and access. o Clustering on all parcels. o Demonstration that there is not sufficient land in Tier 1 to accommodate 10 years of the adopted twenty-year population forecast. H. Land Use Designations and Policies (LU) The land use designations and policies address residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional development. It also directs the concentration of land use in urban centers -11- I:\Planning Division\Long Range Planning\Comp Plan Amendments\Comp Plan 2008\CMP2008-0001 - Bellingham Subarea Plan\For Website\Exhibit C Nov 6 PC LU Policies.doc 185 Whatcom County Planning Commission Land Use Policies -Final Recommendations From the November 9, 2006 Work Session and the preservation of rural areas and resource lands. The following section provides the overall land use goals and policies for all types of development. Goal LU-1: To provide for land uses in the Bellingham Subarea and Bellingham's Urban Growth Area that conform to the Growth Management Act, County -wide Planning Policies, the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan, the Bellingham Comprehensive Plan, and other agency plans applicable to the planning area (such as the Bellingham International Airport Master Plan and the Whatcom Transit Authority Strategic Plan). Goal LU-2: To establish the Bellingham Urban Growth Area to protect rural areas, and accommodate urban development through annexation to the City of Bellingham. Goal LU-3: To establish urban growth boundaries that reduce service inefficiencies associated with sprawl and dispersed development patterns, and to produce a more compact overall urban development pattern that can be served more efficiently. Urban growth boundaries also facilitate more efficient timing of growth, as the urban areas are generally developed more intensely before the boundary is extended into the adjacent rural area. Goal LU-4: To promote efficient use of land, reduce low -density sprawl, encourage alternative modes of transportation, safeguard the environment, promote healthy neighborhoods, and maintain a sense of community through carefully planned levels of development, as population increases in Bellingham and its Urban Growth Area. Goal LU-5: To assure that permitted land use and development in Bellingham's UGA does not preclude future urbanization and densification. Goal LU-6: To encourage affordable, attractive, stable, and diverse residential neighborhoods while providing for a variety of housing opportunities. Goal LU-7: The County shall encourage the City through the interlocal process and other collaborations to assure more compact development patterns that allow for the most efficient and cost-effective delivery of services within the existing city limits. GOAL LU-8: The City shall promote infill by allowing accessory dwelling units (ADU) in single-family zones. Goal LU-9: To provide for a better balance of jobs and housing to minimize -the distance people travel between home, workplace, shopping, and recreation. Goal LU-10: To guide planning decisions and the physical development of areas adjacent to the city limits so that forecasted growth occurs in designated areas where the necessary public facilities and services can be efficiently provided. Goal LU-11: To ensure a smooth transition from Whatcom County jurisdiction to the -12- I:\Planning Division\Long Range Planning\Comp Plan Amendments\Comp Plan 2008\CMP2008-0001 - Bellingham Subarea Plan\For Website\Exhibit C Nov 6 PC LU Policies.doc Whatcom County Planning Commission Land Use Policies -Final Recommendations From the November 9, 2006 Work Session City of Bellingham jurisdiction as both developed and undeveloped areas in the UGA are annexed to the city. Goal LU-12: To provide certainty to residents, property owners, developers and the community regarding the nature and extent of future development in Bellingham's UGA. Goal LU-13: To promote the integrity and character of each planning area within Bellingham's Urban Growth Area through community input. Policy LU-1: Promote a compact development pattern with increasing densities around small neighborhood centers and along key transportation corridors. Policy LU-2: Support adopted goals to limit growth in rural areas, environmentally sensitive areas, and in agricultural and resource lands. Policy LU-3: Limit development in the Bellingham Subarea that lies outside the UGA, to single-family homes on existing lots of record. Subdivision into parcels smaller than 20 acres is prohibited. Policy LU-4: Encourage infill and rezones to higher density single-family and multi- family in Bellingham and the UGA where services and infrastructure can be most efficiently provided. Policy LU-5: Provide opportunities for affordable, attractive, stable, and diverse housing types and residential neighborhoods. Policy LU-6: Direct new high -density residential, commercial and industrial development toward existing urban development, major transportation routes, and areas where City utilities and other services are available or can be readily extended. Policy LU-7: The City of Bellingham will promote infill development in its Urban Growth Area and its existing city limits, consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan goals' and policies. Policy LU-8: The City of Bellingham and Whatcom County will ensure that residentially zoned land included in Bellingham's Urban Growth Area is land that is suitable for urban densities. Policy LU-9: The City of Bellingham and Whatcom County will ensure that there is enough developable commercial and industrial land in cities and Urban Growth Areas to accommodate the forecasted 20-year Whatcom County employment growth. Policy LU-10: Minimize land use conflicts in the Urban Growth Area .through buffer requirements, design standards, and locational criteria; and by promoting compatibility between land uses, especially among residential, commercial, industrial, and Institutional designations. -13- I:\Planning Division\Long Range Planning\Comp Plan Amendments\Comp Plan 2008\CMP2008-0001 - Bellingham Subarea Plan\For Website\Exhibit C Nov 6 PC LU Policies.doc 187 Whatcom County Planning Commission Land Use Policies -Final Recommendations From the November 9, 2006 Work Session Policy LU-11: The City of Bellingham and Whatcom County will establish TDR receiving areas in Bellingham and -the UGA for the purpose of transferring development rights out of the Lake Whatcom watershed and rural and agricultural lands. Policy LU-12: The average zoning density within the City should not be lower than the average zoning density within the UGA. -14- I:\Planning Division\Long Range Planning\Comp Plan Amendments\Comp Plan 2008\CMP2008-0001 - Bellingham Subarea Plan\For Website\Exhibit C Nov 6 PC LU Policies.doc im PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 210 Lottie Street, Bellingham, WA 98225 Telephone: (360.)778-8300 Fax: (360) 778-8302 R-ECEIVED MEMORANDUM To: David Stalheim, Whatcom County Planning Director From: Tim Stewart, Planning"munity Development Director Date: February 20, 2009 RE: Bellingham Subarea Plan FEB 25 2009 1Xhatcorr, county P€ DS Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the County's proposed amendments to the Bellingham Urban Fringe Subarea Plan and Zoning Code. We understand that the County needs to amend the plan and code to comply with the Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board (Hearings Board) decision. We would ask that the following comments be placed in the record of the Planning Commission's March 12 public hearing. It is our understanding from your December 19 memo that the Hearings Board is requiring the County to amend the plan and zoning code to address three issues: 1. Remove policies from the plan referring to the Rural and Agricultural comprehensive plan designations. 2. Add development regulations to the URMX zone to achieve the :densities adopted by the County Council in February2008. 3. Amend the UR, URM and URMX zones in the Bellingham UGA to prohibit subdivision of land less than 1 unit/10 acres without public water and sewer. We strongly support incorporating these changes into Land Use policies section of the plan and in the zoning code to assist the City and County in meeting the Hearings Board requirements However, it appears that there are many other changes to the plan's goal and policy sections that go well beyond what is required to comply with the Hearings Board's order. We cannot support those policies. For example: Policy IG-3 states that the City of Bellingham "shall identify appropriate sending and receiving areas in the city for the TDR program." While we do. not object to the concept of having TDR receiving zones in the city, we do object to language in a County planning document specifying what the City shall do inside the city limits. • Policy OF-1 states that the City and County "shall adopt a "Buildable Lands Program as outlined in RCW 36.70A.215...". Under authority provided in Section 7 of this RCW, it is Whatcom County, not the City of Bellingham, that has the ability to adopt a Buildable Lands program. City staff could support this new initiative if adequate resources are provided by the County to implement this new effort. • Policy OF-7 apparently is intended to give the County the right to "approve enlargement of city boundaries". This is misleading because counties do not have this right under state annexation law. • Policy UGA-5 states that the city "shall" require increased densities by: - allowing ADUs in all single family neighborhoods; - establishing minimum densities in all areas; - limiting single family units in multifamily zones; and - eliminating off-street parking requirements. This type of language does not be in a County subarea plan. These are policy decisions that should be made only after an extensive public review process that includes the City Planning Commission and City Council. If the County would like to adopt these policies, the appropriate place would be in the Countywide Planning Policies, which apply to all jurisdictions in the County, not just Bellingham. There are many other examples of policy language that either does not belong in a subarea plan or that is unclear and needs further review. We are very concerned that City staff were not involved in the creation of, or proposed revisions to, these policies. This lack of City participation is particularly troubling given the number of policies in the document that direct that the City "shall" take action. As a result, this process does not reflect the kind of inter jurisdictional coordination required by the Growth Management Act and by our 1997 Interlocal Agreement concerning growth and development in Bellingham's UGA. Therefore I would ask that the County adopt only those revisions that are absolutely necessary to comply with the Hearings Board's order. All of the other changes should be deferred until we have had an opportunity to discuss the changes with County staff, our community, Planning Commission and City Council. Our intent is to arrive at a revised Bellingham Subarea Plan that can be adopted by both jurisdictions. We stand ready to work with your staff to update the Bellingham Subarea Plan in a comprehensive and inclusive process. Please give me a call if we can be of any assistance. C Mayor Dan Pike Alan Marriner, Asst. City Attorney Greg Aucutt, Senior Planner Pat Carman, Planner 190 BIA W V BUY.LDINcZA?r)asTR:f•.fi z!Yo(-Ltltox, Of, ii }L•r7t7CGhl i3OUiV7Y To: Honorable Whatcom County Planning Commission From: The Building Industry Association of Whatcbm County Date: March 12, 2009 Re: Urban Growth Areas File #CMP 2008-00001 The Building Industry Association (BIAWC) welcomes the opportunity to respond to the Urban Growth Areas (UGA) issues. However, we would like to express the following concerns for the record about this meeting: • Public Participation: We are concerned because there was little public notice for this hearing. The legal notice was published in the Bellingham Herald on March 1, 2009, but even it its confusing because it implies that this public hearing is only to cover Bellingham's UGA, when in fact the issues are broader than that. We also want to point out that it is very difficult to respond to these complex issues before the public hearing (which we know that the Whatcom County Planning Commission prefers) because the materials were not even publicly available until they were posted on the website last Friday, March 7, 2009. The Whatcom County Planning Commission has been quite supportive of public participation in the past, so we wanted to bring to your attention that many members of the general public may not be aware that this meeting is occurring this evening. We are curious how this meeting will fit into Washington State's Growth Management Act's requirement for "early and continuous public participation." WASH. REV. CODE§36.70A.140 (2009). • Complex Items: The items before the Commissions tonight include very many items that are not clearly closely related. First, we are told that this is a complete rewrite of an entire Subarea Plan with some incredibly complex and controversial details in the plan. Then, at the -same hearing, we are discussing adjustments to the County's zoning code that impacts every UGA in the County. How can two important, complex issues like this be combined into one hearing where the public only has three minutes to address them, after having only three working days to read and analyze the materials? • City of Bellingham: There are questions as to if the results of this hearing are valid because the City of Bellingham is not present. Countywide Planning Policy (CWPP) F-11 requires this to be a joint process between the two jurisdictions. CWPP F-11 states: The county and the City of 1 1650 faker Creek ?'lace Bellingham, WA 98226 Phone 360.67' .4247 Fax, 360.647.0756 wvrai-bianifc-corn 191 Bellingham shall establish, through the Urban Fringe Subarea update, the policies, zoning and criteria to comply with the current state Growth Management law. The City of Bellingham has not even had the opportunity to submit a staff report, so the public has no way of knowing if this is a coordinated effort or not. As a result, we have serious questions as to how in practicality the decisions made at this hearing will reconcile with CWPP F- 11. • Mapping: The mapping included in the packet is problematic. Many property owners and citizens are not aware if they are in Bellingham's Urban Fringe Subarea or not. Much of the subarea was actually left out to the map provided as Exhibit B. As a result, a landowner in the northern part of the Urban Fringe Subarea would not recognize that decisions are going to be made at this meeting that will impact him/her. This is especially true about the proposed downzone in this area from one house per five acres (if water and sewer are not present) to one house per ten acres (if water and sewer are not present) and even the prohibition of subdivision of parcels smaller than 20 acres. This seriously impacts GMA's public participation requirements, as expressed in our first bullet point. • Tiering: We.would like greater analysis of the entire tiering process, particularly how it fits into the larger picture of GMA's requirements that urban growth areas are to be encouraged as the place where we are supposed to put our density. WASH. REV. CODE §36.70A.110 (3) (2009). In the materials provided for tonight's meeting, they speak of Tier 1 and Tier 2. However, no map or other relevant information is provided. Where are Tiers 1&2 located? How can we testify about them if we don't even know where they are? • Downzoning and Rural Lands: We are very concerned that proposed downzones of the rural county are being discussed tonight, and most members of the public who live there are probably not aware of this fact. We are referring to Policy LU-3: "Limit development in the Bellingham Subarea that lies outside the UGA, to single-family homes on existing lots of record. Subdivision into parcels smaller than 20 acres is prohibited. (p.13) We find it disingenuous that Whatcom County Planning staff is.trying to slip that language into this plan at this time, without previous prior notice and public involvement. We also are very curious how this plan reconciles with the "rural character" and "rural development" sections of GMA, found at WASH. REV. CODE§36.70A.030 (15) (b) (2009) and WASH. REV. CODE §36.70A.070 (5) (2009), respectfully. We also want to remind the County that the Washington Court of Appeals has established that a five -acre lot is "decidedly rural density." Whidbey Island Environmental Network v. Island County and Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board, 122 Wash. App.. 156, 169 P. 3d 385 (2004), quoting Skagit Surveyors and Engineers, LLC v. Friends of Skagit County, 135 Wash. 2d 542, 571, 958 P, 2d (1998). 2 192 RECEIVED Brownlie Evans Wolf & Lee MAR11znog A T T O R N E Y s A T L A W hatcorr) County P&fly: VIA ELECTRONIC AND HAND DELIVERY March 11, 2009 Jean Melious, Chair Whatcom County Planning Commission 5280 Northwest Drive Bellingham, WA 98226 John Lesow Whatcom County Planning Commission 5280 Northwest Drive Bellingham, WA 98226 Geoff Menzies Whatcom County Planning Commission 5280 Northwest Drive Bellingham, WA 98226 John Steensma Whatcom County Planning Commission 5280 Northwest Drive Bellingham, WA 98226 Sean Wilson Whatcom County Planning Commission 5280 Northwest Drive Bellingham, WA 98226 heather@browntieevans.com Ken Mann Whatcom County Planning Commission 5280 Northwest Drive Bellingham, WA 98226 John Belisle Whatcom County Planning Commission 5280 Northwest Drive Bellingham, WA 98226 David Hunter Whatcom County Planning Commission 5280 Northwest Drive Bellingham, WA 98226 Rabel Burdge Whatcom County Planning Commission 5280 Northwest Drive Bellingham, WA 98226 Re: File # CMP2008-00001; Bellingham Urban Fringe Subarea Plan Dear Commissioners: Our firm represents Eric and Robin Hitz, who own property in the Bellingham Urban Growth Area ("UGA") commonly referred to as the Queen Mountain Area. We take this opportunity to comment upon the proposed Land Use Polices for the Bellingham Urban Fringe Subarea (the "UFSP Polices") and request that the UFSP Policies be remanded to Staff for further consideration and consultation with the City of Bellingham. Of paramount concern is the lack of Brownlie Evans Wolf & Lee, LLP 1 230 E. Champion St., Bellingham, Washington 98225 1 P 360.676.0306 F 360.676.8058 193 Whatcom County Planning Commission March 11, 2009 Page 2 participation by the City of Bellingham in the development of these policies. Both the State's Growth Management Act (the "GMA") and the 1997 Interlocal Agreement require coordination and consistency on policies affecting Bellingham's UGA. The lack of meaningful city input in the development of the UFSP Policies precludes adoption at this time. Although the County may be under a deadline to address certain zoning issues in the Bellingham UGA, it is not under any immediate deadline or mandate to make policy changes to- the Bellingham UFSP; and the Planning Commission should not adopt wide ranging policy changes without adequate review and input by the City of Bellingham. Even ignoring the lack of city participation, numerous flaws exist with regard to the UFSP Policies. The proposal to phase growth in the Bellingham UGA via the proposed tiered system, for example, is neither practical nor good planning under the GMA. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.110, counties must designate UGAs sufficient to accommodate growth for the succeeding twenty year period. Urban levels of growth must be allowed to develop in these UGAs during the planning period. Although this may seem like an obvious maxim, the UFSP Polices do not encourage urban growth in the Bellingham UGA within the applicable planning period. In fact, the proposed policies discourage urban densities throughout the Bellingham UGA. The UFSP Policies provide that only areas within the UGA as of 1997. shall be allowed in either Tier 1 or Tier 2. Areas that have been more rectntly incorporated into the UGA are not included in either tier; this omission highlights that these policies have not been reexamined for consistency with the 2008 comprehensive plan amendments. Nonetheless, using the 1997 date as criteria for allowing urban development will not lead to efficiently phased planning. Recently included areas such as Queen Mountain are actually much more suitable for urban development and annexation than areas that became a part of the UGA in 1997. For example, Queen Mountain is currently surrounded on three sides by the City of Bellingham as well as newly purchased city park land to the north. The property has services available at its boundary line and is under single ownership, which means master planning can easily occur.. In contrast, many of the areas brought into the UGA in 1997 have multiple ownerships, are not easily serviced, and are otherwise constrained. Additionally, the proposed requirements for rezoning from Long -Term to Short -Term UGA status are onerous to the point of being infeasible and will likely preclude any property owner from obtaining urban levels of development. Adoption of urban village regulations, capital facilities plans, infill implementation, land monitoring programs, etc. are properly the purview of the County and City in implementing their respective comprehensive plans. Adoption and implementation of these types of programs, which affect the entire City and the County, should not be made a part of a rezone process for a particular parcel or group of parcels. 194 Whatcom County Planning Commission March 11, 2009 Page 3 The UFSP Policies, particularly those applying a new tiered system for the UGA, will not achieve the County's goal of orderly and logical development patterns in the UGA. Urban development and annexation of areas that can be master planned and are contiguous to existing city limits is the logical and legal solution to the need for orderly planning in the UGA. Consequently, we urge further review and work with the City of Bellingham on these urban fringe goals and policies prior to consideration by the County Council. Sincerely, Brownlie Evans Wolf & Lee, LLP Heather Wolf cc: client 195 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 2009-229 CLEARANCES Initial Date Date Received in Council Office Agenda Date Assigned to: Originator: Michelle Stiles , 4.28.09 Council Introduction p C (�, nV, D '� Division Head 5/12/09 P & D/Council ��` f 2009 Dept. Head David Stalheim �( `r:;, m COUNTY , 1 COUNCIL Prosecutor: Royce Buckingham T Q Purchasing/Budget: Brad Bennett Executive. - Pete Kremen TITLE OF DOC MENT: Amending the Official Whatcom County Zoning Ordinance, Title 20, for the purposes of clarifying the definitions of bed and breakfast operations and additional standards throughout the code. ATTACHMENTS: (1) Draft Ordinance (2) Whatcom County Planning Commission Findings of Fact and Reasons for Action (3) Excerpts from Planning Commission Public Hearing Minutes (4) Proposed Amended Text 5 Staff Report SEPA review required? ( x ) Yes ( ) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing? ( ) Yes (x ) NO SEPA review completed? ( x ) Yes ( ) NO Requested Date: SUMMARYSTATEMENT 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.) The proposal is to amend the official Whatcom County Zoning Ordinance, Title 20, chapter 20.97, in order to clarify definitions of "bed and breakfast establishment" and "bed and breakfast inn;" also amending Chapter(s): 20.20, 20.22, 20.24, 20.32, 20.34, 20.36, 20.37, 20.61, and 20.72 by clarifying the use of bed and breakfast operations; and also amending 20.40 and 20.64 by including new language to provide for Bed and breakfast operations in the Agricultural and Resort Commercial districts. COMMITTEEACTION.• COUNCIL ACTION: 4/28/2009: Introduced Related County Contract #: Related File Numbers: Ordinance or Resolution Number: Please Note: Once adopted and signed, ordinances and resolutions are available for viewing andprinting on the County's website at. www.co.whatcom.wa.us/council. C ADOCUME—I \ADMINI—I \LOCALS-1 \Temp\XPgrpwise\20090415-agendabill-b-b.doc 196 WHATCOM COUNTY �o PLANNING & A. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 3 5280 Northwest Drive li9sNm�G�G� Bellingham, WA 98226 MEMORANDUM TO: Whatcom County Council Members THROUGH: David Stalheim--,� FROM: Wain Harrison, Long Range Planning Supervisor Michelle Stiles, Planner / DATE: April 15, 2009 SUBJECT: Bed and Breakfast David Stalheim Director J.E. "Sam" Ryan Assistant Director Whatcom County Planning and Development Services have begun work on a series of "code scrub" items where is a part of the long range department's work plan. One item on that list is bed and breakfast operations within title 20. Bed and breakfast operations have been difficult to regulate, hard for the public to clearly understand and for planners to implement. Staff's proposed amendment will alleviate the difficulties of interpreting and administering bed and breakfast requirements. The proposal clarifies the requirements of WCC 20.97.027, "bed and breakfast establishment" and WCC 20.97.028, "bed and breakfast inn" and integrates code interpretations used by Whatcom County Building Services. The proposal helps to integrate these requirements with other current adopted codes and code interpretations. The Whatcom County Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed zoning text amendment on March 26, 2009 where the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval for the proposed zoning text amendment. Office (360) 676-6907 County (360) 380-8110 FAX (360) 738-2525 197 SPONSORED BY: CONSENT PROPOSED BY: PDS INTRODUCTION DATE: APRIL 28, 2009 ORDINANCE # AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE, TITLE 20, FOR THE PURPOSES OF CLARIFYING THE DEFINITIONS OF BED AND BREAKFAST OPERATIONS AND ADDITIONAL STANDARDS THROUGHOUT THE CODE WHEREAS, Whatcom County Planning and Development Services identified bed and breakfast operations as a "Code Scrub" item as part of the long range work plan. The list of "Code Scrub" items are those that zoning administrative staff have identified with issues needing clarification within the zoning code; and WHEREAS, legal notice requirements have been met; and WHEREAS, on Thursday, March 26, 2009, the Whatcom County Planning Commission received the staff's findings and recommendations, and held a public hearing on the proposed amendment and considered all testimony; and WHEREAS, on Thursday, March 26, 2009, the Whatcom County Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the proposed amendment to the Whatcom County Council; and WHEREAS, the Whatcom County Council has considered the Planning Commission's Findings of Fact and Reasons for Action, Conclusions and Recommendation for the proposed amendment; and WHEREAS, the amendment conforms to the requirements of the Growth Management Act, is consistent with the Goals and Policies of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan, the County -Wide Planning Policies, and has been evaluated for consistency with the interlocal agreements and comprehensive plans of associated cities; and WHEREAS, The County Council has adopted the following Findings of Fact: FINDINGS OF FACT FINDINGS OF FACT AND REASONS FOR ACTION 1. Whatcom County Planning and Development staff has compiled a list of issues with the current zoning code that are causing confusion and difficulty in implementation. Among these items were the regulations regarding bed and breakfast establishments and bed and breakfast inns. 2. The text amendment will clarify development regulations for the public to clearly understand what the standards are for bed and breakfasts. 3. Staff held discussions in which it was determined that bed and breakfast operations should be provided in the Agriculture and Resort Commercial zones. 4. The proposed amendment to the Whatcom County Official Zoning Ordinance was initiated to the docket by Whatcom County Planning and Development Services, and was given rile number PLN2009-00002. 5. Notice of the proposed amendment was sent to the Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development (CTED) and other state agencies on January 5, 2009. On January 6, 2008 CTED notified Whatcom County that notice of the proposed amendment had been received and had been forwarded to other interested parties as required. No comments regarding the proposed amendment have been received from CTED as of March 26, 2009. 6. On February 26, 2009, the Whatcom County State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Official issued a SEPA threshold Determination of Non - Significance (DNS) in regards to the proposed text amendment, a non - project action. The comment period for this determination ended on Marchll, 2009. No comments were received regarding this determination. 7. Notice of the Planning Commission hearing for the proposed text amendment was published in the Bellingham Herald on March 12, 2009. 8. Pursuant to Whatcom County Code (WCC) 20.90.050, as of March 11, 2009, Whatcom County Planning and Development Services has: evaluated the proposed amendment in relationship to the goals, objectives and policies of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan as authorized by the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) - RCW 36.70A; and considered possible environmental impacts that have been identified by the lead agency designated SEPA official through the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) threshold determination process. 9. A Whatcom County Planning Commission public hearing was held on the subject amendment on March 26, 2009. 10.On Thursday, March 26, 2009, the Whatcom County Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the proposed amendment to the Whatcom County Council. 199 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Whatcom County Council that: Section 1. The Official Whatcom County Zoning Ordinance, Title 20 is hereby amended as shown on Attachment A. Section 2. Adjudication of invalidity of any of the sections, clauses, or provisions of this ordinance shall not affect or impair the validity of the ordinance as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so declared to be invalid. ADOPTED this day of 12009 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL ATTEST: WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Dana Brown -Davis, Council Clerk APPROVED as to form: Royce Buckingham, Civil Deputy Prosecutor Seth Fleetwood, Chairperson ( ) Approved ( ) Denied Pete Kremen, Executive Date: 200 File # PLN2009-00002 Attachment A Attachment A Chapter 20.97 - Definitions 20.97.027 Bed and breakfast establishment. 3/26/09 Page 1 "Bed and breakfast establishment" means any privately -owned dwelling that is the primary residence(s) of the owners in which, for compensation, one , offer individually or as f miliesone to two rooms ; are used to housed or lodge individuals or familiesd for periods of less than one month as transients visitors with limited food service. The use of the dwelling unit for the bed and breakfast shall be clearly incidental and subordinate to its use for residential purposes and the purpose se of the applicable zoning district. 20.97.028 Bed and breakfast inn. "Bed and breakfast inn" means a privately -owned dwelling that is the primary residence(s) of the owners in which. for compensation. three to five rooms are used to house or lodge individuals or families for periods of less than one month as transient visitors with limited food service. The use of the dwelling unit for the bed and breakfast shall be clearly incidental and subordinate to its use for residential purposes and the purpose of the applicable zoning district,(m�^r� offering three or- more sleeping UAt. Chapter 20.20 Urban Residential District 20.20.100 Accessory uses. .106 Bed and breakfast establishments. 20.20.150 Conditional uses. 159 bed and breakfast l a in-gs Bed and breakfast inns. Chapter 20.22 Urban Residential — Medium Density District 20.22.100 Accessory uses. .106 Bed and breakfast establishments 20.22.150 Conditional uses. 155 Rooming houses, or bed and breakfast led^irnsbed and breakfast inns. Chapter 20.24 Urban Residential — Mixed District 20.24.100 Accessory uses. .106 Bed and breakfast establishments. 20.24.150 Conditional uses. 15943ed-andbreak€ast-ledgi-ngs. Bed and breakfast inns. 201 File # PLN2009-00002 3/26/09 Attachment A Page 2 Chapter 20.32 Residential Rural District 20.32.100 Accessory uses. .106 Bed and breakfast establishments 20.32.150 Conditional uses. .159 Bed and breakfast lodgi Bed and breakfast inns. Chapter 20.34 Rural Residential -Island District 20.34.100 Accessory uses. .106 Bed and breakfast establishments. 20.34.150 Conditional uses. .161 Boa and breakfast ledgings Bed and breakfast inns. Chapter 20.36 Rural District 20.36.100 Accessory uses. .109 Bed and breakfast establishments. 20.36.150 Conditional uses. .170 Bed and breakfast lodgings. Bed and breakfast inns. Chapter 20.37 Point Roberts Transitional Zone District 20.37.100 Accessory uses. .107 Bed and breakfast establishments. 20.37.150 Conditional uses. .156 Bed and breakfast lod i Bed and breakfast inns. Chapter 20.40 Agriculture District 20.40.100 Accessory uses. .113 Bed and breakfast establishments. 20.40.150 Conditional uses .161 Bed and breakfast inns. Chapter 20.42 Rural Forestry District 20.42.150 Conditional uses. .152 Bed and breakfast establishments. Chapter 20.61 Small Town Commercial District 20.61.050 Permitted uses. .060 Hotels, motels_, and bed, breakfast inns and conference centers. 20.61.100 Accessory uses. .106 Bed and breakfast establishments and bed and breakfast inns. 202 File # PLN2009-00002 3/26/09 Attachment A Page 3 Chapter 20.64 Resort Commercial District 20.64.100 Accessory uses. .110 Bed and breakfast establishments and bed and breakfast inns. Chapter 20.72 Point Roberts Special District 20.72.050 Permitted uses. .051 In the RC Zone, -bed and breakfast le 7gingn bed and breakfast establishments and bed and breakfast inns mod-2003 0521, 2003; Or-dL2gp2n,�inn��-d. 99-044 19 203 File # PLN2009-00002 Zonina Text Amendments WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF REPORT I. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL AND RECOMMENDATION File Number: PLN2009-00002 File Name: Bed and Breakfast Applicant: Whatcom County Planning and Development Services Requested Action: The proposal is to amend the Whatcom County Zoning Code (WCC); 4/15/2009 Paae 1 More specifically, to amend WCC 20.97.027, in order to clarify and simplify the definition of "bed and breakfast establishment;" and amend WCC 20.97.028, in order to clarify and simplify the definition' -of "bed and breakfast inn;" also to amend WCC Chapter(s): 20.20, 20.22, 20.24, 20.32, 20.34, 20.36, 20.37, 20.61, and 20.72 by incorporating the new definitions of bed and breakfast inn and bed and breakfast establishment into already existing chapters of Whatcom County Zoning Code to create consistency. Finally, to amend WWC chapters 20.40 and 20.64, to include new language that provides for bed and breakfast operations. Reason for Request: Whatcom County Planning and Development Services Department staff developed a list of existing items within the Title 20, Whatcom County Zoning Code which caused confusion in interpretation and implementation. By amending the above specified sections, including the definitions and the allowable uses in each zone district, with specific reference to bed and breakfasts requirements, Whatcom County is addressing the conflicting issues and improving implementation and efficiency of administering the code. Staff's proposed amendment will alleviate the difficulties of interpreting and administering bed and breakfast requirements. The proposal clarifies the requirements of WCC 20.97.027, "bed and breakfast establishment" and WCC 20.97.028, "bed and breakfast inn" and integrates code interpretations used by Whatcom County Building Services. The proposal helps to integrate these 204 File # PLN2009-00002 4/15/2009 Zoning Text Amendments Page 2 requirements with other current adopted codes and code interpretations. Staff's proposed amendments also include changes to the previously specified zone districts in order to clarify intent, alleviate confusion, and to regulate the way in which these uses are administered in a more efficient manner. Staff proposes that in most zones, bed and breakfast establishments be changed from conditional uses to accessory uses. Bed and breakfast inns would remain conditional uses. Staff proposes that bed and breakfast establishments be permitted as an accessory use and bed and breakfast inns be permitted as a conditional use in the following designated zones: Urban Residential, Urban Residential- Medium Density, Urban Residential = Mixed, Residential Rural, Rural, and Point Robert's Transitional zone. In addition, staff also proposes that in the Small Town Commercial zone, bed and breakfast inns be removed as a permitted use and both bed and breakfast establishments and bed and breakfast inns be changed to accessory.uses. Finally, staff proposes, in the Agriculture zone to include bed and breakfast establishments as an accessory use and bed and breakfast inn as a conditional use and in the Resort Commercial zone, to include both bed and breakfast establishments and bed and breakfast inns as accessory uses. Staff's goal with these proposed amendments is to clarify the requirements and create consistency in both the definitions and the zone districts regarding bed and breakfast establishments and bed and breakfast inns. The proposal would allow the public or a planner working on a project to clearly differentiate and identify where either bed and breakfast establishments or bed and breakfast inns are permitted in a zone district and have a clear definition in WCC 20.97.027 and WCC 20.97.028 that are consistent with other adopted codes and code interpretations. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the Whatcom County Council for the proposed amendments to the Whatcom County Zoning Code. H. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The purpose of the proposed amendment is to provide better organization and more clarity to the existing regulations and standards. In preparing the proposed amendments, Long Range staff discussed preliminary proposals with Current Planning staff and Building Services staff. Through these discussions staff identified several issues with the existing bed and breakfast requirements. After discussion, it was proposed that these issues could be alleviated through an amendment; this amendment would significantly increase the ease of interpreting the requirements of this code and clearly outline for the public what the requirements are for each zone. The proposed changes address issues of confusion as identified by staff are listed below: • Eliminate the reference to bed and breakfast lodgings • Clarify WCC 20.97.027 "bed and breakfast establishment" • Clarify WCC 20.97.028 "bed and breakfast inn" • In the Urban Residential, Urban Residential- Medium Density; Urban 205 File # PLN2009-00002 4/15/2009 Zoning Text Amendments Page 3 Residential - Mixed, Residential Rural, Rural, and Point Robert's Transitional zone allow bed and breakfast establishments as accessory uses and continue to allow bed and breakfast inns as a conditional use. • In the Agriculture district, allow bed and breakfast establishments as an accessory use and bed and breakfast inns as a conditional use. • In the Small Town Commercial district eliminate bed and breakfast inns as a permitted use and make both bed and breakfast establishments and bed and breakfast inns an accessory use. • In the Resort Commercial district allow both bed and breakfast inns and bed and breakfast establishments as accessory uses. The proposed amendment will eliminate the existing text reference to bed and breakfast lodgings. Bed and breakfast lodging was referred to in zoning districts but not defined in WCC 20.97; this created confusion. The original intent of providing a reference to "lodgings" was so that both bed and breakfast establishments and bed and breakfast inns could be referenced at once. In order to alleviate confusion and streamline code interpretation staff has proposed to eliminate the reference to bed and breakfast lodgings. References to bed and breakfast lodgings have been replaced with bed and breakfast establishments and/or bed and breakfast inns, as applicable. Staff is proposing several changes in wording to the existing definitions of bed and breakfast establishments and bed and breakfast inns. For the most part, these changes do not affect the meaning or intent of the original language, but are simply being proposed to make the meaning and intent clearer. The current definition of bed and breakfast establishment is located within WCC 20.97.027. The proposed definition emphasizes that the dwelling in which the bed and breakfast operation is located in the primary residence(s) of the owners and that the dwelling unit(s) for the bed and breakfast shall be clearly incidental and subordinate to its use for residential purposes and for the purpose of the applicable zoning district. The proposed code also clarifies the size of a bed and breakfast establishment. Currently the definition for bed and breakfast establishment allow for "one or more persons, either individually or as families" as the threshold. Staff proposes that the definition of bed and breakfast establishments be changed to read: "one to two rooms are used to house or lodge individuals or families (emphasis added by staff)." Limits established by number of rooms are easier and more straightforward to regulate. Through collaborative discussion staff determined that a limit of two rooms is adequate. The current definition of "bed and breakfast inn" is located within WCC 20.97.028. The proposed definition emphasizes the that the dwelling in which the bed and breakfast is located within must be the primary residence(s) of the owners and that the dwelling unit for the bed and breakfast shall be clearly incidental and subordinate to its use for residential purposes and the purpose of the applicable zoning district. The proposed code also clarifies the size of a bed and breakfast inn. Currently the definition for bed and breakfast inn allows for "three or more sleeping units" as the threshold. Staff proposes that the definition of bed and breakfast inn allow "three to five rooms." Staff 206 File # PLN2009-00002 4/15/2009 Zoning Text Amendments Page 4 recommends five rooms to be the maximum in order to create consistency in the adopted codes and code interpretations. For zoning purposes, five is the proposed maximum since WCC 20.97.185 defines a "hotel" as six or more rooms. Furthermore, the 2009 International Building Codes, when adopted, will allow bed and breakfast establishments with up to 10 transient visitors to meet standards for R-3 occupancy, a less restrictive occupancy than R-1. However, the Building Official and Fire Marshal are in agreement that it is easier and more straightforward from a regulatory perspective to limit the number of guest rooms. Assuming an average use of two guests per bedroom, 10 transient visitors will be most consistently accommodated by 5 guest rooms, recognizing minor exceptions will occur. Staff proposes that bed and breakfast establishments, under the new definition that limits the number of rooms in a dwelling unit to two rooms, be an accessory use instead of a conditional use. This would be applicable in the Urban Residential, Urban Residential- Medium Density, Urban Residential - Mixed, Residential Rural, Rural, and Point Robert's. Transitional zone districts. After consulting with Current and Long range planning staff, it was proposed that existing code amended to provide for bed and breakfast in the Agriculture zone. Staff proposes to allow bed and breakfast establishments as an accessory use and Bed and breakfast inns as a conditional use. Allowing bed and breakfast operations in the Agriculture district is consistent with the purpose of the district and has the potential to support the economic stability of the agricultural use. Staff proposes that within the Small Town Commercial district, bed and breakfast inns, which are currently a primary permitted use, be changed to an accessory use. In this district bed and breakfast inns were grouped together with hotels, motels, and conference centers as permitted uses. In order to reorganize and recognize that a bed and breakfast is secondary to the primary residence, staff is proposing to remove bed and breakfast from permitted use and adding bed and breakfast inn and bed and breakfast establishment as accessory uses. The reason for the change is to create uniformity within the code. Currently, bed and breakfasts are not allowed in the Resort Commercial district. After consulting with staff, it was found that this has been seen as a conflict with the purpose and intent of the zone. In the Resort Commercial district, staff proposes to provide fo'r both bed and breakfast inns and establishments as accessory uses. III. ANALYSIS OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT Pursuant to Whatcom County Code 20.90.050, Whatcom County Planning and Development Services staff is required to: 1) Evaluate the proposed amendment in relationship to the goals, objectives and policies of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan as authorized by the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) - RCW 36.70A; 2) Address consistency with interlocal planning agreements between the County and associated cities; 3) Consider 207 File * PLN2009-00002 4/15/2009 Zoning Text Amendments Page 5 whether the proposed amendment is consistent with any associated city's comprehensive plan; and 4) Consider possible environmental impacts that have been identified by the lead agency designated SEPA official through the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) threshold determination process. What follows are the relevant sections from applicable code and related planning documents with staff discussion noted below each section. Growth Management Act The proposed amendment has been developed in accordance with Growth Management Act (GMA) Planning Goals of RCW 36.70A.020 as listed and discussed below: GMA Goal 7: Permits. Applications for both state and local government permits should be processed in a timely and fair manner to ensure predictability. Discussion: When property owners or applicants are in the planning stages of developing a bed and breakfast operation they look to the zoning code for information about what types of permitting requirements there are for the proposed use in any specific zone. The proposed amendment clarifies the existing definitions and eliminates confusing language. Easily accessible information, early in the project permitting stage is a vital component to project success; it also increases the likelihood of project compliance with applicable regulations, and may add to the speed in which a permit application can be processed; in addition it may also provide a more accurate expectation by the applicant as to the length of time a permit application will require. for issuance, thereby ensuring a greater sense of predictability in the permit application/issuance process. GMA Goal 5: Economic Development. Encourage economic development throughout the state that is consistent with adopted comprehensive plans, promote economic opportunity for all citizens of this state, especially for unemployed and for disadvantaged persons, promote the retention and expansion of existing businesses, recognize regional differences impacting economic development opportunities and encourage growth in areas experiencing insufficient economic growth, all within the capacities of the state's natural resources, public services, and public facilities. Discussion:. Operating a bed and breakfast within a primary residence can provide a significant source of income for those who might not otherwise have the ability or opportunity to travel to and from a job, or for those who have limited means of earning a living due to disability. Amending the zoning code to better provide for the operation of bed & breakfasts in the Whatcom County Agriculture District is consistent with the goals of the state to encourage economic growth and promote economic opportunity for all citizens of the state; for some, operating a bed breakfast within the File # PLN2009-00002 4/15/2009 Zoning Text Amendments Page 6 home could be a way to afford the costs of maintaining a residence, especially during economically challenging times. Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan The proposed amendment has been developed in accordance with the following Goals and Policies of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan. Goal 8C: Preserve and enhance the cultural heritage that is related to agriculture. Policy 8C-4: Support the continuation of owner occupied/family owned farms. Discussion: "Agriculture is not just a business but a way of life, with many farmers farming he same land their parents and grandparents farmed. The sense of community that these people have built over the years is one of the most valuable assets of our county." (Whatcom County 2008 Comprehensive Plan). Allowing bed and breakfast operations in the Agriculture District could be one way to help preserve this "way of life" by offering overnight visitors an experience of life on the farm, and might also enrich and cultivate public awareness of the importance of agriculture in our community. County -Wide Planning Policies The proposed amendment has been developed in accordance with the Whatcom County County -Wide Planning Policies (CWPP) as listed and discussed below. Policy A — Citizen Involvement 4. Citizen comments and viewpoints shall be incorporated into the decision - making process in development of draft plans and regulations. Consideration of citizen comments shall be evident in the decision -making process. Discussion: It is consistent with the County -Wide Policies for local governments to assess the needs of the community and to respond to citizen input. Staff has received numerous comments from the public about how the provisions of the code relating to bed and breakfast operations are confusing and difficult to understand, often requiring extra time to clarify and interpret by staff. Whatcom County Planning Department staff has listened to the public input, and has taken steps to transform existing code into a better working document through the amendment process. Policy I — Economic Development and Employment 8. Economic development should be encouraged that: a) does not adversely impact the environment; b) is consistent with community values stated in local 209 File # PLN2009-00002 Zoning Text Amendments 4/15/2009 Paae 7 comprehensive plans; c) encourages development that provides jobs to county residents; d) addresses unemployment problems in the county and seeks innovative techniques to attract different industries for a more diversified economic base; e) promotes reinvestment in the local economy, and f) supports retention and expansion of existing businesses. Discussion: The proposed amendment includes new provisions that allow bed and breakfast operations in the Resort Commercial district. Bed and breakfast operations that are conducted in residential homes may be a creative and innovative strategy to not only fortify the income of local residents, but could also have the beneficial effect of promoting local economies and for visitors to experience the character and quality of Whatcom County. Environmental Review Pursuant to the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) rules, proposed agency actions must be evaluated to determine whether probable significant adverse environmental impacts are likely to occur as a result of implementation. On February 26, 2009, the SEPA Official issued a threshold Determination of Non -Significance (DNS) in regards to the proposed text amendment, a non -project action. Consistency with Interlocal Agreements & Comprehensive Plans of Cities The proposed amendment applies to land that is within city urban growth areas, therefore, pursuant to the provisions of Whatcom County Code, Chapter 20.90.051 (3) (a) (4) the amendment has been developed in accordance with adopted interlocal agreements of the associated cities, and has been evaluated for consistency with their respective comprehensive plans. Discussion: Staff has reviewed the interlocal agreements of cities likely to be affected by the proposed amendment if adopted. Staff has noted no apparent inconsistencies with the interlocal agreements with cities or their respective comprehensive plans. IV. FINDINGS OF FACT AND REASONS FOR ACTION 1. Whatcom County Planning and Development staff has compiled a list of issues with the current zoning code that are causing confusion and difficulty in implementation. Among these items were the regulations regarding bed and breakfast establishments and bed and breakfast inns. 2. The text amendment will clarify development regulations for the public to clearly understand what the standards are for bed and breakfasts. 3. Staff held discussions in which it was determined that bed and breakfast operations should be provided in the Agriculture and Resort Commercial 210 File # PLN2009-00002 Zonina Text Amendments zones. 4/15/2009 Paae 8 4. The proposed amendment to the Whatcom County Official Zoning Ordinance was initiated to the docket by Whatcom County Planning and Development Services, and was given file number PLN2009-00002. 5. Notice of the proposed amendment was sent to the Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development (CTED) and other state agencies on January 5, 2009. On January 6, 2008 CTED notified Whatcom County that notice of the proposed amendment had been received and had been forwarded to other interested parties as required. No comments regarding the proposed amendment have been received from CTED, to date. 6. On February 26, 2009, the Whatcom County State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Official issued a SEPA threshold Determination of Non -Significance (DNS) in regards to the proposed text amendment, a non -project action. The comment period for this determination ended on Marchll, 2009. No comments were received regarding this determination. 7. Notice of the Planning Commission hearing for the proposed text amendment was published in the Bellingham Herald on March 12, 2009. 8. Pursuant to Whatcom County Code (WCC) 20.90.050, as of March 11, 2009, Whatcom County Planning and Development Services has: evaluated the proposed amendment in relationship to the goals, objectives and policies of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan as authorized by the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) - RCW 36.70A; and considered possible environmental impacts that have been identified by the lead agency designated SEPA official through the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) threshold determination process. 9. A Whatcom County Planning Commission public hearing was held on the subject amendment on March 26, 2009. V. PROPOSED CONCLUSION Staff has concluded that the proposed amendment is consistent with all applicable state and local law, and that the proposed amendment, if adopted, will be in the best interest of the public. V. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the Whatcom County Council for the proposed zoning text amendment that is attached as Attachment A. 211 File # PLN2009-00002 4/15/2009 Zoning Text Amendments Page 9 ATTACHMENTS • Attachment A - Preliminary Draft of Amended Text as Proposed 212 EXCERPTS FROM RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION March 26, 2009 Regular Meeting - Public Hearing Call To Order: The meeting was called to order, by Whatcom County Planning Commission Vice -Chair, John Lesow, in the Northwest Annex Conference Room at 6:40 p.m. Roll Call: Present: John Lesow, Ken Mann, Sean Wilson, John Belisle, John Steensma David Hunter in attendance at 6:55 p.m. Absent: Rabel Burdge, Geoff Menzies, Jean Melious Staff Present: David Stalheim, Michelle Stiles, Warner Webb, Becky Boxx Public Hearing File #PLN2009-00002 - A proposal to amend, for clarification and implementation purposes, the definitions of bed and breakfast facilities and additional standards within Whatcom County's zoning code, Title 20. Michelle Stiles presented the staff report. We are eliminating the reference to bed and breakfast lodging. Bed and breakfast lodging was referred to in the zoning district but not defined in the definition section, 20.97. References to bed and breakfast lodgings have been replaced with bed and breakfast establishments or bed and breakfast inns, as applicable. Staff is also proposing several changes to the existing definitions of bed and breakfast establishments and bed and breakfast inns. For the most part, these changes do not affect the meaning or the intent of the original language but are simply being proposed to .make their meaning and intent clearer. 20.97.027, Bed and Breakfast establishments. We are emphasizing that the dwelling in which the bed .and breakfast operation is located in is the primary residence of the owner and the bed and breakfast shall be clearly incidental and subordinate to its use for residential purposes and the purpose of the applicable zoning district. The proposed code also clarifies the size of bed and breakfast establishments. Staff proposes that the definition be changed to read: one to two rooms that are used to house or lodge individuals or families. Previously it read one to two persons. Limits establishing the number of rooms are easier and more straightforward to regulate. 20.97.028, Bed and breakfast inn. We added the same text, that emphasizes a dwelling in which the bed and breakfast is located within must be the 213 EXCERPTS FROM RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION March 26, 2009 Regular Meeting - Public Hearing primary residence of the owners. We have also proposed code that clarifies the size of inns. Staff proposes that the definition of bed and breakfast allow three to five rooms. Previously it was three or more sleeping units. We made this change because 20.97.185 defines hotels as six or more rooms. Building Services previously relied on the code interpretation to meet their building standards so we are incorporating the 2009 International Building Codes so the code interpretation is no longer necessary. With these clearer guidelines we are permitting bed and breakfast establishments as accessory uses and are continuing to allow bed and breakfast inns as conditional uses. These changes mostly affect the Residential zones. In Agricultural zones we are proposing to allow bed and breakfast establishments as an accessory use and bed and breakfast inns as a conditional use. In Small Town Commercial districts inns would be deleted as a permitted use and establishments and inns would be accessory uses. This is done in order to recognize that bed and breakfast is secondary to the primary residence. In the Resort Commercial district it will allow both inns and establishments as accessory uses. Mann: Did you get any feedback from the people in the lodging industry on these changes? Stiles: No. We consulted with staff, who deals with those people. Mann: Does this make any existing bed and breakfast inn or establishments non -conforming? Stiles: I don't believe so. The changes aren't that substantial. Stalheim: They would be grandfathered in if they didn't meet these standards. We are changing it from the amount of people to the amount of rooms. Stiles: We are assuming two people per room but we aren't regulating how many people per room. Lesow: Has there been an uptake for applications for these types of permits, in the past six months? Webb: There have been a lot of inquiries with the Olympics coming up. Lesow: What happens if you get a lot of people and cars coming to these? Is this something that staff or enforcement will regulate? Do you see an enforcement issue down the road? Stalheim: It does fall under our enforcement. I don't anticipate it being an issue, but that doesn't mean it won't happen. 214 EXCERPTS FROM RECORD OF PROCEEDIIVGS OF THE WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION March 26, 2009 Regular Meeting - Public Hearing The hearing was opened to the public. There was no public testimony. Work Session Mann moved to accept the recommendation for approval. Belisle seconded. Wilson: I did reach out to some members of the community who have bed and breakfasts in my area to ask them if these changes were substantial as far as they were concerned. They did not have any concerns. Roll Call Vote: Ayes - Belisle, Hunter, Lesow, Mann, Steensma, Wilson; Nays - 0; Abstain - 0; Absent - Burdge, Menzies, Melious. The motion carried. 215 WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FINDINGS OF FACT AND REASONS FOR ACTION, CONCLUSIONS, & RECOMMENDATION TO AMEND THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE, TITLE 20, CHAPTER 20.97, IN ORDER TO CLARIFY DEFINITIONS OF ""BED AND BREAKFAST ESTABLISHMENT" AND ""BED AND BREAKFAST INN;" ALSO TO AMEND CHAPTER(S): 20.20, 20.22, 20.24, 20.32, 20.34, 20.36, 20.37, 20.61, AND 20.72 BY CLAIRIFYING THE USE OF BED AND BREAKFAST OPPERATIONS; AND ALSO TO AMEND 20.40 AND 20.64 BY INCLUDING NEW LANGUAGE TO PROVIDE FOR BED AND BREAKFAST OPERATIONS IN THE AGRICULUTURE AND RESORT COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS THE PLANNING COMMISSION ENTERS THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT AND REASONS FOR ACTION, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION: FINDINGS OF FACT AND REASONS FOR ACTION 1. Whatcom County Planning and Development staff has compiled a list of issues with the current zoning code that are causing confusion and difficulty in implementation. Among these items were the regulations regarding bed and breakfast establishments and bed and breakfast inns. 2. The text amendment will clarify development regulations for the public to clearly understand what the standards are for bed and breakfasts. 3. Staff held discussions in which it was determined that bed and breakfast operations should be provided in the Agriculture and Resort Commercial zones. 4. The proposed amendment to the Whatcom County Official Zoning Ordinance was initiated to the docket by Whatcom County Planning and Development Services, and was given file number PLN2009-00002. 5. Notice of the proposed amendment was sent to the Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development (CTED) and other state agencies on January 5, 2009. On January 6, 2008 CTED notified Whatcom County that notice of the proposed amendment had been received and had been forwarded to other interested parties as required. No comments regarding the proposed amendment have been received from CTED, as of March 26, 2009. 6. On February 26, 2009, the Whatcom County State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Official issued a SEPA threshold Determination of Non - Significance (DNS) in regards to the proposed text amendment, a non - project action. The comment period for this determination ended on 216 Marchll, 2009. No comments were received regarding this determination. 7. Notice of the Planning Commission hearing for the proposed text amendment was published in the Bellingham Herald on March 12, 2009. 8. Pursuant to Whatcom County Code (WCC) 20.90.050, as of March 11, 2009, Whatcom County Planning and Development Services has: evaluated the proposed amendment in relationship to the goals, objectives and policies of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan as authorized by the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) - RCW 36.70A; and considered possible environmental impacts that have been identified by the lead agency designated SEPA official through the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) threshold determination process. 9. A Whatcom County Planning Commission public hearing was held on the subject amendment on March 26, 2009. CONCLUSIONS Upon evaluating all of the information presented by Planning Division staff, and upon considering all testimony presented at the public hearing, the Whatcom County Planning Commission has concluded that the proposed amendments are consistent with the goals, policies and objectives of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan. RECOMMENDATION Based upon the above findings of fact, reasons for action, and conclusions, the Whatcom County Planning Commission hereby forwards a recommendation of approval to the Whatcom County Council for the proposed amendments to the Official Whatcom County Zoning Ordinance attached hereto as ATTACHMENT A. WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION John Lesow, Vice Chairperson David Stalheim, Secretary Date Date 217 Commissioners present at the March 26, 2009 meeting when the vote was taken on the subject amendment: Present: John Lesow, Ken Mann, Sean Wilson, John Belisle, John Steensma David Hunter in attendance at 6:55 p.m. Absent: Rabel Burdge, Geoff Menzies, Jean Melious Mann moved to accept the recommendation for approval. Belisle seconded. Roll Call Vote: Ayes - Belisle, Hunter, Lesow, Mann, Steensma, Wilson; Nays - 0; Abstain - 0; Absent - Burdge, Menzies, Melious. The motion carried. ATTACHMENT A Recommended Amendments to WCC Title 20 218 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 2009-230 CLEARANCES Initial Date Date Received in Council Office Agenda Date Assigned to: Originator: 4.28.09 Council Introduction Michelle Stiles S Division Head: 5/12/09 P & D/Council C�CCGEWEDD Dept. Head: David Stalheim i �y APR L 0 2009 Prosecutor: �t �' Royce Buckingham _ 7 - U d H H t'i i C O COUNTY Purchasing/Budget: Brad Bennett I V l I C O U N C I L Executive: Pete Kremen TITLE OF DOCUMENT. Amending the Official Whatcom County Zoning Ordinance, Title 20, for the purposes of clarifying the definitions of day care operations and additional standards throughout the code. ATTACHMENTS: (1) Draft Ordinance (2) Whatcom County Planning Commission Findings of Fact and Reasons for Action (3) Excerpts from Planning Commission Public Hearing Minutes (4) Proposed Amended Text 5 Staff Report SEPA review required? ( x ) Yes ( ) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing? ( ) Yes (x ) NO SEPA review completed? ( x ) Yes ( ) NO Requested Date: S UMMA R Y S TA TEMENT 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.) Adopting amendments to the official Whatcom County Zoning Ordinance, Title 20, chapter 20.97 — Definintions, in order to clarify language that defines "family day care home," "mini -day care center," "mini -day care home," AND "day care center;" also to amend chapter(s): 20.20, 20.22, 20.24, 20.32, 20.34, 20.35, 20.36, 20.37, 20.40, 20.60, 20.62, 20.63, 20.64, 20.65 clarifying the use of day care operations. COMMITTEE ACTION. COUNCIL ACTION: 4/28/2009: Introduced Related County Contract #: Related File Numbers: Ordinance or Resolution Number: 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.us/council. C:\DOCU ME- I \ADM IN )-I \LOCAL S- I \Temp\XPgrpwise\20090415-agenda-bill-day care_I.doc 219 WHATCOM COUNTY GZ PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 3 �` 5280 Northwest Drive Bellingham, WA 98226 9sN`INil G.�o� MEMORANDUM TO: Whatcom County Council Members THROUGH: David Stalheim._� FROM: Wain Harrison, Long Range Planning Supervisor A11 �. Michelle Stiles, Planner ,{,� � DATE: April 15, 2009 I. "� SUBJECT: Day Care David Stalheim Director J.E. "Sam" Ryan Assistant Director Whatcom County Planning and Development Services have begun work on a series of "code scrub" items where is a part of the long range department's work plan. One item on that list is day care operations within title 20. Day care operations have been difficult to regulate, hard for the public to clearly understand and for planners to implement. Staff's proposed amendment will alleviate the difficulties of interpreting and administering the requirements of day care facilities. The proposal clarifies the requirements that are currently located in WCC 20.97.052.1, "child care facilities." Currently, there are three different types of day care facilities listed under the definition in WCC 20.97.052.1, and the terminology in the specific zoning districts is inconsistent with the specific definition. For example, "mini -day care home" is referenced in one zone, while the definition of such a use is in the definition section under "child care facility." Both the staff and the public have found this to be difficult to interpret and challenging to implement. Staffs proposed amendments will alleviate the difficulties of interpreting and administering the requirements of such day care facilities. The proposal reorganizes, clarifies, and expands on the definitions that are currently administered. The proposal creates an independent definition for family day care home, mini -day care center, and day care center that clarifies existing texts. The proposal creates a definition for mini -day care home which permits seven to twelve children being cared for within an occupied dwelling unit. The Whatcom County Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed zoning text amendment on March 26, 2009 where the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval for the proposed zoning text amendment. Office (360) 676-6907 County (360) 380-8110 FAX (360) 738-2525 220 SPONSORED BY: CONSENT PROPOSED BY: PDS INTRODUCTION DATE: APRIL 28, 2009 ORDINANCE # AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE, TITLE 20, FOR THE PURPOSES OF CLARIFYING THE DEFINITIONS OF DAY CARE OPERATIONS AND ADDITIONAL STANDARDS THROUGHOUT THE CODE WHEREAS, Whatcom County Planning and Development Services identified bed and breakfast operations as a "Code Scrub" item as part of the long range work plan. The list of "Code Scrub" items are those that zoning administrative staff have identified with issues needing clarification within the zoning code; and WHEREAS, legal notice requirements have been met; and WHEREAS, on Thursday, March 26, 2009, the Whatcom County Planning Commission received the staff's findings and recommendations, and held a public hearing on the proposed amendment and considered all testimony; and WHEREAS, on Thursday, March 26, 2009, the Whatcom County Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the proposed amendment to the Whatcom County Council; and WHEREAS, the Whatcom County Council has considered the Planning Commission's Findings of Fact and Reasons for Action, Conclusions and Recommendation for the proposed amendment; and WHEREAS, the amendment conforms to the requirements of the Growth Management Act, is consistent with the Goals and Policies of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan, the County -Wide Planning Policies, and has been evaluated for consistency with the interlocal agreements and comprehensive plans of associated cities; and WHEREAS, the County Council has adopted the following Findings of Fact: FINDINGS OF FACT FINDINGS OF FACT AND REASONS FOR ACTION 1. Whatcom County Planning and Development Services staff has compiled a list of issues with the current zoning code that cause confusion and difficulty in implementation. Among these items were the regulations regarding day care facilities. 2. The text amendment will clarify development regulations, making it easier 221 for the public to clearly understand what the standards are for "family day care home," "mini -day care center," "mini -day care home," and "day care center." 3. The proposed amendment to the Whatcom County Official Zoning Ordinance was initiated to the docket by Whatcom County Planning and Development Services, and was given file number PLN2009-00003 by Planning and Development Services Department. 4. Notice of the proposed amendment was sent to the Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development (CTED) and other state agencies on January 5, 2009. On January 6, 2008 CTED notified Whatcom County that notice of the proposed amendment had been received and had been forwarded to other interested parties as required. No comments regarding the proposed amendment have been received from CTED, as of March 26, 2009. 5. On February 26, 2009, the Whatcom County State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Official issued a SEPA threshold Determination of Non - Significance (DNS) in regards to the proposed text amendment, a non - project action. The comment period for this determination ended on March 11, 2009. No comments were received regarding this determination. 6. Notice of the Planning Commission hearing for the proposed text amendment was published in the Bellingham Herald on March 12, 2009. 7. Pursuant to Whatcom County Code (WCC) 20.90.050, as of March 11, 2009, Whatcom County Planning and Development Services has: evaluated the proposed amendment in relationship to the goals, objectives and policies of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan as authorized by the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) - RCW 36.70A; and considered possible environmental impacts that have been identified by the lead agency designated SEPA official through the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) threshold determination process. 8. A Whatcom County Planning Commission public hearing was held on the subject amendment on March 26, 2009. 9. On Thursday, March 26, 2009, the Whatcom County Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the proposed amendment to the Whatcom County Council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Whatcom County Council that: Section 1. The Official Whatcom County Zoning Ordinance, Title 20 is hereby amended as shown on Attachment A. 222 Section 2. Adjudication of invalidity of any of the sections, clauses, or provisions of this ordinance shall not affect or impair the validity of the ordinance as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so declared to be invalid. ADOPTED this day of ATTEST: Dana Brown -Davis, Council Clerk APPROVED as to form: Royce Buckingham, Civil Deputy Prosecutor WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Seth Fleetwood, Chairperson ( ) Approved ( ) Denied Pete Kremen, Executive Date: 223 File # PLN2009-00003 Attachment A Attachment A Chapter 20.97 Definitions I 3/26/09 Page 1 I III �.Wvxmm �i���%i ni••.Qs��i�•i�•i�v •. 20.97.126 Family day care home Means an occupied dwelling unit regularlv -Droviding care during -Dart of the 24-hour da for six or fewer children in the family abode of the person or persons under whose direct care the children are placed. Such care in a family day care home is limited to six or fewer children, including those children living in the home or children of other close relatives cared for in the home. 20.97.241 Mini -day care center Means a structure other than an occupied dwellinguit regularly providing care during part of the 24-hour day for twelve or fewer children. Such care in a mini -day care center is limited to 12 or fewer children, including those children of the faculty or children of other close relatives cared for by the facultv. 20.97.242 Mini-dav care home Means an occupied dwelling unit regularly providing care during part of the 24-hour day for seven to twelve children in the family abode of the person or persons under whose 224 File # PLN2009-00003 Attachment A 3/26/09 Page 2 direct care the children are placed. Such care in a mini -day care home is limited to 12 or fewer children, including those children living in the home or children of other close relatives cared for in the home. 20.97.092 Day care center Means a structure other than an occupied dwelling unit regularly providing care during part of the 24-hour day to thirteen or more children. 225 File # PLN2009-00003 Attachment A 3/26/09 Page 3 Chapter 20.20 Urban Residential District Permitted T see .059 Family day eaFe homes subjeefte the requirements E)f WGG 20.97.180 for hemee eceupatiens. Accessory use .105 Family day care homes subject to the requirements of WCC 20.97.180 for home occupations. Administrative Approval .134 Mini -day care homeseare eenter-s in a family dwellin Conditional Use .154 Retirement and convalescent homes; social and health rehabilitation centers; day care centers; mini -day care centers_, and adult care centers not in a family dwelling; and other health -related services consistent with the purpose of the district. Chapter 20.22 Urban Residential Medium District Peii ,;tte Us .057 Family day ear-e homes subjeet to the r-equir-eme-PAs of AICG 20.97.180 for- hE)—jt:ttv ece-upa4ions. Accessory use .105 Family day care homes subject to the requirements of WCC 20.97.180 for home occpTations. Administrative Approval .133 Mini -day care homes eenlers in a family dwelling Conditional Use .154 Retirement and convalescent homes; social and health rehabilitation centers; day care centers; mini -day care centers; and adult care centers not in a family dwelling; and other health -related services consistent with the purpose of the district.* Chapter 20.24 Urban Residential Mixed Use District Dofmitte Us .057 Family day eafe homes subject to the requirements of WCG 20.97.180 for- hemee 226 File # PLN2009-00003 Attachment A Accessory use 3/26/09 Page 4 .105 Family day care homes subject to the requirements of WCC 20.97.180 for home occupations. Administrative Approval .134 Mini -day care homes centers in a family ,aweli ng Conditional Use .154 Retirement and convalescent homes; social and health rehabilitation centers; day care centers; mini -day care centers; and adult care centers not in a family dwelling; and other health -related services consistent with the purpose of the district. .161 The following uses may be approved within a neighborhood center where the locational criteria (WCC 20.24.161(2)) and site criteria (WCC 20.24.161(3)) are met; the floor area per nonresidential use does not exceed 2,500 square feet; and the developer has conducted at least one neighborhood meeting prior to application for the purpose of hearing neighborhood concerns and suggestions regarding the proposal. (1) Uses. (a) Commercial uses with a neighborhood or specialty nature including, but not limited to, barber and beauty shops, bakeries, drugstores; provided, that food markets may have no more than two gasoline pump islands, hardware stores, restaurants and coffee shops without drive -up service, stationery stores, laundromats, video rental, bookstores, frame shops and other small convenience retail, rental, or repair shops. (b) Professional offices. (c) Adult care centers, mini -day care centers, and day care centers. ehild ere centers (d) Residential units located on the upper floor(s) of buildings containing the uses listed above. Such units will be counted toward minimum densities and maximum percentage of multifamily units, but shall not be counted toward maximum densities. (2) Locational Criteria. Uses must be clustered in a single center which is no larger than two acres, excluding areas used for duplex and multifamily dwellings, and: (a) Fronts on an arterial or collector street; or (b) Is located adjacent to a public square or neighborhood park; and (c) Is no closer than one-half mile from an existing or approved commercial center or other commercial use or zone; 11 227 File # PLN2009-00003 Attachment A 3/26/09 Page 5 (d) Neighborhood centers shall not be developed in areas characterized by residential development at less than one dwelling unit per acre except as part of a mixed residential development.* (3) Site Criteria. (a) Parking shall be located at the rear of the buildings with access from alleys or side streets. On -street parking may be counted toward the parking requirements in Chapter 20.80 WCC. (b) Buildings are located adjacent to the right-of-way or sidewalk, or as close as allowed in WCC 20.80.200, Setback requirements. (c) Commercial development shall occur in nodes; linear strips will be discouraged. (d) Centers should be visible and accessible to pedestrians from the streets and clearly defined through lighting, landscape, landmarks, and/or open space. (e) In the Urban Fringe Subarea, specific wetland systems and sensitive environmental areas shall be preserved and incorporated into the development site design plan consistent with Bellingham city ordinances.* (f) Sidewalks are a minimum of eight feet wide. (g) Street trees are located on the curb side of the sidewalk in accordance with city of Bellingham street tree standards. (h) Individual businesses or establishments must be joined by common walls unless the applicant can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the administrator that unique site circumstances dictate some other form. (i) Storage areas shall be located entirely within the structure and outside trash receptacles shall be enclosed and screened from public view. 0) All lighting shall be designed and installed to prevent the illumination of adjacent properties during business hours; however, security lighting may be permitted during nonbusiness hours if it is designed to prevent the illumination of adjacent properties. (k) In accordance with WCC 20.80.465, Urban Residential -Mixed (UR-MX) District sign regulations, not more than two identification signs, with a maximum of 32 square feet total area for each storefront shall be permitted; provided, that said sign(s) shall not project above any part of the roof line. Signs may extend 24 inches from the wall or to the edge of a permanent canopy or awning of the building to which it is attached. At least one of the signs for an individual business must be readable to pedestrians on the adjacent sidewalk. Said sign(s) shall be harmonious and compatible in appearance with the 228 File # PLN2009-00003 3/26/09 Attachment A Page 6 character of the surrounding area. Signs may only be illuminated by an indirect external source. * (1) Use of shared parking areas is encouraged. The minimum parking requirement shall be 50 percent of the parking requirements in WCC 20.80.580, but shall in no case exceed two-thirds of the requirements in WCC 20.80.580. Chapter 20.32 Residential Rural District Permitted Use eeeupatiens. Accessory use .105 Family day care homes subject to the requirements of WCC 20.97.180 for home occupations. Administrative Approval .133 Mini -day care homes. centers in a family dwelling. Conditional Use .154 Retirement and convalescent homes; social and health rehabilitation centers; day care centers; mini -day care, centers and adult care centers not in a family dwelling; and other health -related services consistent with the purpose of the district.* Chapter 20.34 Rural Residential Island Chapter Permitted Us .057 Family day eare homes subject to the r-equirments of WCC 20.97.180 fef hom-e Accessory use .105 Family day care homes subject to the requirements of WCC 20.97.180 for home occupations. Administrative Approval .133 Mini -day care homes. ^enters in a family dwel i^^ Conditional Use .154 Retirement and convalescent homes; social and health rehabilitation centers; day care centers; mini -day care centers; and adult care centers not in a family dwelling; and other health -related services consistent with the purpose of the district. I 229 File # PLN2009-00003 Attachment A 3/26/09 Page 7 Chapter 20.35 Eliza Island District Pen:nitted Us .059 Family day ear-e homes subject to the r-equir-emen4s of WGG 20.97.180 for- home Accessory use .107 Family day care homes subject to the requirements of WCC 20.97.180 for home occupations. Administrative Approval .131 Mini -day care homes.ce tefs in ^ family , well~� Conditional Use .154 Day care centers; and mini -day care centers not in a family dwel in Chapter 20.36 Rural District Permitted Us .063 Family day care homes subjeet to the requirements of WCC 20.97.180 for- hom Accessory use .108 Family day care homes subject to the requirements of WCC 20.97.180 for home occupations. Administrative Approval .134 Mini -day care homes.ee tern in a family dwell.*..,,. Conditional Use .154 Retirement and convalescent homes; social and health rehabilitation centers; day care centers; mini -day care centers; and adult care centers not in a family dwelling; and other health -related services consistent with the purpose of the district.* Chapter 20.37 Transitional District Permitted Use .056 Family day eafe homes subjeet to the requirements of WCC 20.97. 180 for home Edens. 7 230 File # PLN2009-00003 Attachment A Accessory use 3/26/09 Page 8 .106 Family day care homes subject to the requirements of WCC 20.97.180 for home occupations. Administrative Approval .133 Mini -day care homes.^e„*ers in a family ,a. elh. n Conditional Use .154 Retirement and convalescent homes; social and health rehabilitation centers; day care centers; mini -day care centers; and adult care centers not in a family dwelling; and other health -related services consistent with the purpose of the district.* Chapter 20.40 Agriculture District Do,-mitte Us .057 Family day care homes subject to the requiremevAs of WGG 20.97.180 for hom-e Accessory use .112 Family day care homes subject to the requirements of WCC 20.97.180 for home occupations. Administrative Approval .138 Mini -day care homes.eente.s in a family ,awelh..,,. Chapter 20.60 Neighborhood Commercial District Permitted Use .059 Adult care centers, -mini -day care centers, and day care centers and ehild eaf4eilifies; provided, that a ehild eare f4eility in a family dwelling shall eonfofffl to definition E) fh me ecpat e^, «GG20.97.18o- Accessory use .104 Family day care homes and mini -day care homes; provided that such uses conform to the definition of home occupation, WCC 20.97.180, and further; provided that the single family residence is a legally non -conforming use. 231 File # PLN2009-00003 3/26/09 Attachment A Page 9 Chapter 20.62 General Commercial District Permitted Use .069 Mini -day care centers and day care centers Child ^^r^ f ^rifles- provided, tha4 ear-e faeilifies in a family dwelling shall eenfefm to the definition of heme eeeupatief,, WCC 20.97.180, an fur:64 > , • t provided that--. f, ` Child care f ^;' that such uses require a conditional use permit if located within airport overlay zone 2 or 3 as shown in Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan Appendix H. Accessory use .104 Family day care homes and mini -day care homes; provided, that such uses conform to the definition of home occupation, WCC 20.97.180, and further; provided that such uses require a conditional use permit if located within airport overlay zone 2 or 3 as shown in Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan Appendix H. Chapter 20.63 Tourist Commercial District Permitted Uses .065 Mini -day care centers and day care centers.Ch;'a eare facilities; pr-ovide,a that eare f4eilifies in a family dwelling shall conform to the definition of home oeeupatie�H-, WGG n.n�- Accessory use .104 Family day care homes and mini -day care homes; provided that such uses conform to the definition of home occupation, WCC 20.97.180, and further; provided that the single family residence is a legally non -conforming use. Chapter 20.64 Resort Commercial District Permitted Use .069 Mini -day care centers and day care centers. Childear-e f ^;';ties• provided, that ear-e faeilities in a family dwelling shall eonfenn to the definition of home ace-upatieff,- Accessory use .110 Family day care homes and mini -day care homes; provided that such uses conform to the definition of home occupation, WCC 20.97.180. Conditional Use .164 Retirement and convalescent homes; social and health rehabilitation centers; childr- and adult care centers in a building not used as a residence; and other health - related services consistent with the purpose of the district. W 232 File # PLN2009-00003 Attachment A 3/26/09 Page 10 Chapter 20.65 Gateway Industrial District Permitted Uses .056 The following uses; provided, that maximum allowable floor area of buildings on parcels located beyond one -quarter mile of a freeway interchange shall not exceed 6,000 square feet per individual use or an aggregate of 30,000 square feet within a single development: (1) Barber and beauty shops. (2) Bakery shops. (3) Drug stores, hardware stores, food markets and other convenience retail shops. (4) Adult care centers, mini -day care centers or day care centers. or child care center (5) Recreational vehicle parks and associated sales and service facilities. (6) Churches. (7) Service stations. (8) Laundry and dry cleaning establishments. (9) Eating and drinking establishments. (10) Commercial storage of personal recreational boats and trailers, recreational vehicles and accompanying mini -storage. Accessory Use .107 Chid ear Mini -day care centers and day care centers; f�ties operated by, maintained by or funded by business in the district for the purpose serving the child care needs of employees whose place of employment lies within this zone district_; , Chapter 20.66 Light Impact Industrial District Accessory Use .107 Child ^are fi ^iliti sMini-day care centers and day care centers; operated by, maintained by or funded by business in the district for the purpose serving the child care needs of employees whose place of employment lies within this zone district; , Chapter 20.67 General Manufacturing District Accessory Use .107 Qii Mini -day care centers, and day care centers; fz4eilitiesoperated by, maintained by or funded by business in the district for the purpose serving the child care needs of employees whose place of employment lies within this zone district_; , 10 233 File # PLN2009-00003 Attachment A 3/26/09 Page 11 Chapter 20.68 Heavy Impact Industrial District Accessory Use 107 !''hill eare f eilitie Mini -day care centers, and day care centers; operated by, maintained by or funded by business in the district for the purpose serving the child care needs of employees whose place of employment lies within this zone district; , Chapter 20.70 Airport Operations District Accessory Uses .106 r'h4tiMini-da_y care centers, and day care centers; f eilities operated by, maintained by or funded by business in the district for the purpose serving the child care needs of employees whose place of employment lies within this zone district_;—previded-; 11 234 File # PLN2009-00003 4/15/2009 Zoning Text Amendments Page 1 WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF REPORT I. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL AND RECOMMENDATION File # PLN2009-00003 File Name: Day Care Applicant: Whatcom County Planning and Development Services Requested Action: The proposal is to amend the Whatcom County Zoning Code (WCC); More specifically, to delete, reorganize and incorporate the requirements of WCC 20.97.052.1, "child care facilities" into the definition section. There are four proposed definitions for day care facilities that replace the 20.97.052.1; each definition is independent of the other and there is no longer the need to have one definition that contains all day care types; more specifically, to include language that defines "family day care home," "mini -day care center," "mini -day care home," and "day care center," incorporating the criteria previously located in 20.97.052.1, creating a definition specifically for these types of facilities; amend WCC chapter(s): 20.20, 20.221 20.24, 20.32, 20.34, 20.35, 20.36, 20.37, 20.40, 20.60, 20.62, 20.63, 20.64, 20.65 as proposed above into already existing chapters of Whatcom County Zoning Code. Reason for Request: Whatcom County Planning and Development Services Department staff developed a list of items within the Title 20, Whatcom County Zoning Code which caused confusion in interpretation and implementation. By amending the above specified sections, staff is addressing the conflicting issues and improving implementation and efficiency of administering the code. Staff's proposed amendment will alleviate the difficulties of interpreting and administering the requirements of day care facilities. The proposal clarifies the requirements that are currently located in WCC 20.97.052.1, "child care facilities." Currently, there are three different types of day care facilities listed under the definition in WCC 20.97.052.1, and the terminology in the specific zoning districts is inconsistent with the specific definition. For example, "mini -day care home" is 235 File # PLN2009-00003 4/15/2009 Zoning Text Amendments Page 2 referenced in one zone, while the definition of such a use is in the definition section under "child care facility." Both the staff and the public have found this to be difficult to interpret and challenging to implement. Staffs proposed amendments will alleviate the difficulties of interpreting and administering the requirements of such day care facilities. The proposal reorganizes, clarifies, and expands on the definitions that are currently administered. The proposal creates an independent definition for family day care home, mini -day care center, and day care center that clarifies existing texts. The proposal creates a definition for mini - day care home which permits seven to twelve children being cared for within an occupied dwelling unit. In this amendment proposal, there are several proposed changes to the individual zone districts. Staffs proposal would change any family day care home from a permitted use to an accessory use. In many zones, staff proposes to remove the language, "mini -day care centers in the family dwelling" and insert "mini -day care homes." This specific clarification would eliminate unnecessary verbiage and confusion. In the Neighborhood Commercial, General Commercial, Tourist Commercial, and Resort Commercial districts staff proposes some necessary clarification and uniformity. Staff proposes to outright permit mini -day care centers and day care centers. The proposal would permit family day care homes and mini -day care homes as an accessory use. In the Gateway Industrial, Light Impact Industrial, General Manufacturing, Heavy Impact Industrial, and the Airport Operations districts, staff is proposing to only permit mini -day care centers and day care centers as an accessory use. Staffs goal with these proposed amendments is to clarify the requirements and create consistency in the definitions, as well as the zone districts for day care facilities when located inside a dwelling unit or structure. The proposal would allow for the public working on a project to clearly differentiate and identify which type of day care facility is permitted in which zone district and be able to find a clear definition of that use in the definition section of the code. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the Whatcom County Council for the proposed amendments to the Whatcom County Zoning Code. II. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The purpose of the proposed amendment is to provide better organization and more clarity to the existing regulations and standards. In preparing the proposed amendments Long Range Planning staff discussed preliminary proposals with Current Planning staff and Building Services staff. Through these discussions staff identified several issues with the child care facilities requirements. After discussion, it was proposed that these issues could be alleviated through an amendment; this amendment would significantly increase the ease of interpreting the requirements of 236 File # PLN2009-00003 4/15/2009 Zoning Text Amendments Page 3 this code and clearly outline for the public what the requirements are for each zone. The proposed changes address issues of confusion as identified by staff are listed below: • Eliminate the reference to WCC 20.97.052.1 "child care facilities" and the definitions that are currently located in this section • Create WCC 20.97.126 "family day care home" • Create WCC 20.97.241 "mini -day care center" • Create WCC 20.97.242 "mini -day care home" • Create WCC 20.97.092 "day care center" • Amend references to day care facilities in the following zones of WCC 20.20, 20.22, 20.24, 20.32, 20.34, 20.35, 20.36, 20.37, 20.40, 20.60, 20.62, 20.63, 20.64, and 20.65 The proposal clarifies the requirements that are currently located in WCC 20.97.052.1 "child care facilities." Currently, there are three definitions of different types of day care facilities listed under the definition in WCC 20.97.052.1, as previously noted; the specific zones reference the specific definition of one use and not always all three listed child care facilities. Both the staff and the public have found this to be difficult to interpret and challenging to implement. Staff is proposing several changes in wording to the existing definitions. These changes do not affect the meaning or intent of the original language, but are simply being proposed to make the meaning and intent clearer. Staff's proposed amendments will alleviate the difficulties of interpreting and administering the requirements under the definition of day care facilities. After much deliberation with staff, the proposal reorganizes, clarifies, and expands on the definitions that are currently administered. The proposal creates an independent definition for family day care home, rnini-day care center, and day care center that clarifies existing texts. In addition to these three definitions, the proposal creates a definition for mini -day care home which permits seven to twelve children being cared for within an occupied dwelling unit. Staff's proposal for 20.97.126, "family day care home," 20.97.241, "mini -day care center" and 20.97.092, "day care center" will keep the same standards, but provide more clarity in the definitions. The proposal for 20.97.242, "mini -day care home" will alleviate inconsistent and cumbersome references to mini -day care centers located in a family dwelling, which were referenced in several of the zone districts. In this amendment staff proposes several changes to the individual zone chapters. Staff's proposal would change any family day care home from a permitted use to an accessory use. Staff has indicated that the home is the primary permitted use in these districts and the mini -day care home and family day care home is accessory to the dwelling unit. This will create predictability and uniformity in the code. In many zones, staff proposes to remove the language, "mini -day care centers in the family dwelling" and insert the new definition of mini -day care homes. This would eliminate unnecessary verbiage and confusion. In the Neighborhood Commercial, General Commercial, Tourist Commercial, and Resort Commercial districts staff proposes some necessary clarification and uniformity; in these zones staff proposes to primarily permit mini -day care centers and day care centers. The proposal would permit family 237 File # PLN2009-00003 4/15/2009 Zoning Text Amendments Page 4 day care homes and mini -day care homes as an accessory use, creating consistency between the zone districts. In the Gateway Industrial, Light Impact Industrial, General Manufacturing, Heavy Impact Industrial, and the Airport Operations districts, staff is proposing to only permit mini -day care centers and day care centers as an accessory use. In most of these zones dwelling units are not permitted, so having day care homes (conducted in a primary residence) is inconsistent with the intended uses within the zones. Staff proposes that day care centers are more appropriate for these districts. 1. ANALYSIS OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT Pursuant to Whatcom County Code 20.90.050, Whatcom County Planning and Development Services staff is required to: 1) Evaluate the proposed amendment in relationship to the goals, objectives and policies of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan as authorized by the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) - RCW 36.70A; 2) Address consistency with interlocal planning agreements between the County and associated cities; 3) Consider whether the proposed amendment is consistent with any associated city's comprehensive plan; and 4) Consider possible environmental impacts that have been identified by the lead agency designated SEPA official through the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) threshold determination process. What follows are the relevant sections from applicable code and related planning documents with staff discussion noted below each section. Growth Management Act The proposed amendment has been developed in accordance with Growth Management Act (GMA) Planning Goals of RCW 36.70A.020 as listed and discussed below: GMA Goal 7: Permits. Applications for both state and local government permits should be processed in a timely and fair manner to ensure predictability. Discussion: When property owners or applicants are in the planning stages of developing day care operation they look to the zoning code for information about what types of permitting requirements there are for the proposed use in any specific zone. The proposed amendment clarifies the existing definitions and eliminates confusing language. Easily accessible information, early in the project permitting stage is a vital component to project success; it also increases the likelihood of project compliance with applicable regulations, and may add to the speed in which a permit application can be processed; in addition it may also provide a more accurate expectation by the applicant as to the length of time a permit application will require for issuance, thereby ensuring a greater sense of predictability in the permit application/issuance process. 238 File # PLN2009-00003 4/15/2009 Zoning Text Amendments Page 5 GMA Goal 5: Economic Development. Encourage economic development throughout the state that is consistent with adopted comprehensive plans, promote economic opportunity for all citizens of this stat, especially for unemployed and for disadvantaged persons, promote the retention and expansion of existing businesses, recognize regional differences impacting economic development opportunities and encourage growth in areas experiencing insufficient economic growth, all within the capacities of the state's natural resources, public services, and public facilities. Discussion: Operating a day care can provide a significant source of income for those who might not otherwise have the ability or opportunity to travel to and from a job, or for those who have limited means of earning a living due to disability. Amending the zoning code to better provide for day care operations in Whatcom County is consistent with the goals of the state to encourage economic growth and promote economic opportunity for all citizens of the state; for some, operating a day care in the home could be a way to afford the costs of maintaining a residence, especially during economically challenging times. Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan The proposed amendment has been developed in accordance with the following Goals and Policies of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan. Goal 7D: Consistent with other goals of the county, strive for balanced, clear, and predictable overall policies, practices and regulations which do not unnecessarily or inadvertently prevent, confuse, delay or create costly hurdles restricting effective and desirable economic development. Discussion: The proposed amendment fulfills the above Whatcom County Comprehensive goal by clarifying the very confusing language that currently defines day care operations. The result of this proposal creates greater predictability, and streamlines the permitting process. By creating a more efficient code, the ability for one to open a day care in the home is more appealing and thus less restrictive and more appealing, which in turn can provide anther source of income for our community members. County -Wide Planning Policies The proposed amendment has been developed in accordance with the Whatcom County County -Wide Planning Policies (CWPP) as listed and discussed below. Policy A — Citizen Involvement 4. Citizen comments and viewpoints shall be incorporated into the decision- 239 File # PLN2009-00003 4/15/2009 Zoning Text Amendments Page 6 making process in development of draft plans and regulations. Consideration of citizen comments shall be evident in the decision -making process. Discussion: It is consistent with the County -Wide Policies for local governments to assess the needs of the community and to respond to citizen input. Staff has received numerous comments from the public about how the provisions of the code relating to day care operations are confusing and difficult to understand, often requiring extra time to clarify and interpret by staff. Whatcom County Planning Department staff has listened to the public input, and has taken steps to transform existing code into a better working document through the amendment process. Policy I — Economic Development and Employment 8. Economic development should be encouraged that: a) does not adversely impact the environment; b) is consistent with community values stated in local comprehensive plans; c) encourages development that provides jobs to county residents; d) addresses unemployment problems in the county and seeks innovative techniques to attract different industries for a more diversified economic base; e) promotes reinvestment in the local economy, and f) supports retention and expansion of existing businesses. Discussion: The proposed amendment includes new provisions that allow day careoperations to be more accessible to the community members. Having the option to create a day care is important because of day care operations are a means of income for property owners. Day care operations that are conducted in the home are a creative and innovative strategy to fortify the income of homeowners. Clarifying existing language that provide for such use, will encourage development that provides residents with income opportunities close to home and potentially caring for family members at the same time. Environmental Review Pursuant to the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) rules, proposed agency actions must be evaluated to determine whether probable significant adverse environmental impacts are likely to occur as a result of implementation. On February 26, 2009, the SEPA Official issued a threshold Determination of Non -Significance (DNS) in regards to the proposed text amendment, a non -project action. Consistency with Interlocal Agreements & Comprehensive Plans of Cities The proposed amendment applies to land that is within city urban growth areas, therefore, pursuant to the provisions of Whatcom County Code, Chapter 20.90.051 (3) (a) (4) the amendment has been developed in accordance with adopted interlocal agreements of the associated cities, and has been evaluated for consistency with their respective comprehensive plans. 240 File # PLN2009-00003 Zonind Text Amendments 4/15/2009 Paae 7 Discussion: Staff has reviewed the interlocal agreements of cities likely to be affected by the proposed amendment if adopted. Staff has noted no apparent inconsistencies with the interlocal agreements with cities or their respective comprehensive plans. IV. FINDINGS OF FACT AND REASONS FOR ACTION 1. Whatcom County Planning and Development Services staff has compiled a list of issues with the current zoning code that cause confusion and difficulty in implementation. Among these items were the regulations regarding day care facilities. 2. The text amendment will clarify development regulations, making it easier for the public to clearly understand what the standards are for "family day care home," "mini -day care center," "mini -day care home," and "day care center." 3. The proposed amendment to the Whatcom County Official Zoning Ordinance was initiated to the docket by Whatcom County Planning and Development Services, and was given File number PLN2009-00003 by Planning and Development Services Department. 4. Notice of the proposed amendment was sent to the Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development (CTED) and other state agencies on January 5, 2009. On January 6, 2008 CTED notified Whatcom County that notice of the proposed amendment had been received and had been forwarded to other interested parties as required. No comments regarding the proposed amendment have been received From CTED, to date. 5. On February 26, 2009, the Whatcom County State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Official issued a SEPA threshold Determination of Non -Significance (DNS) in regards to the proposed text amendment, a non -project action. The comment period for this determination ended on March 11, 2009. No comments were received regarding this determination. 6. Notice of the Planning Commission hearing for the proposed text amendment was published in the Bellingham Herald on March 12, 2009. 7. Pursuant to Whatcom County Code (WCC) 20.90.050, as of March 11, 2009, Whatcom County Planning and Development Services has: evaluated the proposed amendment in relationship to the goals, objectives and policies of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan as authorized by the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) - RCW 36.70A; and considered possible environmental impacts that have been identified by the lead agency designated SEPA official through the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) threshold determination process. 241 File # PLN2009-00003 Zoninq Text Amendments 4/15/2009 Page 8 8. A Whatcom County Planning Commission public hearing was held on the subject amendment on March 26, 2009. V. PROPOSED CONCLUSION Staff has concluded that the proposed amendment is consistent with all applicable state and local law, and that the proposed amendment, if adopted, will be in the best interest of the public. V. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the Whatcom County Council for the proposed zoning text amendment that is attached as Attachment A. ATTACHMENTS • Attachment A - Preliminary Draft of Amended Text as Proposed 242 EXCERPTS FROM RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION March 26, 2009 Regular Meeting - Public Hearing Call To Order: The meeting was called to order, by Whatcom County Planning Commission Vice -Chair, John Lesow, in the Northwest Annex Conference Room at 6:40 p.m. Roll Call: Present: John Lesow, Ken Mann, Sean Wilson, John Belisle, John Steensma David Hunter in attendance at 6:55 p.m. Absent: Rabel Burdge, Geoff Menzies, Jean Melious Staff Present: David Stalheim, Michelle Stiles, Warner Webb, Becky Boxx File #PLN2009-00003 - A proposal is to amend, for clarification and implementation purposes, the definitions of daycare facilities and additional standards within Whatcom County's zoning code, Title 20. Michelle Stiles presented the staff report. The first step in updating the language for daycares was eliminating the reference to 20.97.052.1, "child care facilities" in the definition section. We are going to relocate the definitions that are currently located in this section. The proposal creates an independent definition for family day care homes, mini day care center and day care center that clarifies existing text standards. In addition to these three definitions the proposal creates a definition for mini day care homes. The proposal, for 20.97.242, mini day care home, will alleviate the inconsistent, cumbersome references to mini day centers, located in the family dwelling, which are referenced in several of the zoning districts. Next we propose to amend references to day care facilities. We propose to change family day care home from a permitted use to an accessory use where it was listed as permitted. We are doing this because the home is a primary permitted use in these districts and the mini day care home and the family day care home is accessory to the dwelling unit. In the Commercial districts and Tourist districts we are going to primarily permit mini day care centers and day care centers. This is not a change, it was just previously referenced as a day care facility. The proposal would permit family day care homes and mini day care homes as an accessory use consistent with the change as previously discussed, in the residential districts. In the Industrial zones, Manufacturing and Airport Operation districts staff is proposing to only permit mini day care centers and day care centers as an accessory use. In most of these zones dwelling units are not permitted. Having day care homes conducted in the primary is inconsistent with the intended use of the zone. 243 EXCERPTS FROM RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION March 26, 2009 Regular Meeting - Public Hearing Staff proposes that the day care centers are more appropriate for these districts. Hunter: I have found that you get complaints from neighbors, when somebody in a residential environment, decides to run a little day care. The primary reason for the complaint is traffic. I have always assumed that in the City of Bellingham they had a conditional use permit. That seemed logical to me. It seems that the County has decided that either it creates an insufficient burden on the neighbors to not require any analysis on an individual basis or that the benefit of it would somehow overcome any concerns you have about it. Did you think about that issue at all? Stiles: Yes. In the residential areas family daycare homes are the only ones that are not accessory uses. Conditional use permits are required for the mini day care centers and day care centers. Stalheim: The RCW's prohibit us from treating it as anything other than a residence if they have six or fewer children. Belisle: Does anyone check these homes to make sure they are suitable? Stalheim: The Health Department regulates and I believe the larger ones are regulated by the State Depart of Health. Belisle: How many of these little day cares are out there? Stalheim: The smaller ones are purposely set up to be under the zoning radar screen. Webb: The larger ones do have to meet certain requirements. They usually start out as a small day care, do that for a while and work up to the larger center. That's when more of the inspections come into play. The hearing was opened to the public. There was no public testimony. Work Session Mann moved to accept the recommendation for approval. Wilson seconded. Roll Call Vote: Ayes - Belisle, Hunter, Lesow, Mann, Steensma, Wilson; Nays - 0; Abstain - 0; Absent - Burdge, Menzies, Melious. The motion carried. 244 WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FINDINGS OF FACT AND REASONS FOR ACTION, CONCLUSIONS, & RECOMMENDATION TO AMEND TO THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE, TITLE 20, CHAPTER 20.97 - DEFININTIONS, IN ORDER TO CLARIFY LANGUAGE THAT DEFINES "FAMILY DAY CARE HOME," -MINI-DAY CARE CENTER," -MINI-DAY CARE HOME," AND "DAY CARE CENTER;" ALSO TO AMEND CHAPTER(S): 20.20, 20.22, 20.24, 20.32, 20.34, 20.35, 20.36, 20.37, 20.40, 20.60, 20.62, 20.63, 20.64, 20.65 CLARIFYING THE USE OF DAY CARE OPPERATIONS. THE PLANNING COMMISSION ENTERS THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT AND REASONS FOR ACTION, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION: FINDINGS OF FACT AND REASONS FOR ACTION 1. Whatcom County Planning and Development Services staff has compiled a list of issues with the current zoning code that cause confusion and difficulty in implementation. Among these items were the regulations regarding day care facilities. 2. The text amendment will clarify development regulations, making it easier for the public to clearly understand what the standards are for "family day care home," "mini -day care center," "mini -day care home," and "day care center." 3. The proposed amendment to the Whatcom County Official Zoning Ordinance was initiated to the docket by Whatcom County Planning and Development Services, and was given file number PLN2009-00003 by Planning and Development Services Department. 4. Notice of the proposed amendment was sent to the Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development (cTED) and other state agencies on January 5, 2009. On January 6, 2008 CTED notified Whatcom County that notice of the proposed amendment had been received and had been forwarded to other interested parties as required. No comments regarding the proposed amendment have been received from CTED as of March 26, 2009. 5. On February 26, 2009, the Whatcom County State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Official issued a SEPA threshold Determination of Non - Significance (DNS) in regards to the proposed text amendment, a non - project action. The comment period for this determination ended on March 11, 2009. No comments were received regarding this determination. 6. Notice of the Planning Commission hearing for the proposed text 245 amendment was published in the Bellingham Herald on March 12, 2009. Pursuant to Whatcom County Code (WCC) 20.90.050, as of March 11, 2009, Whatcom County Planning and Development Services has: evaluated the proposed amendment in relationship to the goals, objectives and policies of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan as authorized by the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) - RCW 36.70A; and considered possible environmental impacts that have been identified by the lead agency designated SEPA official through the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) threshold determination process. S. A Whatcom County Planning Commission public hearing was held on the subject amendment on March 26, 2009. CONCLUSIONS Upon evaluating all of the information presented by Planning Division staff, and upon considering all testimony presented at the public hearing, the Whatcom County Planning Commission has concluded that the proposed amendments are consistent with the goals, policies and objectives of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan. RECOMMENDATION Based upon the above findings of fact, reasons for action, and conclusions, the Whatcom County Planning Commission hereby forwards a recommendation of approval to the Whatcom County Council for the proposed amendments to the Official Whatcom County Zoning Ordinance attached hereto as ATTACHMENT A. WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION John Lesow, Vice Chairperson David Stalheim, Secretary Date Commissioners present at the March 26, 2009 meeting when the vote was taken on the subject amendment: 246 Present: John Lesow, Ken Mann Sean Wilson John Belisle John Steensma avid Hunter in _Deleted: ¶ attendance at 6:55 p.m. Absent: Rabel Burdge, Geoff Menzies, Jean Melious Mann moved to accept the recommendation for approval. Wilson seconded. Roll Call Vote: Ayes - Belisle, Hunter, Lesow, Mann, Steensma, Wilson; Nays - 0; Abstain - 0; Absent - Burdge, Menzies, Melious. The motion carried. ATTACHMENT A Recommended Amendments to WCC Title 20 247 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 2009-248 CLEARANCES Initial Date Date Received in Council Office Agenda Date Assigned to: Michael Bobbink originator Mh 05-06-09 5/12/09 P&D/Council Division Head: Dept. Head: Prosecutor: Purchasin /Bud et: Executive: TITLE OF DOCUMENT: Mike Owens, Planned Unit,PUD2005-0007, and Preliminary Long Subdivision, LSS2005-0012, for "Lincoln Road Plat" ATTACHMENTS. Hearing Examiner file: Mike Owens, PUD2005-0007 and LSS2005- 0012,includingExhibits and Recommendation to County Council, dated May 6, 2009 SEPA review required? ( ) Yes ( ) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing? ( ) Yes ( ) NO SEPA review completed? ( ) Yes ( ) NO Requested Date: SUMMARYSTATEMENT 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.) The Whatcom County Hearing Examiner hereby recommends the Whatcom County Council approve the Planned Unit Development and Preliminary Long Subdivision, proposed by Mike Owens, for the proposal to be known as "Lincoln Road Plat, " subject to conditions. COMMITTEE ACTION: COUNCIL ACTION. Related County Contract #: Related File Numbers: Ordinance or Resolution Number: Please Note: Once adopted and signed, ordinances and resolutions are available for viewing and printing on the Coun 's website at: www. co. whatcom. wa. us/council. WHATCOM COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER RE: Planned Unit Development ) PUD2005-0007 Preliminary Long Subdivision ) LSS2005-0012 Application for ) FINDINGS OF FACT, Mike Owens ) CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, "Lincoln Road Plat" ) AND RECOMMENDATION TO WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL SUMMARY OF APPLICATION AND RECOMMENDATION Application: The Applicant seeks Preliminary Long Subdivision and Planned Unit Development Approval for the proposed creation of 22 single-family residential lots and one reserve tract on a 19.73-acre parcel located on Lincoln Road, approximately 660 feet west of Blaine Road, Blaine, Washington. The Technical Review Committee of Whatcom County Planning and Development Services has recommended approval of the proposed subdivision and PUD, subject to conditions. Recommendation: The Whatcom County Hearing Examiner recommends the Whatcom County Council grant Preliminary Long Subdivision and Planned Unit Development Approval to the proposed 22-lot development, to be called "Lincoln Road Plat," subject to conditions. FINDINGS OF FACT INTRODUCTION The following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law are based upon consideration of the exhibits admitted and evidence presented at the public hearing. I. Applicant: Mike Owens Agent: Darcy Jones, Jones Engineers Inc. Site Location/Address: The subject property is located on the south side of Lincoln Road, approximately 660 feet west of Blaine Road, Blaine, WA 1 249 Legal Description: Located within a portion of the NW'/4 of the NE'/4 of Sec19, T40N, R1E, W.M. Assessor's Parcel No. 400119 436463 Zoning: Urban Residential (UR4) Comprehensive Plan: Birch Bay -Short Term Urban Growth Area (UGA) Subarea: Birch Bay -Blaine Number of Lots: 22 single-family lots and one reserve tract Reserve Area: 13.5-acres Total acreage 19.73-acres Roads: Public Water Supply: Birch Bay Water and Sewer District Sewage Disposal: Birch Bay Water and Sewer District Fire Protection: Whatcom County Fire District No. 21 Law Enforcement: Whatcom County Sheriff's Office Public Schools: Blaine School District No. 503 Topography The site is described as generally flat with gentle slopes of 0-3% with a maximum slope of 5%. Soils are described as Edmonds-Woodlyn (slopes 0-2%) and Laxton Loam (slopes 0-3%) as identified in the Soil Survey of Whatcom County Area, Washington. The soil study does classify some areas of the site as prime farmland. Vegetation: Vegetation consists of forested areas with a mixture of coniferous and deciduous trees, shrubs, grass and wet soil plants. Adjacent Land Use: North: Single-family and power vaults South: Large single-family home sites East: Large single-family home sites West: Vacant residential land Utility Easements: Necessary utility easements will be established prior to recording the Final Plat. 2 250 Variances: No Variances requested. SEPA Review: Revised Mitigated Determination of Non -significance, issued May 7, 2008 Authorizing Ordinances: 1) Revised Code of Washington Chapter 58.17 2) Whatcom County Code Title 20, Official Whatcom County Zoning Ordinance 3) Whatcom County Code Title 21, Subdivision Regulations 4) State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). Washington Administrative Code Chapter 197-11 Whatcom County Environmental Policy Administration Chapter 16.08 5) Whatcom County Code Chapter 12.08, Development Standards 6) Whatcom County Code Chapter 16.16, Critical Areas Legal Notices: Posted — April 8, 2009 Mailed — April 2, 2009 Published — September 7, 2005, April 5, 2006, and April 9, 2009 Hearin: April 16, 2008 and April 15, 2009 Parties of Record: Mike Owens 1536 Willie Lake Road Ferndale, WA 98248 Darcy Jones Jones Engineers Inc. 4164 Meridian Street, Suite 200 Bellingham, WA 98226 Jon Sitkin 1500 Railroad Avenue Bellingham, WA 98225 Shawn Alexander PO Box 359 Olga, WA 98279 Mary White Division of Engineering Wayne Fitch and Amy Keenan Planning and Development Services 3 251 Exhibits: 1 Land Use Application (binder) 2 Determination of Completeness, dated August 30, 2005 2-1 Application Processing Track 2-2 Mailing Labels 2-3 Fire Concurrency Letter, dated August 29, 2005 2-4 Email Correspondence with staff 3 Affidavits of Publication, dated September 7, 2005 and April 5, 2006 4 Revised MDNS, dated May 7, 2008 5 Letter dated April 28, 2008, from Jon Sitkin to Martin Blackman re: Revised SEPA DNS, SEPA2006-00168 6 Letter dated February 26, 2009 from North Whatcom Fire and Rescue to Tyler Schroeder re: Letter Conditionally Confirming Concurrency 7 Staff Report, dated April 4, 2008 8 Memo, dated March 28, 2006, with Revised Application Notice and Mailing attached, from Robert Mulrooney to Technical Review Committee 9 Addendum to Staff Report, dated April 16, 2008, re: Health Conditions 10 Agency Comments 11 Public Comment 12 Staff Email Correspondences 13 Certificate of Mailing, dated April 2, 2009, with attached list of neighboring property owners notified of hearing 14 Legal Notice, dated April 9, 2009 15 Posting Notice, dated April 8, 2009 16 Revised Site Plan 4 252 17 Aerial Map 18 Vicinity Map 19 Zoning Map 20 Memorandum, dated April 2009, from Amy Keenan to Michael Bobbink re: Lincoln Road Subdivision 21 Letter, dated April 9, 2009, from Shawn Alexander re: Lincoln Road PUD and LSS, by Mike Owens 22 Letter, dated April 15, 2009, from Birch Bay Water and Sewer District, re: Water Availability II. The Applicant is requesting Preliminary Long Subdivision and Planned Unit Development Approval for the proposed creation of 22 single-family residential lots and one reserve tract on a 19.73-acre parcel, located on south Lincoln Road, approximately 660-feet west of Blaine Road, Blaine, Washington. Sewer and water will be supplied to the proposed subdivision by the Birch Bay Water and Sewer District, under the terms set forth in a letter, dated April 15, 2009, from the Water District to the Applicant. Whatcom County Fire District No. 21 withdrew an Appeal of the SEPA Threshold Determination based on an agreement between the Fire District and the Applicant for Planned Unit Development Approval. This agreement includes a request that a Condition of Approval of the Planned Unit Development require the Applicant to comply with the agreement. The Hearing Examiner should recommend a Condition of Approval to the Whatcom County Council requiring the Applicant to comply with the agreement between the Applicant and Fire District No. 21, as set forth in Exhibit No. 6 of the Hearing Examiner file. IV. Whatcom County Planning and Development Services gave Notice of Application regarding the initial subdivision application, which was published on September 7, 2005. There were public comments to the Planning Department following that notice. On April 5, 2006, published a Notice of a Revised Application regarding this preliminary long subdivision. Public comments were also received in response to this notice. The public comments are in the file as Exhibit No. 11. 5 253 No members of the public or of interested community organizations testified at the hearing on this matter. The Hearing Examiner believes that the Technical Committee appropriately addressed all issues raised by members of the public, and that their failure to attend the hearing is evidence that they are satisfied with the amended proposed development which would create only 22-lots instead of the original request for 45-single-family lots. The only comments at the public hearing were from attorneys. Mr. Alexander represented a neighboring property owner who had concerns about impacts along the border between his property and the development. However, the record indicates that all building lots are over 1,000-feet from this property owner's property and the Attorney indicated that, because of this distance, his client would have no concerns. Mr. Sitkin appeared at the hearing on behalf of Whatcom County Fire District No. 21, and indicated that the Fire District and the Applicant had entered into a written agreement and that the SEPA Appeal had been withdrawn. IV. The Technical Review Committee of Whatcom County Planning and Development Services has recommended approval of this proposal in a Staff Report, Exhibit #7 in the Hearing Examiner file, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. The Applicant has indicated that the Factual Findings set forth in the Staff Report are accurate. The Applicant has indicated no objection to any of the Conditions of Approval recommended by Staff. The Findings of Fact set forth in the Staff Report are supported by the record as a whole and are hereby adopted by the Hearing Examiner as Findings of Fact herein. kv Any Conclusion of Law which is deemed a Finding of Fact is hereby adopted as such. Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact, now are entered the following CONCLUSIONS OF LAW I. Subject to the Conditions of Approval recommended by the Hearing Examiner, the proposed Preliminary Long Subdivision and Planned Unit Development will be consistent with the requirements of RCW 58.17, the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act, the requirements of Chapter 12.08 of the Whatcom County Code, Development Standards, the requirements of Chapter 16.16 of the Whatcom County Code, Critical Areas, the applicable requirements of WCC Title 20, the Official Whatcom County Zoning Ordinance, and the applicable requirements of WCC Title 21, the Subdivision Regulations. 254 II. The Technical Review Committee of Whatcom County Planning and Development Services has indicated in the attached Staff Report the Technical Committee's conclusions in regard to the proposed Long Subdivision and Planned Unit Development's conformance with both the requirements of State and local law, as indicated above. The Technical Review Committee has concluded, as does the Hearing Examiner, that the proposal does meet these requirements. The conclusions set forth in the Staff Report by the Technical Committee are adopted as Conclusions of Law by the Hearing Examiner. Based on the above Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the Whatcom County Council should granted approval to the proposed Preliminary Long Subdivision and Planned Unit Development, subject to conditions. Any Finding of Fact deemed to be a Conclusion of Law is hereby adopted as such. Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, now is entered the following RECOMMENDATION The Whatcom County Hearing Examiner recommends that the Whatcom County Council grant Preliminary Long Subdivision andPlanned Unit Development Approvalfor theproposed 22 single-family residential lot development, with one reserve tract, on a 19.73-acre parcel located on the south side of Lincoln Road, approximately 660 feet west of Blaine Road, Blaine, Washington, Assessor's Parcel No. 400119 436463, subject to the following conditions: 1) The use and location on the site shall not be amended or changed in any way without further approval of the Whatcom County Hearing Examiner. 2) The Applicant shall comply with all of the conditions of the Whatcom County Division of Engineering, as outlined in the memorandum, dated November 16, 2006, unless modified by the Division of Engineering or appealed to the appropriate agency. 3) The Applicant shall comply with the conditions of the Whatcom County Deputy Fire Marshal, as outlined in the memorandum, dated April 8, 2008, unless modified by the Deputy Fire Marshal or appealed to the appropriate agency. 4) The Applicant shall comply with the conditions of the Whatcom County Chief Plans Examiner, as outlined in the memorandum, dated February 22, 2006, unless modified by the Chief Plans Examiner or appealed to the appropriate agency. 5) The Applicant shall comply with the conditions of the Whatcom County Critical Areas Administrator, as outlined in the memorandum, dated October 12, 2007, unless modified by 7 255 the Critical Areas Administrator or appealed to the appropriate agency. 6) Approval of this preliminary subdivision shall become invalid unless a Final Plat is submitted in proper form for final plat approval within five years of the date of preliminary subdivision approval. This expiration date may be extended pursuant to WCC 20.05.030(5). 7) The Applicant shall comply with the conditions of the Whatcom County Health Department, as outlined in the memorandum, dated April 7, 2007, unless modified by the Health Department or appealed to the appropriate agency. 8) The playground facility shall be completed prior to Final Plat Approval. 9) All outside lighting shall be installed pursuant to WCC 20.80.523 to reduce impacts to adjacent residential uses and streets. 10) A maintenance agreement for the entire project will be drafted to provide for the maintenance of any areas in common ownership including the playground. This requirement shall be included in the Final CC&Rs, for all uses within the project. 11) A community identification sign shall be permitted pursuant to WCC 20.80.470 (4) Exemptions. 12) No sign shall be located closer than 10-feet to any right-of-way, per WCC 20.80.410 (1), and a building permit shall be obtained for any and all signs installed on the site. 13) Proper inscriptions shall be placed on the face of the mylar. 14) All appropriate deed, dedications and easements will be established on the face of the plat during the final review process, and recorded on the face of the mylar. 15) The Applicant shall comply with the agreement between the Applicant and Fire District 21, as set forth in Exhibit 6 in the Hearing Examiner file and attached hereto. 16) The Applicant shall comply with the conditions of the Watershed Administrator, memorandum, dated April 8, 2008, unless modified by the Watershed Administrator or appealed to the appropriate agency. 17) A note shall be placed on the face of the plat prohibiting accessory dwelling units. 18) The Applicant shall have a cultural resource assessment study done by a professional archeologist and submitted to the Lummi Indian Business Council as well as the Whatcom County SEPA Official for review prior to any clearing or land disturbance. 19) Should any archaeological materials (shell midden, faunal remains, stone tools) or human remains be observed during the project activities, all work in the immediate vicinity shall E? 256 stop, and the area shall be secured. The State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (360-586-3065), and the Lummi Nation Tribal historic Preservation Office (360- 384-2298) should be contacted immediately in order to help assess the situation and determine how to preserve the resource(s). Compliance with all applicable laws pertaining to archaeological resources is required. 20) The Applicant shall contact the Washington State Department of Natural Resources to determine if a Forest Practices Application is required prior to any land clearing. 21) The following cluster subdivision notes shall be included on the face of the plat: 1) This 23-lot long (22-cluster lots and 1-reserve lot) plat, Lincoln Road Cluster Plat has been approved as a cluster long subdivision. All lots within this plat are subject to the development and use standards of the Urban Residential (UR4) District, pursuant to WCC 20.20. The following notes shall be considered a deed restriction and shall constitute a binding agreement between Whatcom County and all present and future owners of record. Said notes shall be included within all deeds and contracts of conveyance and may only be amended by mutual agreement between said parties pursuant to the zoning in effect at the time. 2) The currently permitted density shall be achieved with one single-family dwelling on each of lots 1 through 22. Lots 1-22 are not eligible to apply for accessory dwelling units (ADU). 3) The wetland/upland/reserve area has been designated as a reserve tract and is subject to the following restrictions: a) Based on density calculations for the 19.73-acre parent parcel located in the Urban Residential (UR4) zone, there are 56 densities remaining that are assigned to the Reserve Tract for future development. The reserve tract shall not be reduced below 20% of the parent 19.73-acre parcel. b) The reserve tract shall not be further subdivided in any manner except as may be provided by WCC 20.20.320. c) The reserve tract may be retained by the subdivider, conveyed to the residents of this long plat or conveyed to a third party. d) This project shall be subject to the right to farm disclosure policy contained in Whatcom County Code Title 14. e) Accessory Dwelling Units are prohibited on the reserve tract. 9 257 f) A small portion of the reserve tract will be developed with a playground (tot lot) and will be maintained by the homeowners association and benefit all lot owners. 22) The Applicants shall provide a 20-foot wide landscape buffer along the south side of Lincoln Road with suitable plant materials to provide an all season vegetative barrier between Lincoln Road and development. This buffer shall be designed in accordance with WCC20.80.345, and approved by the Zoning Administrator, prior to gny development on the subject site. 23) All required vegetative buffering shall be installed per the approved plan, or bonded for 125% of the cost of labor and installation for planting and irrigation prior to submittal of a Final Plat Application. DATED this 6th day of May 2009. Michael Bobbink, Hearing Examiner 10 258 WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING & DEVELOPMEN T SERVICES 5280 Northwest Drive Bellingham, WA 98226 OM C\G� A �QVff NG�G[, April 4, 2008 David Stalheim Director J.E. "Sam" Ryan, C.B.O. Assistant Director 18 1T WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF REPORT The application of Mike Owens LSS2005-00012, PUD2005-00007 & for a Long Subdivision and Planned APL2007-00027 Unit Development (Lincoln Road cluster) FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, I AND RECOMMENDATIONS SUMMARY OF APPLICATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary: The project consists of 22 single-family residential lots and one reserve tract located on a 19.73-acre site within the Birch Bay Short -Term Urban Growth Area. The subject site is zoned Urban Residential (UR4). Recommendation: The Technical Review Committee recommends approval of the requested Permits, subject to the attached conditions. Il. PRELIMINARY INFORMATION A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Applicant: Mike Owens 1536 Willie Lake Road Ferndale, WA 98248 Agent: John Cox Jones Engineers Inc. 4164 Meridian Street, Suite 200 Bellingham, WA 98226 Site Location/Address: The subject property is located on the south side of Lincoln Road, approximately 660 feet west of Blaine Road, Blaine, WA Legal Description: Located within a portion of the NW'/4 of the NE'/4 of Section 19, T40N, R1 E, W.M, Assessor's Parcel No: 400119 436463 Zoning: Urban Residential (UR4) Office (360) 676-6907 County (360) 380-8110 FAX (360) 738-2525 A %%Is-11VOLIVAPPSXpennitplan%documentsVO0804%SS20050.00112ULSS2005-012 LINCOLN ROAD, STAFF REPORT.DOC 259 Comprehensive Plan: Birch Bay -Short Term Urban Growth Area (UGA) Subarea: Birch Bay -Blaine Number of Lots: 22 single family lots and one reserve tract Reserve Area: 13.5-acres Total acreage 19.73-acres Roads: Public Water supply: Birch Bay Water and Sewer District Sewage Disposal: Birch Bay Water and Sewer District Fire Protection: Whatcom County Fire District No. # 21 Law Enforcement: Whatcom County Sheriffs Office Public Schools: Blaine School District No. 503 Topography: The site is described as generally flat with gentle slopes of 0-3% with a maximum slope of 5%. Soils are described as Edmonds-Woodlyn (slopes 0-2%) and Laxton Loam (slopes 0-3%) as identified in the Soil Survey of Whatcom County area, Washington. The soil study does classify some areas of the site as prime farmland. Vegetation: Vegetation consists forested areas with a mixture of coniferous and deciduous trees, shrubs, grass and wet soil plants. Adiacent Land Use: North: Single-family and power vaults South: Large single-family home sites East: Large single-family home sites West: Vacant residential land Utility Easements: Necessary utility easements will be established prior to recording the final plat. Variances: No variances requested SEPA Review: Determination of Non -significance issued January-4, 2008 2 260 B. Procedural Information Authorizing Ordinances: 1) Revised Code of Washington Chapter 58.17 2) Whatcom County Code Title 20, Official Whatcom County Zoning Ordinance 3) Whatcom County Code Title 21, Subdivision Regulations 4) State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). Washington Administrative Code Chapter 197-11 Whatcom County Environmental Policy Administration Chapter 16.08 5) Whatcom County Code Chapter 12.08, Development Standards 6) Whatcom County Code Chapter 16.16, Critical Areas Site Description The subject rectangular 19.73-acre site is located on the south side of Lincoln Road, approximately 660 feet west of Blaine Road. The property has approximately 662-feet of frontage along Lincoln Road and is approximately 1,300-feet deep. . As previously stated, the terrain is described as generally flat with gentle slopes of 0-3% with a maximum slope of 5%. Vegetation on the site consists of forested areas with a mixture of coniferous and deciduous trees, shrubs, grass and wet soil plants. Property to the north of the site is zoned UR4 (long term -urban growth area) and consists of single- family development and power vaults and property to the south of the site is also zoned UR4 (long term -urban growth area) and consists of large single-family home sites. Property to the east of the site is zoned UR4 (short term- urban growth area) and developed with large single-family home sites, and property to the west of the site is also zoned UR4 (short term -urban growth area) and is undeveloped pasture and forestlands. Project Proposal The Lincoln Road development was initially proposed as a 45-lot single-family project, with one wetland/reserve area, however due to wetland constraints, the application was revised to a 22-lot single-family project located on 6.23-acres of the 19.72-acre site. The balance acreage (13.5-acres) will be set aside as a wetland/reserve tract which may ultinmately serve up to an additional 56-units. Residential lots range from 6,000-square feet to 8,379-square feet in size. The applicant has submitted a Long Plat and a Planned Unit Development with the intent of providing flexibility in lot design, preserving and enhancing large areas of wetland and providing 15-feet of right of way dedication along the entire frontage of Lincoln Road. B. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 1) Conservation of natural elements and features Critical Areas Review A Conceptual Wetland Mitigation Plan was prepared for the site by Northwest Wetlands Consulting and submitted to Planning and Development Services on June 14, 2007. The Whatcom County Critical Areas Administrator reviewed the plan and submitted a memo dated October 12, 2007 with the following conditions of approval for the subject proposal: 3 261 Conditions #8 and #10 must be met before road construction begins. 1. An herbaceous component should be included in the planting design for both wetland and mitigation areas. This should include a seed mix comprised of native indigenous species, containerized plantings at five-foot spacing, or a combination. 2. The pre-existing, or baseline, hydrological regime for the area proposed for wetland creation must be described in the mitigation plan. Data should be provided that shows depth to groundwater over a yearly cycle in order to determine hydrology. 3. The preliminary mitigation plan states that additional water from development runoff may enhance hydrology in created wetlands (p.11). Elsewhere in the plan it states that all runoff from proposed developments will be directed to an approved stormwater drainage system in order to protect wetlands from contaminated runoff from lawns and streets (p.14). Any discrepancies must be reconciled in the final mitigation plan. Any discharge of stormwater to wetlands must meet the applicable standards in the DOE stormwater manual 4. In the "Soils" section the preliminary mitigation plan mentions that soil excavated from the area proposed for wetland creation will be placed outside of critical areas. (p.11) The final mitigation plan must specifically address topsoil preservation and replacement. Only subsoil may be permanently removed from the excavation area. Topsoil must be sorted, preserved and replaced after the grade has been lowered. The final grade elevation must elevation must take the re -spread topsoil into consideration. 5. In the "Landscape" section the preliminary mitigation plan mentions planting woody species on 10 foot centers. Ten to twelve foot centers are a general standard for tree species, while shrubs should be planted on five-foot centers. This section must include an herbaceous component as specified above. 6. The final mitigation plan should include a more detailed description of how hydrology will be monitored in the wetland creation area (groundwater wells, staff gages, soil moisture, etc) 7. A 'maintenance and monitoring' contract must be developed for a minimum of a five-year period. 8. A surety of savings of 125% of the estimated cost of mitigation must be established before construction of the road or other infrastructure occurs. Estimated costs must include: grading, plants, materials (fencing, mulch, and signs), labor, as -built report, five years of maintenance, and five years of monitoring. Note: The estimate provided in the preliminary mitigation plan does not include an amount for the grading involved in the wetland creation. 9. Protective measures that meet the requirements of WCC16.16.265 must be in place: Signage, fencing, notice on title, and protective easement or placed in a separate tract. 10. Mitigation should be installed before any construction of the long plat road or other infrastructure begins. Exceptions may be approved only to meet seasonal requirements for mitigation installation. 4 262 2) Harmony of selected uses to each other Surrounding Properties As previously indicated, the surrounding properties are Urban Residential four dwelling units per acre (UR4) — properties to the north and south are long-term urban growth areas and properties to the east and west are short-term urban growth areas. These areas consist of largely undeveloped forest, pasture and wetland, with some large single-family home sites to the north south and east. Building Services Review The Whatcom County Chief Plans Examiner submitted a memo dated February 22, 2006 with the following conditions of approval for this proposal: 1. A building permit is required at the initial site development stage of the project for any proposed nonexempt structures or buildings. See the 2003 International Building Code (IBC), Section 105.2., regarding nonexempt structures. 2. When applicable, development stages that include the construction of multi -family and mixed occupancy (commercial) projects shall require the applicant to apply to the Building Official for a pre -application screening prior to building permit application submittal. A pre -application meeting may be required at the discretion of the Building Official. 3. A Washington State Professional Engineer may be required to engineer applicable portions of any proposed nonexempt structures or buildings. The proposal shall comply with all applicable codes and ordinances adopted by Whatcom County. 4. Nonexempt structures may include fences, retaining walls, concrete vaults and other poured - in -place concrete structures, some retention/detention structures, bridges The applicant shall comply with the above conditions of the Chief Plans Examiner's memo of February 22, 2006 unless modified by the Chief Plans Examiner or appealed to the appropriate agency. In summary the Technical Committee finds the subject proposal to be in harmony with existing and future uses designated for urban densities and urban growth. 3) Grouping and design of buildings, service, parking areas, circulation and open space as an integrated unit such that a safe efficient and convenient PUD is created. The Deputy Fire Marshal, Chief Plans Examiner and Division of Engineering have not identified any life safety issues related to the proposed design or grouping of buildings. Open space is addressed on page 15 of this report. The Technical Review Committee has determined.that the grouping and design of buildings, service, parking areas, and circulation and open space has been designed to be safe, efficient, and convenient. 4) Harmony of the proposed PUD with the existing and proposed characteristics of its 5 263 surroundings, with emphasis and due consideration given to air, water and soil pollution, flood protection and aesthetics. As stated previously, surrounding properties to the north, east and south of the site consist of large single-family lots and pasture/wetlands. Properties to the west of the site consist of undeveloped pasture and forestlands. The Technical Committee finds the proposal to be generally in harmony with the intended urban residential land use patterns for the area. The Technical Committee also finds that properly mitigated the proposal will not significantly change the character of the area since the intended land use pattern established by the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning of the area is intended for residential development at urban levels of development. 5) Conformance with the policies, goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan. The Whatcom County Comprehensive plan recognizes the resort, second home nature of the Birch Bay Urban Growth Area with its trend to permanent, often retirement homes. (See page 2-47, of the Comprehensive Plan). The following goals and policies are applicable to the subject site: Policy 2A-1: Concentrate urban levels of development within designated urban growth areas. Policy 2A-10: Recognize the importance of tourism and its influence on the need for land for various types of development. Goal 2Z: Recognize Birch bay as a major unincorporated county growth area. Policy 2Z-4: Recognize the resort nature of Birch Bay including the significant second home factor when analyzing land supply for urban growth area boundaries. GOAL 2A: Ensure provision of sufficient land in all designations to accommodate the growth needs of Whatcom County and protect the qualities which make the county a desirable place to live. Policy 2A-1: Concentrate urban levels of development within designated urban growth areas. Policy 2A-3: Provide a range of land uses which considers locational and market factors as well as required quantities of land. GOAL 2C: Channel growth to areas where adequate services can be provided. Comment: Water, Sewer, Police and Fire Protection, public roads and schools are all available to serve this project. Higher density development is required to support -the provision of public transit. Goal 2N: Establish Urban Growth Boundaries outside present city limits, within which the County has jurisdiction during the period between the adoption of this plan and the annexation or incorporation of the property. During this interim L 264 period the following policies shall be in place to assure that the purposes of this plan and growth management are in fact accomplished. Policy 2P-2: Consider natural limitation on the development capacity of land, such as critical aquifer recharge areas or floodplains, and other characteristics unique to each city, such as seasonal population or adjacent county urban zoning, in designating urban growth areas and densities. Policy 2P-3: Encourage in -filling to occur in existing areas with urban characteristics in a manner, which is more harmonious with existing neighborhood character. Policy 2P-4: Encourage housing to develop with the greatest possible mix of household incomes by utilizing such techniques as lot clustering, varied lot sizes, small scale multi -family dwellings, and reductions in infrastructure requirements for subdivisions. Comment: Goal P and the associated policies encourage densities of six to eight units per acre for larger cities and four units per acre for the smaller cities. Birch Bay is unincorporated and not mentioned in this goal, however, the same density targets should apply to Urban Growth Areas for future cities. The overall density will be consistent with this goal. GOAL 2S: Establish Short Term Planning Areas within which annexations and urban levels of development can occur and outside of which annexations and urban levels of development will not occur. This is intended to be a sprawl preventing measure where a need exists to promote phased development from the urban core outward, where final plans for urban services are not yet in place, and where joint planning at the development regulation level is appropriate. This will assure both conformance and consistency for future plans an developments. Comment: The subject site is designated as a Short Term Planning Area. The Short Term Planning Area (STPA) is designed to promote urban levels of density and cost-effective provision of services and avoid sprawl. (See Page 2-15 of the Comprehensive Plan.) Therefore, staff finds the subject proposal to be harmonious and in accordance with the general and specific goals and policies of Whatcom County's Comprehensive Plan and zoning regulations. GOAL 2AA: Recognize Birch Bay, Sudden Valley Provisional Urban Growth Area, and.the Columbia Valley/Kendall area as county urban growth areas, not associated with existing cities. Policy 2Z-4: Encourage incorporation of Birch Bay when financial viability can be achieved without including the Cherry Point Industrial Area within proposed city boundaries. GOAL 3C: Create opportunity for a broad range of housing types and encourage mixed affordability POLICY 3C-1: Support lot clustering, varied lot sizes, small-scale multi -family dwellings, accessory housing and reductions in infrastructure requirements for 7 265 subdivisions as incentives for development of housing obtainable by purchasers with the greatest possible mix of household incomes. Comment: This project fulfills the above goals and policies by providing a range of lot sizes and to accommodate various single-family development styles and building sizes. GOAL 4B: Develop a six -year financing program for capital facilities that meets the requirements of the GMA, achieves the county's levels -of -service, and is within financial capability as determined by projected financial resources. Policy 413-1: Maintain and update, on at least a biennial basis, a six -year capital improvement program (CIP) that identifies projects, outlines a schedule, and designates realistic funding sources for all county capital projects based on a review of population and revenue conditions existing at that time. Comment: Lincoln Road is a county right-of-way and part of the County six -year Transportation Improvement Plan. Access will be obtained from Lincoln Road and the applicant will be required to dedicate an extra 15-feet of right-of-way for a half width of 35-feet of right-of-way along Lincoln Road, frontage improvements as well as offsite improvements to Lincoln Road from the eastern boundary of the plat to Blaine road. An encroachment permit is required for any work located within the county right-of-way. GOAL 5Q: Work with Whatcom County PUD and other water purveyors to provide service to all existing and designated urban growth or industrial areas. Policy 5Q-1: Work with -the PUD, Birch Bay Water and Sewer District, Blaine, Ferndale, Ecology, and other jurisdictions as appropriate, to ensure adequate water supplies to the Urban Growth Area and designated industrial areas in northwest Whatcom County. Policy 5Q-2: Ensure provision of urban levels of water service to urban growth within areas designated for urban growth. Comment: The area is within the Birch Bay Urban Growth Area, and adequate water and sewer service is available. GOAL 6A: Provide for the safe and efficient movement of people and goods. Policy 6A-2: Use the transportation planning process to identify transportation system needs throughout the county in order to provide adequate transportation facilities and services to meet current and future travel needs; identify and protect specific transportation corridors and alignments where transportation facilities including auto, commercial, bicycle, transit and rail are needed. GOAL 613: Create a cost-effective transportation system that optimizes public investment. 0 266 Policy 613-2: Develop a fair and equitable formula to assess development for transportation improvements, including but not limited to transit, pedestrian facilities, bikeways and roadways that are considered reasonably necessary as a direct result of proposed developments in Whatcom County. Comment: In the event that the County Lincoln Road improvements have not been completed between Blaine Road and subject plat, the applicants shall complete some temporary improvements to Lincoln Road to facilitate safe transportation. Policy 6D-1: Allow densities and mixed uses in land use planning to reduce the number and length of vehicle trips, increase opportunity to use public transportation, and encourage pedestrian and bicycle trips. Policy 6D-5: Ensure that new developments provide safe and efficient infrastructure for pedestrians and bicyclists. Goal 6M: Promote bicycle and pedestrian travel by systematically providing safe and convenient routes and facilities where feasible. Comment: Low -density residential development encourages continued reliance on single -occupant vehicles and does not encourage the provision of transit. Pedestrian and bicycle facilities may encourage use of alternate transportation for residents traveling to and from Birch Bay and to the proposed commercial center at Blaine and Bay Roads. Increasing urban densities may also encourage future provision of transit service to this area. Birch Bay Community Plan: Additional information and background information regarding this area is provided in the Draft Birch Bay Community Plan, adopted by the Birch Bay Community Plan Steering Committee on June 25, 2003. The Birch Bay Community Plan includes a nurnber of goals and policies supporting minimum residential density of four housing units per acre, protecting rivers, streams and open space, developing an adequate transportation system, including pedestrian and bicycle facilities and roads. Birch Bay Community Goals and Policies Goal HO 1: To provide a mix of housing that reflects the residential and resort atmosphere of the community and that enhances individual neighborhood vitality. Goal EC 1: To continue the commitment to Birch Bay's primary economic resource — recreation and tourism commerce — while maintaining a commitment to the residential character of the community Two memos were received from members of the Birch Bay Community. Steering Committee expressing a variety of comments and concerns including: single ingresslegress, connectivity, provision of - road, pedestrian and bicycle trails, stormwater management, preservation of natural resources, low impact development as well as tree retention. Comments: Roads, sidewalks, safety, frontage improvements, and storm water management issues are addressed in Division of Engineering conditions on pages 11 Through 13 of 267 this report. Future development of the site will be reviewed at the time of complete application and may require an alternate access to better avoid wetlands. ■ Low impact development will be utilized where practical. Clearing will be reviewed by the County Land Disturbance staff, including the Department of Natural Resources if applicable. The southwest portion of the site contains most of the forested area and will not be developed at this time due to access/wetland constraints. Most of the wetland and buffer areas are located on the reserve tract and will be enhanced and protected by a conservation easement. Birch Bay Blaine Subarea Plan: The project has been determined to be generally consistent with the Birch Bay Blaine Subarea Plan and the Birch Bay Community Plan. Comments on Schools and Fire Protection With regard to schools and fire protection, RCW 82.02.050(b) states: "...To promote orderly growth and development by establishing standards by which counties, cities and towns may require, by ordinance, that new growth and development pay a proportionate share of the cost of new facilities needed to serve the growth and development..." No such ordinance is in place in Whatcom County, and RCW 82.0.2.020 is clear that the county has no authority to require such fees. However RCW 82.02.020 "...does not prohibit voluntary agreements with counties, cities, towns, or other municipal corporations that allow a payment in lieu of a dedication of land or to mitigate a direct impact that has been identified as a consequence of the proposed development, subdivision or plat." In addition, RCW 58.17.110 (2) requires that a proposed subdivision shall not be approved unless the city, town or county legislative body makes written findings that: a) Appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety, and general welfare and.... schools and school grounds and all other relevant facts. The applicant submitted a will -serve letter for this proposal dated July 20, 2005 from the Blaine School District # 503. They are currently close to capacity and reserve the right to request to impose impact fees in the future. In addition, the School District asked for the following condition of approval for this proposal: ■ The applicant shall contact the Blaine School District to allow them to review the development plan to insure that appropriate and safe student bus transportation areas are included. Please contact transportation at (360-332-8933). The subject site is located within Fire Protection District No. 21. The Fire District has also submitted a will -serve letter for this proposal dated August 29, 2005. stating that they will provide fire protection services for this subdivision. WCC 20.80.212 Concurrency, states: 10 No subdivision, commercial development or conditional use shall be approved without a written finding that: (1) All providers of water, sewage disposal, schools, and fire protection serving the development have issued a letter that adequate capacity exists or arrangements have been made to provide adequate services for the development. As such the project will need to meet the requirements for concurrency prior to final plat approval. The Whatcom County Deputy Fire Marshal submitted a memo dated April 8, 2008 with the following conditions of approval for this proposal: 1) Fire flow is required. Fire flow shall be a minimum of 500 gpm at 20 psi. Hydrants shall be located within 600-feet of all buildable areas. 2) The fire department access shall meet the requirements of the Whatcom County Development standards for roads. 3) The proposal shall comply with all applicable codes and ordinances adopted by Whatcom County. The applicant shall comply with all of the above conditions of the Deputy Fire Marshal's April 8, 2008 memo unless modified by the Deputy Fire Marshal or appealed to the appropriate agency. 6) Adequate provision of utilities and circulation to serve the project and, where appropriate, contribute to the overall development of urban areas. The proposal is located within the Birch Bay Water and Sewer service area, and the district has provided a will -serve letter, dated August 1, 2005 to verify that they will supply the proposed development with both water and sewer. This availability letter was valid for one year from the effective date, March 4, 2005 and has expired. The Whatcom County Health Department submitted a memo dated April 3, 2007 with the following requirements: 1) Proof of public sewer availability from the Birch Bay Water and Sewer District to serve the entire project is required prior to preliminary approval. 2) Proof of public water availability from the Birch Bay Water and Sewer District to serve the entire project is required prior to preliminary approval. The applicant has contacted the Birch Bay Water and Sewer District to get their water and sewer service letter updated and the district has agreed to send them an updated service letter. Staff will forward this letter as soon as it is received. The applicant shall comply with the above conditions of the Whatcom County Health Department's memo of April 3, 2007 unless modified by -the Health Department or appealed to the appropriate. agency. Access and circulation are addressed in the following Division of Engineering Comments: The Whatcom County Division of Engineering submitted a memo dated November 16, 2006 with the following conditions of approval for this proposal: 11 269 All development shall comply with Whatcom County Development Standards. 2. Sight distance at all intersections, including the Blaine Road & Lincoln Road intersection, shall meet Whatcom County Road Standards. 3. Applicant has the financial obligation for offsite Lincoln Road improvements from the lots eastern most boundaries to Blaine road of a rural local access standard, consisting of 22 feet of pavement with 4-foot gravel shoulders. Some temporary improvements will be required if the County Lincoln Road improvements have not been constructed for that section of roadway. 4. Applicant has the financial obligation for 3/ frontage improvements on the full length of the proposed project to the functional classification of Rural Major Collector (12 foot wide lanes and 8 foot wide paved shoulder). Timing of contribution and any construction done should coincide with the County Lincoln Road improvement project. 5. Applicant shall dedicate an extra 15 feet of right-of-way for a half width of 35 feet of right-of-way along Lincoln Road. 6. The main road within the plat shall be built to Urban Local Access Standards. The cul-de-sacs may be constructed to Urban Minor Access Standards. All roads shall be dedicated to Whatcom County. A prohibited vehicle access note shall be placed on the face of the plat on all lots along Lincoln Road. 7. All signing and striping shall be installed per MUTCD standards at the developer's expense. 8. Traffic mitigation of $100/ADT for project generated trips shall be applied to County offsite road/intersection improvements. Traffic mitigation to be applied to any of the Lincoln Road project, Birch Bay Lynden/Blaine Road intersection or Birch Bay Lynden/Portal Way intersection. County engineering to determine where the mitigation money is to be applied. 9. An Engineered Stormwater Design Report that addresses conveyance, detention, and water quality measures by a Washington State licensed civil engineer shall be submitted for approval by Whatcom County Engineering. 10. Provision for maintenance of private stormwater system will be required as set forth in Whatcom County Development Standards, Chapter 2, Section 220. 11. A Revocable Encroachment Permit will be obtained for work within the county right of way. 12. Erosion control plans shall be submitted and approved prior to any clearing or grading on -the site. 13. All easements, any physical appurtenances such as fences or structures which may indicate encroachment, lines of possession, or conflict of title must be shown on the final mylar. [WAC 332-130-050(1)(b)] 14. Road name proposals for all roads must be submitted for approval. A map at 1"=400' scale of the lots shall be provided to Whatcom County Engineering for address assignment. Address fee of $200.00 shall be paid prior to recording. 12 270 15. All road, drainage facilities, and grading plans shall be designed and stamped by a Washington State licensed civil engineer and submitted for county engineering approval prior to construction. As -built road plans and a letter of certification from a licensed engineer must be submitted to the County Engineer prior to acceptance of any roads into the County Road System. 16. Developer shall provide a plat layout to the post office to get approved mailbox location(s). The applicant shall comply with the above conditions of the Division of Engineering's memo of November 16, 2006 unless modified by the Division of Engineering or appealed to the appropriate agency. The Whatcom Watershed Administrator submitted a memo dated April 8, 2008 with the following comments and conditions of approval for this proposal: Temporary Erosion And Sediment Control (TESC) Plan — Per Water Resources Special Management Area (WCC 20.80.735) and Stormwater Special District (WCC 20.80.635) A TESC plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Watersheds Staff prior to beginning any clearing activity. ESC measures shall be inspected when installed. Depending on the site this inspection may occur prior to, during, or after land disturbance. Call Watersheds staff to arrange inspection. Details for submittal are found in the Whatcom County Development Standards Chapters 2 and 3. The plan shall contain a site plan and narrative including, but not limited, to the following components: ® If checked, an ESC preconstruction meeting is required with representatives of Whatcom County PDS, Whatcom County Engineering, the Project Engineer, and Contractor in attendance. TESC Site Plan (drawn to scale): 1) Depiction of all areas where soil disturbance will occur 2) Depiction of all areas where vegetation is to be removed. Clearing activity limits shall be marked and inspected on site. 3) Depiction and description of the type and location of ALL TESC BMPs to be utilized on site ® If checked, the TESC Site Plan is required to be prepared by a Professional Civil Engineer, licensed in the State of Washington If checked, a WA DOE NPDES Stormwater General Permit may be required (for cumulative land disturbance one acre or greater). Contact Department of Ecology at 360.738.6250 for more info. TESC Maintenance Plan: Include a narrative describing, in detail, the TESC BMP maintenance plan. BMPs shall be inspected and reinstalled, if necessary, after each phase of construction. The BMP maintenance plan shall include each anticipated inspection and the position title of the staff responsible for performing the maintenance. ® If checked, the TESC Maintenance Plan is required be prepared by a Professional Civil Engineer, licensed in the State of Washington 13 271 Street Sweeping Plan In order to protect surface waters and stormwater conveyance systems all streets shall be kept free of sediment for the duration of construction including subsequent development of individual lots. Street sweeping shall be conducted on a regularly scheduled basis. A narrative describing the equipment, the disposal of sediment, and frequency of sweeping shall be submitted prior to final plat approval ® If checked, the Street Sweeping Plan is required to be prepared by a Professional Civil Engineer, licensed in the State of Washington Pumping Plan for Sediment or Storm Water Pond Provide a narrative describing, in detail, measures planned to ensure capacity of the pond during the wet season. These may include but are not limited to: pumping turbid water to a truck and removing it from the site to another approved site, pumping turbid water to an approved dispersion/ infiltration system on or off site. The name, contact info, and contract for pumping services contractor shall be on file with the technical administrator. ® If checked, the Pumping Plan is required to be prepared by a Professional Civil Engineer, licensed in the State of Washington Runoff Treatment— Per Stormwater Special District Standards (Section 221, Chapter 2 Stormwater Management) Treatment shall be required for all pollution -generating impervious surfaces (PGIS) per the standards located in Section 6 of the Stormwater Special District Standards. No clearing activity shall occur until drainage plan is reviewed and approved by Watersheds staff. Plat Notes ® DRAYTON HARBOR AND BIRCH BAY WATERSHEDS STORMWATER SPECIAL DISTRICT AND WATER RESOURCE SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA NOTE: THE LOTS WITHIN THIS PLAT ARE LOCATED IN AN AREA DESIGNATED AS A STORMWATER SPECIAL DISTRICT AREA AND WATER RESOURCE SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA. ANY DEVELOPMENT OF SAID LOTS SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THOSE REGULATIONS PURSUANT TO WCC 20.80.636 AND WCC 20.80.735. The applicant shall comply with the above conditions of the Watershed Administrator's April 8, 2008 memo unless modified by the Administrator or appealed to the appropriate agency In summary, the Technical Committee believes that utilities and circulation facilities can be adequately provided, by compliance with the recommended conditions of approval. 7) The exceptions granted by this Chapter are warranted by creative design utilizing good design principles and provision of amenities incorporated in the planned unit development and its program. 14 272 The applicant has designed the proposal to accommodate the extensive wetlands on the subject 19.73- acre parcel, providing for a variety of clustered lot sizes as well as enhancing natural wetland features and providing a playground area. The presence of wetland areas, and their associated buffers as well as road requirements were significant factors in determining the density. Open Space • A total of 13.5-acres or approximately 68% of the overall acreage has been allotted to reserve area, consisting primarily of wetlands, detention/retention pond, upland areas for future development and the playground area. In addition, the design of a planned unit development shall take into account the relationship of the site to the surrounding areas. The perimeter of the PUD and arrangement of uses on the site shall be designed to minimize adverse impacts between the project and adjacent land uses. Compatibility factors include but are not limited to visual and audio intrusion and conspicuous visual barriers. Buffering shall be provided on the site perimeter or within the site where probable incompatibility based on congestion, noise or visual intrusion may exist. WCC 20.85.105 also states that, where buffering is required by the PUD ordinance, the following factors will be considered in determining the adequacy of the type and extent of the buffer. • The purpose of the buffer, for example, to decrease noise levels, absorb air pollution, filter dust or to provide a visual barrier. • The size of the buffer needed in terms of width and height to achieve the purpose. • The location of the buffer. Regarding buffering, surrounding existing and future uses are also residential in nature, and there is no apparent conflict. between this plat and other existing or future area housing or uses. However, the applicant shall comply with the wetland buffering requirements of the Critical Areas Ordinance as required by the Critical Areas Administrator on page 4 of this report. 8) That the system of ownership, and means of developing, preserving and maintaining open space and other common facilities, is acceptable to the County. The applicant has indicated that a Community Association will be formed and will be responsible for the operation and upkeep of open space areas and common areas. The final CC & R's shall include language regarding maintenance of wetlands and wetland buffers as well as playground facilities, and all amenities and common facilities within the PUD. 9) Where expanded land uses as allowed by WCC 20.85.053 are requested for an application, the criteria of WCC 20.85.054 are met, and where a phasing plan is proposed, the criteria of WCC 20.85.117 (3) are met. Increased density is not proposed with this application. The original 45lot application requested 15 273 multiple phasing of 10-15 units. As the application has been revised to 22 units phasing is no longer necessary. 10) Promotion of creativity and affordability in residential, commercial and industrial development. The Technical Review Committee has determined that the design is creative, in that it permits the preservation of open space and wetlands, and provides public road access without compromising the applicant's objective of developing the site with residential uses under -the PUD provisions of the zoning ordinance. In summary the Technical Review Committee has reviewed the proposed creative design, finds that the applicant's proposal complies with the standards of the PUD ordinance, and therefore, recommends approval of the requested Planned Unit Development. C. LONG PLAT REVIEW Pursuant to the Revised Code of Washington (RCVV) 58.17.110,. in order to approve a preliminary long subdivision, Whatcom County must find that appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety, and general welfare, open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds, and shall consider all other relevant facts including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who walk to and from school, and the public use and interest will be served by the platting of such subdivision. 1) With Regard to the public health, safety and general welfare, the Technical Committee submits the following findings: Public Comments Staff received two public comment letters concerning the proposed project as well as those concerns submitted by the Birch Bay Community Steering Committee addressed on page 9 of this report. Concerns raised by the public include: • Impacts to existing wetlands, transportation increases to Lincoln and Blaine Roads, need for low impact development, impact on country lifestyle, need for pedestrian/bicycle path along Lincoln Road, stormwater facilities sufficient to prevent pollution of Birch Bay and buffering between development and Lincoln Road. Response Wetlands will be enhanced, protected with buffers and contained within the reserve tract. The application was downscaled from 45 lots to 22 lots to better conform to the critical areas ordinance. Transportation and stormwater issues have been reviewed by the Division of Engineering (see pages 11-13 of this report) and with appropriate conditions will meet the County standards. Lincoln Road is also identified as a project on the Whatcom County Six Year Transportation Improvement Program (Resolution No. 2004-049). Low impact development is encouraged and stomwater systems will be designed using the current guidelines outlined in the Special Stormwater District (see page 14 of this report). The Birch Bay Community Plan encourages buffering between Lincoln Road and proposed development 16 274 (see page 11-15 of the Birch Bay Community Plan, attached). This area is surrounded by UR4 zoning and has been established as an urban growth area (short and long) and as such is appropriate to be developed at urban densities and the applicants utilized the clustering provisions allowed by the zoning in order to better avoid impacts to wetlands and their buffers. The applicants shall provide a 20-foot wide landscape buffer along the south side of Lincoln Road with suitable plant materials to provide an all season vegetative barrier between Lincoln Road and development. 2) With regard to open space, parks and playgrounds the Technical Review Committee finds the following: The applicant has designated a portion of the wetland/reserve tract as a playground facility (tot lot) for the plat. As previously stated, open space is addressed on page 15 of this report. The final CC & Rs shall specifically indicate the type of facilities (i.e. playground equipment) to be installed on the playground and safety and maintenance of the playground shall be included in the CC & R's as the responsibility of the Community Association. Cluster Subdivision Notes for Lincoln Road Cluster Plat: The following cluster subdivision notes shall be included on the face of the plat: • The use and location on the site shall not be amended or changed in any way without further approval of the Whatcom County Hearing Examiner. • The following cluster subdivision notes shall be included on the face of the plat: 1) This 23-lot long (22-cluster lots and 1-reserve lot) plat, Lincoln Road Cluster Plat has been approved as a cluster long subdivision. All lots within this plat are subject to the development and use standards of the Urban Residential (UR4) District, pursuant to WCC 20.20. The following notes shall be considered a deed restriction and shall constitute a binding agreement between Whatcom County and all present and future owners of record. Said notes shall be included within all deeds and contracts of conveyance and may only be amended by mutual agreement between said parties pursuant to the zoning in effect at the time. 2) The currently permitted density shall be achieved with one single-family dwelling on each of lots 1 through 22. Lots 1-22 are not eligible to apply for accessory dwelling units (ADU). 3) The upland/reserve area has been designated as a reserve tract and is subject to the following restrictions: a) Based on density calculations for the 19.73-acre parent parcel located in the Urban Residential (UR4) zone, there are 56 densities remaining that are assigned to the Reserve Tract for future development. The reserve tract shall not be reduced below 20% of the parent 19.73-acre parcel. b) The reserve tract shall not be further subdivided in any manner except as may be provided by WCC 20.20.320. 17 275 c) The reserve tract may be retained by the subdivider, conveyed to the residents of this long plat or conveyed to a third party. d) This project shall be subject to the right to farm disclosure policy contained in Whatcom County Code Title 14. e) Accessory Dwelling Units are prohibited on the reserve tract. f) A small portion of the reserve tract will be developed with a playground (tot lot) and will be maintained by the homeowners association and benefit all lot owners. 3) With regard to streets or roads, alleys, other public ways and transit stops, the Technical Review Committee finds the following: See Division of Engineering comments and conditions on pages 11 through 13 of this report. According to the Whatcom Transit Authority Website (www.ridewta.com) WTA does not currently serve this area. In summary, the Technical Review Committee finds that the development will be adequately served by roads, subject to implementation of the conditions proposed by the Division of Engineering. 4) With regard to drainage Technical Review Committee finds the following: The proposal, with required mitigation, is not expected to generate significant levels of air, water or soil pollution, as it is a residential development and storm water treatment will be required. (See Division of Engineering conditions on pages 11 through 13 of this report, and Watershed conditions on pages 13 and 14 of this report. 5) With regard to schools and playgrounds, the Technical Committee finds the following: The subject site is located within the Blaine School District No. 503. As stated previously, a will -serve letter dated April 7, 2006 was received from the School District stating that the district can provide educational facilities for this proposal, and would like the opportunity to review the development plan to assure that appropriate and safe student bus transportation areas are included. The applicant is providing an on site playground. 6) With regard to compliance with the relevant polices of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan the Technical Review Committee finds the following: See Comprehensive Pl8n goals and policies on pages 6 through 10 of this report. 7) With regard to compliance with Title 20 and Title 21, and other land use controls, the Technical Review Committee finds the following: The subject site is designated Urban Residential Density (UR4) and is located within a Short term Urban growth Area, per the Comprehensive Plan. The PUD Section of the Official Whatcom County Ordinance allows for design modifications including lot sizes, widths, depths, frontage requirements, setbacks, height, etc, per WCC 20.85.109(1) & (2) & 5. The applicant is proposing a range of lot sizes from 6,000-square feet up to 8,379-square feet. rD 276 A summary of the UR zoning and conventional subdivision lot design requirements, and the applicant's proposal is provided as follows: Parameter Maximum density Min. Cluster Lot size Min. width Street line: Min. mean depth: Zoning/Subdivision Reg.'s. 4-dwelling units per acre 6,000-square feet 30-feet 70-feet Applicant's Proposal 89-units per acre (due to wetlands) 6,000-square feet 15-feet per PUD 65-feet per PUD Due to extensive wetlands on the subject site, the density is considerably lower than normal for a parcel of this size. No accessory dwelling units were requested. In summary the TRC has reviewed the proposed subdivision and lot designs and finds that they comply with the density and dimensional requirements of the UR zone as allowed considering critical areas constraints and size modifications allowed as a result of the PUD. The applicant is also preserving wetlands and providing right-of-way dedication along Lincoln Road as a means of complying with the intent of the PUD. All signs in the portion of the site designated General Commercial shall comply with the requirements of WCC20.80.430. Community identification signs shall be permitted in the Urban Residential areas pursuant to WCC 20.80.470 (4) Exemptions. No sign shall be located closer than 10-feet to any right-of-way, per WCC 20.80.410 (1), and a building permit shall be obtained for any and all signs installed on the site. a) All service providers serving the development have issued a letter that adequate capacity exists or arrangements have been made to provide adequate services for the development. See Health Department comments on page 11 of this report regarding water and sewer availability, and the attached will -serve letter and agreement from the Birch Bay Water and Sewer District. b) No county facilities will be reduced below applicable Levels of Service as a result of the development. Written conditions to support the above requirements have been placed on the permit by the Whatcom the Deputy Fire Marshal, and the Division of Engineering. No comments were received from the Sheriff's Office. Additional Environmental Comments The Whatcom County Deputy SEPA Official issued a revised Determination of Non -significance (DNS) for this proposal on January 4, 2008. This determination was appealed on behalf of Fire District #21 and the SEPA Official has addressed the issues concerned in an attached memo dated April 8, 2008. The Whatcom County Natural Resources Administrator/Geologist reviewed the proposal on September 19 277 27, 2005 and concluded that there are no geohazards. The Washington State Department of Natural Resources submitted a letter dated September 7, 2005 with the following concerns: • In reviewing the proposal for this project it appears that a Forest Practice Permit from the Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) may be required. A Forest Practive Application can be obtained on line from the DNR's website www.wa.gov/dnr or through our Region Office in Sedro-Woolley at (360) 856-3500. The applicant shall contact the Washington State Department of Natural Resources to determine if a Forest Practices Application is required prior to any land clearing. In a letter dated April 10, 2006, the Lummi Nation Tribal Historic Preservation Office (LNTHPO) stated that they completed an internal review and have the following comments: Registered Site(s) within 1.3 of a mile Proposed project activities have the potential to affect cultural resources Located within a Shoreline area or other archaeologically sensitive landforms Based on these factors it is highly likely that cultural resources are present in the project area and LNTHPO recommends that a professional cultural resource assessment of the proposed project area be conducted prior to the commencement of ground -disturbing activities in order to determine the presence of cultural resources and plan for their appropriate protection during all phases of the project. Therefore, the following conditions shall apply: 1) The applicant shall have a cultural resource assessment study done by a professional archeologist and submitted to the Lummi Indian Business Council as well as the Whatcom County SEPA official for review prior to any clearing or land disturbance. 3) Should any archaeological materials (shell midden, faunal remains, stone .tools) or human remains be observed during the project activities, all work in the immediate vicinity shall stop, and the area shall be secured. The State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (360-586-3065), and the Lummi Nation Tribal historic Preservation Office (360-384-2298) should be contacted immediately in order to help assess the situation and determine how to preserve the resource(s). Compliance with all applicable laws pertaining to archaeological resources is required. The applicant shall comply with the above condition of the Lummi Nation Tribal Historic Preservation Office unless modified by the Lummi Nation Tribal Historic Preservation Office or appealed to the appropriate agency. As required by the Revised Code of Washington 58.17.110 and WCC 21.20.090, the Technical Review Committee finds that with appropriate conditioning, adequate provisions have been made for the public heath, safety and general welfare, and for such open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds and other relevant factors as required, and that the public use and interest will be served by the platting of such subdivision. Additionally it is found that the 20 278 subdivision conforms to the zoning ordinance and other applicable land use controls. A Technical Review Committee meeting was convened with the applicant on September 8., 2006 to discuss the proposal. Some modifications and clarifications were required at that time. The Committee reviewed those modifications and clarifications and determined that subject to the following proposed conditions, the proposal would comply with the following county and state regulations: A) Revised Code of Washington Chapter 58.17 B) The intent and established policies of the Urban Residential component of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Land Use Plan. C) Whatcom County Code Title 20, Official Whatcom County Zoning Ordinance; D) Whatcom County Code Title 21, Subdivision Regulations; E) State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Washington Administrative Code Chapter 197-11; Whatcom County Code Chapter 16.08, Whatcom County Environmental Policy Administration. F) Provide for access, sanitation and potable water. IV. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Therefore, subject to the preceding technical review, the Technical Review Committee recommends approval of the requested Planned Unit Development and Long Subdivision V. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1) The use and location on the site shall not be amended or changed in any way without further approval of the Whatcom County Hearing Examiner. 2) The applicant shall comply with all of the attached conditions of the Whatcom County Division of Engineering's memo of November 16, 2006 unless modified by the Division of Engineering or appealed to the appropriate agency. 3) The applicant shall comply with the attached conditions of the Whatcom County Deputy Fire Marshal's memo of April 8, 2008 unless modified by the Deputy Fire Marshal or appealed to the appropriate agency. 4) The applicant shall comply with the attached conditions of the Whatcom County Chief Plans Examiner's memo of February 22, 2006 unless modified by the Chief Plans examiner or appealed to the appropriate agency. 5) The applicant shall comply with the attached conditions of the Whatcom County Critical Areas Administrator's memo of October 12, 2007 unless modified by the Critical Areas Administrator or appealed to the appropriate agency. 10) Approval of this preliminary subdivision shall become invalid unless a final plat is submitted in proper form for final plat approval within five years of the date of preliminary subdivision approval. This expiration date may be extended pursuant to WCC 20.05.030(5). 21 279 11) The applicant shall comply with the attached conditions of the Whatcom County Health Department's memo of April 7, 2007 unless modified by the Health Department or appealed to the appropriate agency. 12) The playground facility shall be completed prior to Final plat approval. 13) All outside lighting shall be installed pursuant to WCC 20.80.523 to reduce impacts to adjacent residential uses and streets. 14) A maintenance agreement for the entire project will be drafted to provide for the maintenance of any areas in common ownership including the playground . This requirement shall be included in the Final CC& Rs, for all uses within the project. 15) A community identification sign shall be permitted pursuant to WCC 20.80.470 (4) Exemptions. 16) No sign shall be located closer than 10-feet to any right-of-way, per WCC 20.80.410 (1), and a building permit shall be obtained for any and all signs installed on the site. 17) Proper inscriptions shall be placed on the face of the mylar. 18) All appropriate deed, dedications and easements will be established on the face of the plat during the final review process, and recorded on the face of the mylar. 19) Prior to final plat approval, the applicants shall provide written verification from Fire District 21 affirming that adequate fire protection services, as defined by Whatcom County, will be available. 20) The applicant shall comply with the attached conditions of the Watershed Administrator's memo of April 8, 2008 unless modified by the Watershed Administrator or appealed to the appropriate agency. 21) A note shall be placed on the face of the plat prohibiting accessory dwelling units. 22) The applicant shall have a cultural resource assessment study done by a professional archeologist and submitted to the Lummi Indian Business Council as well as the Whatcom County SEPA official for review prior to any clearing or land disturbance. 23) Should any archaeological materials (shell midden, faunal remains, stone tools) or human remains be observed during the project activities, all work in the immediate vicinity shall stop, and the area shall be secured. The State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (360- 586-3065), and the Lummi Nation Tribal historic Preservation Office (360-384-2298) should be contacted immediately in order to help assess the situation and determine how to preserve the resource(s). Compliance with all applicable laws pertaining to archaeological resources is required. 24) The applicant shall contact the Washington State Department of Natural Resources to determine if a Forest Practices Application is required prior to any land clearing. 25) The following cluster subdivision notes shall be included on the face of the plat: 22 1) This 23-lot long (22-cluster lots and 1-reserve lot) plat, Lincoln Road Cluster Plat has been approved as a cluster long subdivision. All lots within this plat are subject to the development and use standards of the Urban Residential (UR4) District, pursuant to WCC 20.20. The following notes shall be considered a deed restriction and shall constitute a binding agreement between Whatcom County and all present and future owners of record. Said notes shall be included within all deeds and contracts of conveyance and may only be amended by mutual agreement between said parties pursuant to the zoning in effect at the time. 2) The currently permitted density shall be achieved with one single-family dwelling on each of lots 1 through 22. Lots 1-22 are not eligible to apply for accessory dwelling units (ADU). 3) The wetland/upland/reserve area has been designated as a reserve tract and is subject to the following restrictions: a) Based on density calculations for the 19.73=acre parent parcel located in the Urban Residential (UR4) zone, there are 56 densities remaining that are assigned to the Reserve Tract for future development. The reserve tract shall not be reduced below 20% of the parent 19.73-acre parcel. b) The reserve tract shall not be further subdivided in any manner except as may be provided by WCC 20.20.320. c) The reserve tract may be retained by the subdivider, conveyed to the residents of this long plat or conveyed to a third party. d) This project shall be subject to the right to farm disclosure policy contained in Whatcom County Code Title 14. e) Accessory Dwelling Units are prohibited on the reserve tract. f) A small portion of the reserve tract will be developed with a playground (tot lot) and will be maintained by the homeowners association and benefit all lot owners. 26) The applicants shall provide a 20-foot wide landscape buffer along the south side of Lincoln Road with suitable plant materials to provide an all season vegetative barrier between Lincoln Road and development. This buffer shall be designed in accordance with WCC20.80.345, and approved by the Zoning Administrator, prior to any development on the subject site. 27) All required vegetative buffering shall be installed per the approved plan, or bonded for 125% of the cost of labor and installation for planting and irrigation prior to submittal of a final plat application. Report prepared for the Technical Review Committee by Wayne Fitch Senior Planner 23 281 Blaine Road. Widen Blaine Road to four lanes from Grandview Road to Lincoln Road. Provide a two-way left turn lane (in the middle) through the commercial and multi -family residential area at Blaine Road and Alderson Road. Provide left turn lanes at the intersections of Blaine Road and Alderson Road and Blaine Road and Arnie Road. Provide left turn lanes and a traffic signal at the intersection of Blaine Road and Birch Bay - Lynden Road. Provide left turn lanes and a traffic signal at the intersection of Blaine Road and Lincoln Road. Improve the Blaine Road bridge, crossing California Creek. Further, add shoulders north of Lincoln Road. Birch Bay - Lynden Road. Widen Birch Bay - Lynden Road to four lanes from Harborview Road to I-5. Widen shoulders along Birch Bay - Lynden Road from Kickerville Road to Interstate 5 to accommodate bicycles. Provide left turn lanes at the intersections of Birch Bay-Lynden Road with Kickerville Road, Blaine Road and Harborview Road. Provide a two-way left turn lane (in the middle) from Harborview Road to Blaine Road. Provide traffic signals at the intersections of Birch Bay - Lynden Road with Harborview Road and Blaine Road. Provide bicycle lanes and pedestrian walkways along Birch Bay - Lynden Road from Harborview Road to Blaine Road. - Lincoln Road. Finish constructing the gap in Lincoln Road between Harborview Road and Blaine Road. Widen Lincoln Road with adequate shoulders from Shintaffer Road to Blaine Road. Provide left turn lanes along Lincoln Road at Shintaffer Road, Harborview Road and at Blaine Road. Provide a traffic signal at the intersection of Lincoln Road and Blaine Road. Development along Lincoln Road should be set back from the road and clustered with limited direct access to Lincoln Road. The existing pedestrian/ bicycle path along Semiahmoo Drive within the Blaine City Limits should be extended along the South side of Lincoln Road to Blaine Road prior to approval of new development projects along Lincoln Road. These improvements may be funded by a Local Improvement District, developer financing with latecomer fees, grant funding, traffic impact fees, or a combination of sources. 41.1„ 5' "faot landscaped buffer with suitable plant, materials to piavid6 an all gmQn vegetative, boner"between Lincoln load and proposed -development shall be required as a and t o a of new development approval. Birch Point Road. Widen Birch Point Road by providing adequate shoulders from Shintaffer Road to the middle of section 22 where Birch Point Road turn sharply to the south. Construct a new two lane roadway section with wide shoulders beginning in the middle of section 22 and running north to and connecting with Semiahmoo Drive. This section of the road should be built concurrently with the buildout of the surrounding residential area. To relieve Birch -Bey EommunityPlan 11-15 282 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DISCLAIMER: This document is a draft and is provided as a courtesy. This document is not to be considered as the final minutes. All information contained herein is subject to change upon further review and approval by the Whatcom County Council. WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL Regular County Council April 14, 2009 Council Chair Seth Fleetwood called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington. Present: Barbara Brenner Bob Kelly Sam Crawford Carl Weimer Laurie Caskey-Schreiber L. Ward Nelson FLAG SALUTE ANNOUNCEMENTS Absent: None Fleetwood reported for the Committee of the Whole Meeting and the following items were discussed in executive session: 1. Strategy planning discussion and positions to be taken regarding Deputy Sheriff's Guild collective bargaining (AB2009-055) 2. Consideration of appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision on APL2008-0023 filed by Philip Buri, on behalf of the City of Bellingham, regarding sewer service to North Shore Estates (AB2009-100) Crawford moved to uphold the Hearing Examiner. Motion carried 7-0. MINUTES CONSENT Brenner moved to approve the Minutes Consent Items. Motion carried 7-0. 1. SPECIAL JOINT COUNTY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION FOR FEBRUARY 17, 2009 2. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE FOR FEBRUARY 24, 2009 3. REGULAR COUNTY COUNCIL FOR FEBRUARY 24, 2009 Whatcom County Council, 4/14/2008, Page 1 283 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DISCLAIMER: This document is a draft and is provided as a courtesy. This document is not to be considered as the final minutes. All information contained herein is subject to change upon further review and approval by the Whatcom County Council. 4. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE FOR MARCH 17, 2009 OPEN SESSION Rollin Harper, 1320 Lincoln Street, Bellingham, stated the Council should only consider the proposal to plan for extremely low growth, resulting in a population of 234,000 in 2031, if it is brought forward with a solid, well -reasoned basis and is supported by third party professional analysis. People come to this county for a variety of reasons. To affect practical, real -life population growth, County officials really aren't going to take measures such as closing the ski area, making job opportunities less attractive, or raise taxes too much. They don't really have many options at the macro -level. However, they can work on the distribution of the population in the county. They need to see specific policies, and have those policies analyzed for specific impacts. Decide what analysis of these proposals the County Council is willing to pay for. Jan Eskola, Glacier Chamber of Commerce, stated funds collected for the lodging tax fund come predominantly from the hotel by the airport and from Glacier. Glacier has 590 beds. No funds are gotten from the cities. She requests approval of the application for lodging tax funds in the amount of $35,180.00, pursuant to Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 67.28.181(7). Michael Gleeson, 4761 Mosquito Lake Road, Deming, stated the County should require its contractors to use the federal e-verify system as part of the contract agreement. Federal stimulus money will come to the County, mostly for construction activities. Studies show that construction work forces comprise of many workers who don't have authorization to work in the United States. Given the unemployment rate in the county, the Council must take reasonable actions to prevent illegal workers. Many unauthorized workers send their money to another country to support people in their home countries. He doesn't want to use his money to stimulate another country's economy. The use of e-verify in Arizona and Oklahoma has reduced the number of illegal workers and illegal aliens living in the state. Reducing illegal immigration will lower schooling, social services, and incarceration costs to states. State representatives have implied that farming in Whatcom County can't be profitable unless illegal workers are used. Bob Wiesen, 3314 Douglas Road, Ferndale, stated County planning has turned into a bad joke. Bellingham has a shortage of buildable land, according to Pat Jones' study several years ago. Now they are going to redo the study again. He asked when they're going to come to the process so people can plan for what needs to be done in the future. George Leonard, 247 Van Wyck Road, stated the County is treating him and his neighbors horribly. They are trying to annex into the city, and have gone through all the hoops. Please allow them to move on. Bruce Deila, citizen, stated he is skeptical about a presentation about Lyme disease put on in Bellingham two months ago. Has been denied treatment with IV antibiotics that will help him recover from Lyme disease in eight different states. People in the presentation who said that anyone could get treatment were lying. He's not getting any help here. A neurologist today wouldn't treat him because he wouldn't sign paperwork with false statements. He had hoped for help, but isn't getting any here. He asked why he isn't Whatcom County Council, 4/14/2008, Page 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DISCLAIMER: This document is a draft and is provided as a courtesy. This document is not to be considered as the final minutes. All information contained herein is subject to change upon further review and approval by the Whatcom County Council. getting help. They are taking $100 per month for Medicaid out of his welfare. The low income clinic referred him to the neurologist, and he was billed $70 for the visit. Also, the emergency room bills charge interest. Syndey Paxma, 6109 Shelby Court, Ferndale, stated he thanked the Council on behalf of Western Washington University's Journalism Department students for all the interviews. PUBLIC HEARINGS S. ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE WHATCOM COUNTY LUMMI ISLAND SUBAREA PLAN (AB2009-088A) Caskey-Schreiber asked about holding this for two weeks and making substantial amendments. Fleetwood opened the hearing. Sheila Marshall, West Shore Drive, Lummi Island, submitted and read from her testimony (on file), which included errors and suggestions for changes in the plan. Polly Hanson, West Shore Drive, Lummi Island, stated water is the most crucial element for them all. They must be more guarded about the water supply. Consider the island as an entire system. Keep down the number of people who live on the island and need to use water. They can limit other uses. Guard the water that falls onto Lummi Island. Have proper ditches that funnel water into a clean area that isn't dumped into the saltwater. Darlyn Delboca, Ferndale, stated she owns property on Lummi Island. She previously submitted proposed amendments (on file), relating mostly water and agricultural resource land protection. Now, Lummi Island is beyond its agricultural and water carrying capacity. Crawford asked if 940 acres of agricultural protection overlay (APO) soils are on Lummi Island. Delboca stated the APO doesn't apply. During the Planning Committee process, she tried to get this information from the consultant and Planning Department. The 940 acres is on page 32 of the plan, which shows the map from the Soil Conservation Service and the county soil survey. She described the map. Roland Middleton, Public Works Department, stated he believes those acres are true APO soils, but he would have to check how the current APO regulations apply to the RRI zone. Delboca stated she's encouraged to hear the Council talk about preserving resource lands in the county. Extend that to Lummi Island. Wynne Lee, 2171 Tuttle Lane, Lummi Island, submitted and read from her testimony (on file), which includes suggestions for changes to the plan. Whatcom County Council, 4/14/2008, Page 3 285 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DISCLAIMER: This document is a draft and is provided as a courtesy. This document is not to be considered as the final minutes. All information contained herein is subject to change upon further review and approval by the Whatcom County Council. Susan Kilgore, 2877 North Nugent Road, Lummi Island, stated her condo has 22 units in a very spacious area. Others have water rights and use their well and water. They have two rental properties that were given water rights. Two or three times per year, the rental properties have used up to 17,000 gallons of water in a week. In a summer with low water, that can threaten their well. The plan isn't specific about providing recourse for water abuse. Tamara Hall, resident, stated her family has owned property on the island since the 1940's. She is concerned about trespassing and public access items. Now, under the Open Space/Forestry designation, there is provision for public access. There is beach access by The Willows. The County also has a State park and land by the ferry dock. The County already has quite a bit of land on Lummi Island for public access. The County is asking the private property owners to absorb the costs, litigation, and hassle of unexpected and unwelcome public access across private land. If the public wants public land, then the County can buy it. Remove the trespassing item from the plan. Bill Quehrn, Building Industry Association of Whatcom County Executive Officer, submitted and read from his testimony (on file), which includes suggestions for plan amendments regarding permit allocation. Remove language about permit metering from the plan. Mary Dickinson, Lummi Island, stated she is a fourth generation Lummi Island property owner. (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.) Dickinson continued to state that increased demand for public access to shorelines and wilderness can result in increased trespass on private property. The community must work toward some form of public trail system or find workable ways to retain significant amounts of open space. Otherwise, there will be increased trespass and privacy concerns. Trespassing has already occurred on her property. Her elderly neighbors are constantly harassed by trespassers. The subarea plan will become part of the Comprehensive Plan. Don't encourage criminality. Remove the trespass language. David Dickinson, 4100 Legoe Bay Road, Lummi Island, referenced the top of plan page 50 regarding the flood areas and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The term FEMA has specific and nasty connotations. A neighbor had to prove his property wasn't in the FEMA flood plain. Required FEMA flood insurance is very expensive. That area hasn't ever flooded. Remove the flood language. Jim Dickinson, Lummi Island Land Company President, stated he is one of the only landowners on Lummi Island who did inverse development. The water study said Lummi has enough water for a density of one house per one acre. Therefore, the downzone from three acres to five acres is applicable. It affects 67 properties. Existing three -acre properties should be vested. If downzoned, they will become nonconforming, subject to public hearing. Land owners will have to pay large amounts of money. He referenced the walking trails on Lummi Mountain on plan page 57. Remove that language. He is the major private landowner on Lummi Island. They log the area and have heavy equipment up there. This last year, there were two wild land fires set by trespassers. The language in the plan will encourage trespassing. Potential losses by wildfires from trespassers would be Whatcom County Council, 4/14/2008, Page 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DISCLAIMER: This document is a draft and is provided as a courtesy. This document is not to be considered as the final minutes. All information contained herein is subject to change upon further review and approval by the Whatcom County Council. horrendous. The island isn't capable of taking care of this. It must be done by the State Department of Natural Resources (DNR), which may not be able to take care of a fire on Lummi Island for a week. Language about trespassers on plan page 90 should be clarified and removed also. Fleetwood stated the public should submit written comments before a Council work session. Brenner asked if the language was deleted from the Parks and Recreation Plan. Jim Dickinson stated it was. There is public property on Lummi Mountain, but it is designated as a resource conservation area, with no money for enforcement, and a wildlife area, where the State doesn't allow the public. Hearing no one else, Fleetwood closed the public hearing. Caskey-Schreiber moved to hold in committee. She's glad to see the Lummi Island residents turn out tonight. However, there were three opportunities in committee to talk, and no one showed up. The Council would much rather have community input at the committee level. She is happy to delay this item. Middleton stated he has already made change to the plan as a result of comments from Sheila Marshall. Other comments were brought forward to the Planning Commission, which decided to not make those changes. Much of that information isn't new, but is new to the County Council. Brenner asked if the Planning Commission discussed the trespass language referenced by the Dickinson family. Middleton stated he doesn't recall. The original authors of this plan no longer work for the County. The Council will have to remove the language about Lummi Mountain in committee. That will take time. The language regarding trails has been removed from the Parks Plan. Caskey-Schreiber stated the Planning Committee will have a work session on this item. She withdrew her motion to table. Crawford stated certain harsh language referenced during the public hearing can be softened. The committee should take a look at the permit metering issue. Caskey-Schreiber moved to have a Committee of the Whole meeting on this item on April 21 from 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m., before the surface water work session. Any changes can be made at that time, and an amended copy can be included in the Council packet for a introduction on April 28 and a public hearing on May 12, in time for the concurrency review vote. Brenner stated one hour isn't enough time to discuss this item. Motion carried 5-2 with Crawford and Kelly opposed. 1. RESOLUTION APPROVING MODIFICATIONS TO THE 2008 WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE PLAN (AB2009-184) Whatcom County Council, 4/14/2008, Page 5 287 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DISCLAIMER: This document is a draft and is provided as a courtesy. This document is not to be considered as the final minutes. All information contained herein is subject to change upon further review and approval by the Whatcom County Council. Fleetwood opened the public hearing. Mary Dickinson, citizen, stated she thanks Parks and Recreation Department Director Mike McFarlane for his hard work and the County Council for approving their amendments to the plan. She supports the plan. David Dickinson, 4100 Legoe Bay Road, Lummi Island, stated he approves the decision to remove language regarding a trail system on Lummi Mountain. According to the State Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Lummi Mountain is the most explosive fuel load west of the Cascades. They are afraid of someone lighting a fire in the area. Their only plan for a response is to build a fire line at the bottom of the mountain. When the trees fall, the wood doesn't rot as quickly as normal. Hearing no one else, Fleetwood closed the public hearing. Brenner moved approval of the resolution. Motion carried 7-0. 2. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 1.08.170 TO CLARIFY PROCEDURES FOR THE "MINI -INITIATIVE", AND WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 1.08.090, "PETITION - REQUIRED NUMBER OF SIGNATURES", TO AMEND THE LANGUAGE SO THAT EACH CONFORMS TO LANGUAGE USED IN THE WHATCOM COUNTY CHARTER (AB2009-185) Fleetwood opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, closed the public hearing. Nelson moved to adopt the ordinance. Shirley Forslof, Auditor, stated a previous Charter amendment was based on 15 percent of the number of voters voting in the last general election. The Code still references the last gubernatorial election. This ordinance makes the County Code the same as the County Charter. She explained the mini -initiative process. Motion carried 7-0. 3. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE TITLE 21, LAND DIVISION REGULATIONS, REGARDING GENERAL PROVISIONS, EXEMPT LAND DIVISIONS AND BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENTS, SHORT SUBDIVISIONS, PRELIMINARY LONG SUBDIVISIONS, FINAL LONG SUBDIVISIONS, SURVEYS AND DEDICATIONS, AND DEFINITIONS (AB2009- 177) Fleetwood opened the public hearing. Mary Dickinson, Building Industry Association of Whatcom County Governmental Affairs Director, submitted and read from her testimony (on file) regarding a boundary line issue. Hold this item in committee. Whatcom County Council, 4/14/2008, Page 6 Ko 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DISCLAIMER: This document is a draft and is provided as a courtesy. This document is not to be considered as the final minutes. All information contained herein is subject to change upon further review and approval by the Whatcom County Council. Hearing no one else, Fleetwood closed the public hearing. Crawford stated he has suggestions for amendments. He would like to work with staff. David Stalheim, Planning and Development Services Department Director, stated holding this item for two weeks would allow time to work on amendments. Brenner stated she also has ideas for amendments that she will send to Director Stalheim. It seems like this language is a little different from what is in place right now. She thought that it's okay as long as they don't create any additional nonconforming lots with a boundary line adjustment. Now the language says they can't create either lot becoming more nonconforming in size. She asked if that is new language. Stalheim stated it is existing standard practice and consistent with Hearing Examiner rulings. This question has to do with the next public hearing item on the agenda, which he also recommends referring to committee. Kelly moved to refer to the Planning and Development Committee for a short work session in two weeks. Motion carried 7-0. 4. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 20.83.110 TO INCLUDE LANGUAGE REGARDING "REDUCTION OF AREA" IN THE NON -CONFORMING USE CHAPTER (AB2009-179) Fleetwood opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, closed the hearing. Brenner asked if two nonconforming lots couldn't have a boundary line adjustment. David Stalheim, Planning and Development Services Director, stated there can be a boundary line adjustment. The County requires an equal trade, so the nonconformity of neither lot is increased. Brenner moved to refer to committee. Motion carried 6-1 with Caskey-Schreiber opposed. CONSENT AGENDA Crawford reported for the Finance Committee and moved to approve Consent Agenda items one through five, seven, nine, and ten. Motion carried 7-0. 1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND JIM SNYDAR FOR A FARM LEASE OF 80 ACRES AT HOVANDER HOMESTEAD PARK, IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,000 (AB2009-191) Whatcom County Council, 4/14/2008, Page 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DISCLAIMER: This document is a draft and is provided as a courtesy. This document is not to be considered as the final minutes. All information contained herein is subject to change upon further review and approval by the Whatcom County Council. 2. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND JEFF RAINEY, COLDSTREAM FARM, LLC FOR APPROXIMATELY 64 ACRES OF LAND KNOWN AS -EAST ACME FARM" IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,400 (AB2009-192) 3. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO THE RENEWAL AND EXTENSION OF THE USE OF PREMISES AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE LUMMI COMMERCIAL COMPANY FOR A FERRY VEHICULAR TRAFFIC PARKING AREA, IN THE AMOUNT OF $50,975.09 (AB2009-193) 4. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A RENEWAL OF THE CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND DFM ASSOCIATES FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ANNUAL MAINTENANCE FEE FOR THE ELECTION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, IN THE AMOUNT OF $48,000 (AB2009-194) S. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND NORTHWEST HYDRAULIC CONSULTANTS, INC. FOR SCOUR EVALUATION AT VARIOUS COUNTY BRIDGES, IN THE AMOUNT OF $18,862 (AB2009-195) 6. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FROM THE COUNTY COUNCIL AND THE WHATCOM COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FOR PUBLIC WORKS RIVER & FLOOD DIVISION TO AWARD BID #09-28 FOR ON -CALL CONTRACTOR/EQUIPMENT FOR PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS, IN AN AMOUNT THAT MAY EXCEED $35,000 (AB2009-196) Crawford moved to approve the request as the Whatcom County Council. Motion carried 7-0. (Clerk's Note: Council acting as the Whatcom County Flood Control Zone District Board of Supervisors. Board Chair Weimer assumed the duties of the Chair for this portion of the meeting.) Crawford moved to approve this item and Consent Agenda item eight as the Whatcom County Flood Control Zone District Board of Supervisors. Motion carried 7-0. 7. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BID #09-29 FOR ON - CALL RENTAL EQUIPMENT FOR PROJECTS FOR PUBLIC WORKS AND OTHER DEPARTMENTS, IN AN AMOUNT THAT MAY EXCEED $35,000 (AB2009-197) 8. REQUESTS AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN AMENDED CONTRACT WITH WILSON ENGINEERING FOR THE ACME EARLY CHINOOK RESTORATION PROJECT, IN THE AMENDED AMOUNT OF $33,000, FOR A TOTAL CONTRACT OF $159,000 (AB2009-198) Whatcom County Council, 4/14/2008, Page 8 290 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DISCLAIMER: This document is a draft and is provided as a courtesy. This document is not to be considered as the final minutes. All information contained herein is subject to change upon further review and approval by the Whatcom County Council. (Clerk's Note: See Consent Agenda item six for approval of this item.) 9. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND SUSTAINABLE CONNECTIONS TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL WORK ON THE ZERO WASTE INITIATIVE EFFORT, IN THE AMENDED AMOUNT OF $30,000, FOR A TOTAL CONTRACT OF $50,000 (AB2009-199) 10. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPLY FOR A DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY COASTAL PROTECTION — WATER QUALITY GRANT ON BEHALF OF THE WHATCOM LAND TRUST FOR THE ACQUISITION OF FIVE ACRES OF WETLANDS ON THE SAMISH RIVER IN THE AMOUNT OF $21,000 (AB2009-200) OTHER ITEMS 1. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WHATCOM COUNTY CODE TO ADD SECTION 20.04.075 TO ADDRESS BOUNDARY MAPS FOR THE REGULATED WATERSHEDS OF WHATCOM COUNTY (AB2009-163) Weimer reported for the Natural Resources Committee and moved to adopt the ordinance. Brenner stated that if a citizen brings in LIDAR maps of their property, which is in a questioned area, the County staff will consider those maps rather than requiring the citizen to get a hydrologist report. Wayne Harrison, Planning and Development Services Department, stated the presentation of LIDAR maps would be worthy of consideration in the decision -making process. Crawford stated the LIDAR maps belong to the County, which will continue to use that information to determine watershed boundaries. He will support this item because the only alternative to this policy is to include an area beyond the watershed boundary, which isn't acceptable. Instead, this is a compromise. It does allow some administrative leeway, which could be concerning if the administration takes too much regulatory authority. However, the option is much stricter because these maps are somewhat inaccurate. The County doesn't have the resources to do topographic and hydrologic study for every watershed boundary. This is a lesser of two evils. Motion carried 7-0. 2. ORDINANCE REPEALING ORDINANCE 98-075, AMENDMENTS TO THE FLOOD CONTROL MAINTENANCE PROGRAM (AB2009-161) Weimer reported for the Natural Resources Committee and moved to adopt the ordinance. Whatcom County Council, 4/14/2008, Page 9 291 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DISCLAIMER: This document is a draft and is provided as a courtesy. This document is not to be considered as the final minutes. All information contained herein is subject to change upon further review and approval by the Whatcom County Council. Motion carried 7-0. 3. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE RULES GOVERNING MEMBERSHIP, VACANCIES, AND MEETINGS OF THE FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND RECODIFYING THEM FROM WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 2.92 TO WHATCOM COUNTY CODE TITLE 100, FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT (AB2009-186) (Clerk's Note: Council acting as the Whatcom County Flood Control Zone District Board of Supervisors. Board Chair Weimer assumed the duties of the Chair for this portion of the meeting.) Weimer reported for the Natural Resources Committee and moved to approve the substitute resolution. Brenner moved to amend 100.02.040(C), "...or a geographic area sheuld shall serve more than...." Motion to amend carried 7-0. Motion to approve as amended carried 7-0. 4. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE WHATCOM CONSERVATION DISTRICT TO IMPLEMENT A PILOT SMALL FARM COST - SHARE PROJECT IN THE DRAYTON HARBOR SHELLFISH PROTECTION DISTRICT IN THE AMOUNT OF $50,000 (AB2009-190) Crawford reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee and moved to approve the request. Motion carried 7-0. 5. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 2.78, SOLID WASTE ADVISORY COMMITTEE (AB2008-343) (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side B.) Brenner reported for the Public Works and Safety Committee and moved to adopt the ordinance. Motion carried 7-0. 6. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS OF WHATCOM COUNTY CODE, TITLE 20, TO REORGANIZE AND RELOCATE SETBACK STANDARDS FOR CLARITY OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF EACH ZONE (AB2009- 175) Caskey-Schreiber reported for the Planning and Development Committee and moved to adopt the ordinance. Whatcom County Council, 4/14/2008, Page 10 292 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DISCLAIMER: This document is a draft and is provided as a courtesy. This document is not to be considered as the final minutes. All information contained herein is subject to change upon further review and approval by the Whatcom County Council. Crawford stated he will support the ordinance because it does not increase any setbacks. Motion carried 7-0. 7. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE, TITLE 20, TO ADOPT REGULATIONS WITHIN THE URMX ZONE, MODIFY DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL WITHOUT PUBLIC WATER AND SEWER SERVICE, AND AMEND THE CLUSTER SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENTS IN THE UR, URM, AND URMX ZONES (AB2009-176) Caskey-Schreiber reported for the Planning and Development Committee and moved to adopt the ordinance. Motion carried 7-0. 8. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN AMENDMENT TO THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE CITY OF BELLINGHAM FOR THE PURPOSE OF ANNEXATION OF APPROXIMATELY 20 ACRES — THE CORDATA PARK ANNEXATION (AB2009-203) Caskey-Schreiber reported for the Planning and Development Committee and moved to hold in committee for two weeks. Motion carried 7-0. OTHER BUSINESS DISCUSSION REGARDING THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION OF THE VAN WYCK/DAMES ST. AND QUEEN MOUNTAIN AREAS OF THE BELLINGHAM URBAN GROWTH AREA (AB2009-202) Caskey-Schreiber reported for the Planning and Development Services Committee and moved to invoke jurisdiction. Crawford stated Executive Kremen may also invoke jurisdiction. If the County does not invoke jurisdiction, it must have a future population projection for the City of Bellingham that makes sense for the annexations as they go into the 2029 and 2031 process. That may involve some kicking and screaming on the part of the City, although their councilmembers are cognizant that this was more of a statement than a real number. City Council Member Weiss even said the City would change it if the County did something about rural density. The City isn't using the appropriate time or tool to do this, but at the same time, there is a solution that is relatively simple. Don't invoke jurisdiction on these matters. Brenner stated she doesn't support the motion. She disagrees that it would create any problems for the County Planning Department. This is an annexation that has already come forward. Move forward in good faith. It's not something they should deal with. Whatcom County Council, 4/14/2008, Page 11 293 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DISCLAIMER: This document is a draft and is provided as a courtesy. This document is not to be considered as the final minutes. All information contained herein is subject to change upon further review and approval by the Whatcom County Council. Caskey-Schreiber stated the County Council always the purchase of development rights (PDR) and transfe programs. This is one way the County can make that motivation and intention, but they're very inexperienced. Motion failed 1-6 with Kelly in favor. INTRODUCTION ITEMS Brenner moved to accept the Introduction Items. Motion carried 7-0. r criticizes the City for holding up of development rights (TDR) happen. They have the right 1. RESOLUTION IN THE MATTER OF VACATING A PORTION OF SAXON ROAD (AB2009-128) (HEARING TO BE SCHEDULED) 2. RESOLUTION VACATING A PORTION OF GRANDVIEW ROAD (AB2009-093A) (HEARING TO BE SCHEDULED) 3. ORDINANCE REGARDING ESTABLISHMENT OF SPEED LIMITS ON BIRCH BAY AND HARBORVIEW DRIVES (AB2009-201) (HEARING TO BE SCHEDULED) 4. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO ADD THE NECESSARY REFERENCES TO RECOGNIZE THE SIGNIFICANCE OF LAKE WHATCOM AS A DRINKING WATER SOURCE, THE STATE LISTING OF LAKE WHATCOM AS AN IMPAIRED WATERBODY, AND THE ROLE OF FORESTRY IN THE LAKE WHATCOM WATERSHED (AB2009-204) 5. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REMOVING THE "PROVISIONAL URBAN GROWTH AREA" DESIGNATION FROM SUDDEN VALLEY (AB2009-205) 6. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE, TITLE 20, TO AMEND THE BELLINGHAM URBAN FRINGE SUBAREA PLAN (AB2009-206) 7. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 2009 WHATCOM COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT BUDGET, THIRD REQUEST, IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,386,980 (AB2009-207) 8. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2009 WHATCOM COUNTY BUDGET, FOURTH REQUEST, IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,140,000 (AB2009-208) 9. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 24.06, SOLID WASTE RULES AND REGULATIONS — STANDARDS AND PERMITS, TO ALLOW RETRACTABLE SHARPS WASTE TO BE DISPOSED AS SOLID WASTE IN THE MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE STREAM (AB2009-189) (COUNCIL ACTING AS THE HEALTH BOARD) Whatcom County Council, 4/14/2008, Page 12 294 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 DISCLAIMER: This document is a draft and is provided as a courtesy. This document is not to be considered as the final minutes. All information contained herein is subject to change upon further review and approval by the Whatcom County Council. 10. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 3.16.110, REMOVING SPECIFIC REFERENCE TO RCW 36.67 (AB2009-187) OTHER BUSINESS There was no other business. REPORTS AND OTHER ITEMS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS There were no reports or other items. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 8:51 p.m. Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription The Council approved these minutes on ATTEST: Dana Brown -Davis, Council Clerk 2009. WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Seth Fleetwood, Council Chair Whatcom County Council, 4/14/2008, Page 13 295 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 DISCLAIMER: This document is a draft and is provided as a courtesy. This document is not to be considered as the final minutes. All information contained herein is subject to change upon further review and approval by the Whatcom County Council. WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL Special Committee Of The Whole April 21, 2009 Council Chair Seth Fleetwood called the meeting to order at 9:11 a.m. in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington. Present: Absent: Sam Crawford Bob Kelly Carl Weimer Laurie Caskey-Schreiber L. Ward Nelson Barbara Brenner ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE WHATCOM COUNTY LUMMI ISLAND SUBAREA PLAN (AB2009-088A) Roland Middleton, Public Works Department, submitted information (on file) with a recommended amendment regarding newly acquired beach access. Caskey-Schreiber moved to approve the recommended amendment to plan page 55 as shown in the handout. Motion carried 5-0 with Kelly and Brenner absent. Middleton stated information from Al and Sheila Marshall had to do with typos and misunderstandings, and have been corrected. (Clerk's Note: Discussion continued below.) DISCUSSION REGARDING THE URBAN GROWTH AREAS REVIEW PROCESS (AB2009-052) David Stalheim, Planning and Development Services Department, submitted and read through a handout (on file). Weimer asked if the EIS will inform them of the reality of the numbers in the handout. It seems the City numbers may not be realistic. Stalheim stated the EIS will inform them of the impacts. The question is whether the market will follow these City proposals. If they tightly constrain Bellingham, the smaller communities may be more successful. Weimer stated Everson wants to grow in size, but not in jobs, according to the handout. He asked if they are creating bedroom communities. Stalheim stated staff is looking at increasing those jobs numbers. Special Committee of the Whole, 4/21/2009, Page 1 296 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DISCLAIMER: This document is a draft and is provided as a courtesy. This document is not to be considered as the final minutes. All information contained herein is subject to change upon further review and approval by the Whatcom County Council. Fleetwood asked about a proportionate versus disproportionate allocation regarding the City of Bellingham. Stalheim stated they need to get a better jobs -to -housing balance. Either lower the employment or raise the population to create a balance. Caskey-Schreiber stated the danger of the X-Y proposal is that it's a fantasy that rural small cities will capture the job market. They have infrastructure issues that will prohibit that growth. The City of Bellingham isn't planning to meet the historic markers for growth. She asked at what point they create more realistic plans. Stalheim described the Growth Management Act process for gathering and using city proposals. Once the County has collected all the city proposals, it will review and respond to those proposals. The County isn't required to choose either X or Y. They can pick and choose between the alternatives. It seems that one reason small cities have chosen option Y to defend their urban growth areas. If they do something differently, the County will scale back those boundaries. Also, they don't want to be bedroom communities for Bellingham. They want to be more self-sustaining. Fleetwood asked about 15 percent being a reasonable rural percentage. Stalheim stated rural growth rates have been trending downward from 24 percent. There are 18,000 existing vested, vacant lots. The growth rate will still be strong for some time. Caskey-Schreiber asked about the timeline. She asked the city deadline to submit their plans. This needs to be before the Planning Committee in September and the full Council by October. Stalheim stated city proposals are due June 1. Most cities will meet that deadline. The County will move forward even if a city doesn't submit a proposal. Once the proposals arrive in June, the cities can make a presentation to the Council and Planning Commission. Have a hearing on the city proposals, and then staff will develop a response to the information received from the cities and public. They anticipate getting this done the last Council meeting in November. This is the extended -deadline schedule given to the cities several months ago. Nelson asked if changes to the EIS requires another EIS. Stalheim stated they may have to do additional environmental review if they do something outside the ranges studied. They tried to study a broad range in the first place. The cities can do their own environmental review if necessary. Nelson asked how they will prevent last minute changes that would require additional study. Stalheim stated the GMCC is aware of the issue. Fleetwood asked for a summary of the next GMCC meeting. Stalheim explained the topics of discussion for the next meeting. Weimer asked how the County is developing its allocations for the Birch Bay area, since it's not incorporated. Stalheim stated they have gathered feedback from the community and the County Council. They have held work sessions in the community. There is a strong feeling to uphold their 2004 community plan. There is a concern about numbers being out of balance with the City of Blaine. Staff is working with local communities on a proposal. The formal proposal will be a staff proposal with community input. ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE WHATCOM COUNTY LUMMI ISLAND SUBAREA PLAN Special Committee of the Whole, 4/21/2009, Page 2 297 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DISCLAIMER: This document is a draft and is provided as a courtesy. This document is not to be considered as the final minutes. All information contained herein is subject to change upon further review and approval by the Whatcom County Council. (AB2009-088A) (Clerk's Note: Discussion continued from above.) Middleton stated he reviewed community comments. He went through the for recommended changes. He will not address suggested changes to the goals. Those are policy issues for the Council. He referenced plan page 50. The FEMA flood area as shown is correct. Crawford stated the language should clarify that property owners within the FEMA designated zones, particularly the V zone, should be aware of development standards in those areas to meet FEMA standards. Middleton stated he will work with River and Flood Manager Paula Cooper to craft clearer language. (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.) Caskey-Schreiber moved to amend, plan page 50 and Wynne Lee's handout, page two, with a correction to one typo, "...heavy rains, especially during high times tides." Motion carried 5-0 with Kelly and Brenner absent. Middleton referenced page 58 about walking trails and trespass. The language is odd, but he doesn't have a recommendation for a change. Middleton stated this is typical language that doesn't really mean anything. Crawford moved to change the last sentence, , These goals will reduce friction over trespass and privacy concerns." Motion carried 5-0 with Kelly and Brenner absent. Middleton referenced page 79. There is no longer a goal regarding growth rate limit and residential building permit allocation system. The Planning Commission chose to leave it in. There was much debate. He believes it's not viable. Strike that entire section, beginning on plan page 79 and going through to page 81. Weimer moved to delete the section entitled Growth Rate Limit and Residential Building Permit Allocation System from plan page 79 through 81, including Table 9. It is part of rural lands protections. Until they figure out what that means, they don't need a goal that addresses it in the plan. (Clerk's Note: Councilmember Brenner arrived at 10:07 a.m.) Motion carried 6-0 with Kelly absent. Middleton referenced plan page 83, which has an error in goal 1.1. Caskey-Schreiber moved to amend goal 1.1, "minimurn maximum." Special Committee of the Whole, 4/21/2009, Page 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 DISCLAIMER: This document is a draft and is provided as a courtesy. This document is not to be considered as the final minutes. All information contained herein is subject to change upon further review and approval by the Whatcom County Council. Motion carried 5-0 with Kelly absent and Brenner out of the room. Middleton referenced plan page 90, goal 3.1h. The Lummi Island planning group recommends that the goal be six instead of 15 single-family residential units. The Planning Commission chose to leave it at 15. Caskey-Schreiber asked if that would change the required water system. She asked if that density is an issue. Middleton stated the density won't change. He's not sure there are any parcels big enough to handle 15 cluster units. There was discussion about cluster development on Lummi Island; water rights; impacts to the aquifer, and; Title 20 clustering requirements in rural lands in the Rural Residential -Island (RRI) zone. Weimer moved to amend plan page 90, goal 3.1h, "fifteen (IS) six (6) single- family residential units...." Crawford suggested a friendly amendment to delete goal 3.1h on plan page 90. Weimer did not accept the friendly amendment. Motion carried 4-2 with Nelson and Crawford opposed and Kelly absent. Middleton referenced table seven, the Land Use Build Out Alternative Scenarios, on plan page 69. The 2003 information was based on 100 gallons per person, per day. The consultant advocated for a change to 110 gallons per person, per day. The groundwater investigation appendix indicates that the base level should be 110 gallons per person, per day. However, he doesn't recommend recalculating the table since it has no force of law. He referenced citizen requests to immediately include information from the groundwater methodology. Once this plan is moved to concurrency, he will bring forward Title 16 changes to the critical areas ordinance to implement this plan. Other goals and action items will be given to the Planning Department for their work program. Caskey-Schreiber moved to add language to plan page 30, under the section regarding Prime Agricultural Soils, regarding Agricultural Resource Lands, as recommended by Darlyn Del Boca in her fax transmittal to Councilmember Caskey-Schreiber dated April 13, 2009 with one sentence deleted, "Agricultural Resource Lands. Although property values on the island are high, land leased for agricultural use is economically viable. Agricultural has been an important activity on Lummi Island since the arrival of the first Europeans....In addition, there are numerous "kitchen gardens." A community garden has been established... To the fullest possible extent, land with such soil should be preserved for future agricultural uses." Motion carried 5-0 with Nelson out of the room and Kelly absent. There was discussion about soils protected by the agricultural protection overlay (APO); adding agricultural zoning to Lummi Island; the overall, broad goals of this plan; Special Committee of the Whole, 4/21/2009, Page 4 299 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DISCLAIMER: This document is a draft and is provided as a courtesy. This document is not to be considered as the final minutes. All information contained herein is subject to change upon further review and approval by the Whatcom County Council. community and Planning Commission discussion about agricultural resource lands being part of the over plan; modifying the APO to include RR -I; Caskey-Schreiber moved to amend plan page 83, under the Subarea Plan Goal heading, "...that will preserve the island's ground water resources, Agricultural Resource Lands, rural character, and sense of community." Fleetwood suggested a friendly amendment to amend plan page 83, under the Subarea Plan Goal heading, "...that will preserve the island's ground water resources, rural character, and sense of community. Rural character is understood to mean ... wooded areas and wildlife and agricultural resource protection - and the lack of...." Caskey-Schreiber accepted the friendly amendment. Motion carried 6-0 with Kelly absent. There was discussion on applying the APO to smaller parcels on Lummi Island; the purpose of the subarea plan and the County Code; public access to the forest areas on the southern part of the island; increasing ferry traffic to the island as they encourage public access; the use of the term hobby farm'; the Reil Harbor facility; Weimer moved to amend the first paragraph in the recreation section on plan page 55, "South of tThe Red Harbor facility is a marine recreation site owned by the Department of Natural Resources - part of the marine trail in Puget Sound. It is a primitive camping and picnicking site for kayakers and boaters. It is only accessible from the water...." Motion carried 6-0 with Kelly absent. Caskey-Schreiber referenced the amendment suggested by resident Wynne Lee regarding the 2006 Groundwater Investigation by Aspect Consulting (on file). She asked Mr. Middleton to review and incorporate the suggestion, if it hasn't already been incorporated. Middleton stated he can make the change to the original groundwater section and as part of the goals. Add language for implementation, "A water management plan consisting of best available science for water retention practices." Weimer moved to add language, "A water management plan consisting of best available science for water retention practices." Motion carried 6-0 with Kelly absent. Weimer moved to designate Lummi Island a stormwater special district. Add a new goal item 2.8 on plan page 87, "Consider the addition of Lummi Island to the stormwater special district of Whatcom County Code 21.2." Brenner stated they should include options and incentives for people to do their own low -impact development to avoid fees. Motion carried 6-0 with Kelly absent. Special Committee of the Whole, 4/21/2009, Page 5 300 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 DISCLAIMER: This document is a draft and is provided as a courtesy. This document is not to be considered as the final minutes. All information contained herein is subject to change upon further review and approval by the Whatcom County Council. Crawford moved to approve the proposed amendments as shown on page three of the handout from Wynne Lee (on file). Motion carried 6-0 with Kelly absent, Fleetwood stated this plan as amended will come before the Council at the next meeting for either an introduction or a public hearing. OTHER BUSINESS There was no other business. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at approximately 11:15 a.m. Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription The Council approved these minutes on , 2009. ATTEST: Dana Brown -Davis, Council Clerk WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Seth Fleetwood, Council Chair Special Committee of the Whole, 4/21/2009, Page 6 301 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 DISCLAIMER: This document is a draft and is provided as a courtesy. This document is not to be considered as the final minutes. All information contained herein is subject to change upon further review and approval by the Whatcom County Council. WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL Committee Of The Whole April 28, 2009 Council Chair Seth Fleetwood called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Conference Room, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington. Present: Absent: Barbara Brenner None Bob Kelly Sam Crawford Carl Weimer Laurie Caskey-Schreiber L. Ward Nelson 1. DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL PROPERTY ACQUISITION FOR THE FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT (AB2009-181) (COUNCIL ACTING AS THE FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS) Brenner moved to go into executive session to discuss this item. Motion carried 6-0 with Caskey-Schreiber out of the room, OTHER BUSINESS ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 6:37 p.m. Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription The Council approved these minutes on ATTEST: Dana Brown -Davis, Council Clerk 2009. WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Seth Fleetwood, Council Chair Committee of the Whole, 4/28/2009, Page 1 302 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 2009-185 CLEARANCES Initial Date Date Received in Council Office Agenda Date Assigned to: originator: �y 09 3/31/09 Introduction Division Head: MAR 2 4 2009 WHATCOMCOUNTi G,OUNr6IL 4./ 14/09 Hearing Dept. Head: f p 4/28/09 Introduc Hearing*ed Prosecutor: 3��� 5/12/09 Hearing Purchasing Budget: Executive: TITLE OF DOCUMENT. ORDINANCE TO CLARIFY MINI -INITIATIVE LANGUAGE AND ENSURE CONSISTENCY BETWEEN THE WHATCOM COUNTY CHARTER AND THE WHATCOM COUNTY CODE (ELECTIONS) A TTA CHMENTS: Ordinance SEPA review required? ( ) Yes ( x ) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing? ( x ) Yes ( ) NO SEPA review completed? ( ) Yes ( ) NO Requested Date: Next available after 13 days from introduction. 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 ordinance to amend the Whatcom County Code to clarify procedures for the "Mini -initiative" under WCC 1.08.170 and to change the language of WCC 1.08.090 "Petition - Required number of signatures" . so that each conforms to language used in the County Charter. COMMITTEE ACTION. COUNCIL ACTION. 3/31/2009: Introduced 4/14/2009: Council Adopted 7-0 Ord. 2009-019 4/28/2009: Council held for another public hearing on May 12, 2009 with substitute version 4/28/2009: Introduced substitute version *4/28/2009: Second Hearing -Bellingham Herald did not run Public Notice on this item Related County Contract #: Related File Numbers: Ordinance or Resolution Number: Ord. 2009-019 Please Note: Once adopted and signed, ordinances and resolutions are available for viewing and printing on the County's website at: WN,11:co.it,hatcom.wa.iisleoanzcil. 303 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 SPONSORED BY: Consent PROPOSED BY: Count' Auditor INTRODUCTION DATE: April 28, 2009 ORDINANCE NO. AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 1.08.170 AND 1.08.090 TO CLARIFY MINI -INITIATIVE LANGUAGE WHEREAS, the Whatcom County Charter, Article 5, and specifically Section 5.41, is the enabling legislation for initiative procedures, including the "mini -initiative"; and WHEREAS, the Whatcom County Code implements the mini -initiative in WCC Sections 1.08.160-1.08.190; and WHEREAS, differences between the language of the Charter and the Code make the procedures for the mini -initiative somewhat difficult to understand; and WHEREAS, the Whatcom County Auditor has recommended clarifying the language so that citizens can better understand the mini -initiative process; and WHEREAS, Whatcom County Code section 1.08.090 calculates required initiative and referendum signatures based upon the last gubernatorial election in conflict with the more authoritative Whatcom County Charter Section 5.40, which requires signatures based upon the last general election. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Whatcom County Council that Whatcom County Code Sections 1.08.170 and 1.08.090 are hereby amended as outlined in Exhibit A to this ordinance. BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that any mini -initiative proposal filed with the County Auditor prior to the effective date of this ordinance shall be processed under the mini -initiative requirements in place at the time the proposal was submitted. ADOPTED this day of , 2009. WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL ATTEST: WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Dana Brown -Davis, Clerk of the Council APPROVED AS TO FORM: Civil Deputy Prosecutor Seth Fleetwood, Council Chair WHATCOM COUNTY EXECUTIVE WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Pete Kremen, County Executive ( ) Approved ( ) Denied Date Signed: 304 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 I: 29 30 31 32 33 EXHIBIT A (ordinance amending mini initiative language) 1.08.170 Mini -initiative — Requirements. A. Any legal voter or organization of legal voters of Whatcom County may file a mini - initiative proposal with the County Auditor, who within Five (5) days, excluding Saturday, Sunday and holidays, shall confer with the petitioner to review the proposal as to form and style. The Auditor shall give the proposed mini -initiative a number, which shall thereafter be the identifying number for the mini -initiative. The Auditor shall then transmit a copy of the proposal to the petitioner who has one hundred and twenty (120) days to collect the signatures of registered voters of the county equal in number to not less than three (3) percent of the number of votes cast in the county in the last gubernatorial election. The one hundred and twenty (120) day period shall begin upon receipt of official notification to petitioner(s) by the Auditor's Office either by certified mail or messenger. B. The original proponent or his designee may turn in signatures at any time within the one hundred and twenty (120) day signature -gathering period. After the initial Filing, the proponents can continue to turn in signatures for an additional thirty (30) days, but in no case shall additional petition signatures be submitted after the initial one hundred and twenty (120) day signature collection period. Upon receipt of petitions containing more than the required number of signatures for validation, the Auditor shall verify the sufficiency of the signatures within 60 days. C. Initiative petitions must bear the signatures of qualified voters equal in number to not less than three percent of the number of votes cast in the county in the last gubernatorial election. (Ord. 80-22 § 5; Ord. 79-31 § 3.1). 1.08.090 Petition — Required number of signatures. Following expiration of the 10-day period referred to in WCC 1.08.070, the petitioner shall have 120 days to collect signatures of the registered voters of the county equal in number to not less than 15 percent of the number of votes cast in the county in the last general election. Each petition shall contain the full text of the proposed measure, ordinance, or amendment to an ordinance, and the ballot title. (Ord. 79-31 § 2.6). 305 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 2009-17 7 CLEARANCES Initial Date Date Received in Council Office Agenda Date_ 3 /31/09 Assigned to: Introduction Originator: '�l k D"I Division Head: MAR 2 4 2009 ��, -15 P COM COUNTY COUNCIL 4/14/09 Hearing, Dept.Flead: 4/28/09 Introduced/ Hearin Prosecutor: 5/12/09 P&D/Hearing Purchasing/Budget: Executive: ew �&Ly—of TITLE OF DOCUMENT.- Ordinance amending the "atcom County Code Title 21, Section 21.03.060. ATTACHMENTS: Staff memo and ordinance with amended Title 21 section. SEPA review required? ( ) Yes ( x) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing? ( x )Fes ( ) NO SEPA review completed? ( ) Yes ( ) NO Requested Date: 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.) Ordinance amending the "atcom County Code Title 21, Section 21.03.060 to include criteria for approval of boundary line adjustments COMMITTEE ACTION.• COUNCIL ACTION.• 4/28/2009: Introduce substitute ordinance 3/31/2009: Introduced tonight & have public hearing 5/12/09. 4/14/2009: Council held to 4/28/2009 Schedule in committee again. 4/28/2009: Council held. Hearing to be scheduled on revised version 5/12/09. 4/28/2009: Introduced revised version *4/28/2009: Second Hearing -Bellingham Herald did not run Public Notices on this item Related County Contract #: Related File Numbers: Ordinance or Resolution Number: 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.us/council. 306 WHATCOM COUNTY Planning & Development Services 5280 Northwest Drive, Bellingham, WA 98226-9097 360-676-6907,TTY 800-833-6384 360-738-2525 Fax �GOM COO 3�P 9SkING�0 MEMORANDUM TO: Pete Kremen and County Council Members FROM: David Stalheim-1l'"%7 DATE: March 19, 2009 RE: Proposed Boundary Line Adjustment Criteria David Stalheim Director J.E. "Sam" Ryan Assistant Director RECEIVED MAR 2 0 2009 PETS KREMEN COUNTY EXECUTIVE The Whatcom County Council adopted Ordinance 2009-007 on February 10, 2009 which amended Title 21 - Land Division Ordinance. After several discussions with County Council and the public, the Council chose to withdraw the criteria for approval of a boundary line adjustment (BLA) until further research could be completed. Planning and Development Services (PDS) is now proposing to amend Title 21 and Title 20 - Zoning Code to include criteria for approval of BLA's and to include language addressing the creation and reconfiguration of non -conforming lots. At public hearing for the previous amendment to Title 21 the Building Industry Association of Whatcom County (BIAWC) presented several concerns regarding the proposed criteria for a BLA. The primary concern of the BIAWC was that PDS was attempting to regulate BLA's similar to subdivisions when the RCW specifically states that BLA's are exempt from subdivision regulations (RCW 58.17.040(6)). The BIAWC also sited a Washington State Supreme Court case City of Seattle v. Crispin (2003) as evidence that BLA's are exempt from platting (subdivision) requirements. PDS does concur that BLA's are exempt from subdivision requirements; however neither the RCW nor the Crispin court case state that BLA's are exempt from other applicable development standards and codes when determining whether a lot has a. building site. This submitted amendment proposes to reference those development standards and codes that are applicable to the review of a BLA and to specifically state that a BLA must meet requirements for the Whatcom County Health Department and the Whatcom County Fire Marshal as criteria for approval of a BLA. The amended criteria allows PDS to determine if a proposed BLA is consistent with minimum lot size per the zoning ordinance and to determine if there is a building site as allowed by the previously mentioned RCW. -1- 307 PDS has also proposed an amendment to Title 20 - Zoning Code to clarify an issue regarding the inability to restrict the creation of non -conforming lots with a BLA which is a zoning issue. The current language for non -conforming lot sizes states: 20.83.110 Reduction of area. Lot area, yards, other open space, off-street parking or loading areas which exist on or after the effective date of this ordinance shall not be reduced below the minimum required by ordinance. This current language allows us to deny a BLA that is proposing to reduce any lot below minimum lot size for zoning if the lot is conforming to the minimum lot size. This language does not address how to proceed in a circumstance where one or both lots in the proposed BLA are already non -conforming lots with respect to lot area. The proposed language would make it clear that no action shall increase the non -conformity with regard to lot area, width, yards, open space, or off-street parking or loading areas. The proposed language does allow the Administrator to approve the creation of a non -conforming lot in accordance with RCW 58.04.007(1). -2_ SPONSORED BY: CONSENT PROPOSED BY: PDS INTRODUCTION DATE: MARCH 31, 2009 ORDINANCE NO. AMENDING TITLE 21, LAND DIVISION REGULATIONS REGARDING GENERAL PROVISIONS, EXEMPT LAND DIVISIONS AND BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENTS, SHORT SUBDIVISIONS, PRELIMINARY LONG SUBDIVISIONS, FINAL LONG SUBDIVISIONS, SURVEYS AND DEDICATIONS, AND DEFINITIONS WHEREAS, the Whatcom County Council requested review of Title 21 with the adoption of the 2007-2008 budget; and WHEREAS, Planning and Development Services staff have undertaken a review of land division procedures conducted in Whatcom County; and WHEREAS, the amendments to the land division ordinance are procedural amendments that do not change development standards applicable to any land division in Whatcom County; and WHEREAS, the County Council has adopted the following Findings and Conclusions: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS 1. The amendments are exempt from review under the State Environmental Policy Act pursuant to WAC 197-11-800(19) 2. Notice of the proposed amendments was circulated to those expressing an interest in the proposed amendments prior to public hearing. Several opportunities were provided to review a preliminary draft of the proposed amendments prior to consideration by the Whatcom County Planning Commission. 3. Notice of the public hearing was provided in the Bellingham Herald at least ten days prior to the hearing. 4. The Whatcom County Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to consider the proposed amendments on November 13, 2008 and recommended approval to the Whatcom County Council regarding the proposed amendments. 5. Notice of the proposed amendments was provided to Washington State Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development (CTED). CTED acknowledged receipt of the proposed amendments on February 29, 2008. 6. A copy of the proposed amendments was provided to all cities within Whatcom County. No comments were received from cities regarding the amendments. 7. The amendments are consistent with RCW 58.17, Plats — subdivisions — dedications. 8. A public hearing on the proposed amendments was held by the Whatcom County Council on December 9, 2008. 309 9. After considering public testimony, the Whatcom County Council adopted Ordinance 2009-007 which removed criteria for review of boundary line adjustments pending legal counsel review. 10. The Whatcom County Council re -introduced proposed changes to boundary line adjustment criteria on March 17, 2009 and a public hearing was scheduled to consider the proposed changes. 11. After review of testimony, it has been found that the proposed amendments regarding boundary line adjustments are consistent with RCW 58.17, Plats — subdivisions — dedications. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Whatcom County Council that: Section 1: Title 21 is amended as indicated in Exhibit 1 of this ordinance. ADOPTED this day of , 2009. ATTEST: Dana Brown -Davis, Clerk of the Council APPROVED as to f _;e7 Civ' epAlPecutor WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Seth Fleetwood, Council Chair ( ) Approved ( ) Denied Pete Kremen, County Executive Date: 310 April 28, 2009 EXHIBIT 1 Amendments to Title 21 - Whatcom County Land Division Ordinance 21.03.060 Boundary line adjustments. The purpose of this section is to provide procedures for the review and approval of adjustments or alterations to boundary lines of existing lots of record which does not create any additional lot, tract, parcel, site or division nor create any lot, tract, parcel, site or division which contains insufficient area and dimension to meet minimum requirements for width and area for a building site. (1)Procedures. Boundary line adjustments shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied as follows: a. Applications shall include information required by WCC 21.03.085. b. Any adjustment of boundary lines must be approved by the Subdivision Administrator prior to the transfer of property ownership between adjacent lots. c. The Subdivision Administrator shall make a preliminary decision on boundary line applications within 45 days following submittal of a complete application or revision, unless the applicant consents to an extension of such time period. d. A title insurance certificate updated not more than sixty (60) days prior to application, which includes all parcels within the adjustment, must be submitted to the Subdivision Administrator with boundary line adjustment applications. e. All persons having an ownership interest within the boundary line adjustment shall sign the final recording document in the presence of a notary public. (2) Decision Criteria. In reviewing a proposed boundary line adjustment, the Subdivision Administrator or Hearing Examiner shall use the following criteria for approval: a. The boundary line adjustment shall not result in the creation of an additional lot. b. With the exception of those boundary line adjustments located within the Agricultural zone, the boundary line adjustment shall result in lots which contain sufficient area and dimensions to meet minimum requirements for width and area for a building site pursuant to this Title. c. The boundary line adjustment shall be consistent with any restrictions, depictions or conditions regarding the overall area in a plat or short plat devoted to open space, environmental mitigation or conservation. d. The boundary line adjustment shall be consistent with any restrictions or conditions of approval for a recorded plat, short plat, zoning permit, or development permit. e. The boundary line adjustment shall not cause boundary lines to cross on - site sewage disposal systems or their reserve areas prevent suitable area for on -site sewage disposal systems, or prevent adequate access to water supplies unless suitable mitigation including, but not limited to the 311 April 28, 2009 granting of utility easements is provided to the satisfaction of Whatcom County; Provided, however, in the Agricultural Zone only those lots with existing on -site sewage disposal systems or potable water supplies are subject to this provision. f. The boundary line adjustment will not create a new access which is unsafe or detrimental to the existing road system because of sight distance, grade, road geometry or other safety concerns, as specified in adopted Whatcom County Road Development Standards. (3) Final approval and recording required. To finalize an approved boundary line adjustment, the applicant must submit to the Subdivision Administrator within one year of preliminary approval final review documents meeting the requirements of approval. a. All persons having an ownership interest within the boundary line ,adjustment shall sign the final recording document in the presence of a notary public. b. Certified legal descriptions of the lots after the boundary line adjustment, together with conveyance document(s) and language clearly binding the property which is conveyed to the remainder portion of the property, shall be prepared by a title company or licensed surveyor for all lots affected by the boundary line adjustment. c. A title insurance certificate updated not more than sixty days prior to recording of the adjustment, which includes all parcels within the adjustment, submitted to the Subdivision Administrator with boundary line adjustment final review documents. d. A final boundary line map, prepared by a licensed surveyor, along with legal descriptions shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval. Two map copies shall be provided for review demonstrating compliance with the prelirninary boundary line adjustment approval. e. A boundary line adjustment is not considered approved until the conveyance documents have been duly stamped as exempt and is filed for record concurrently with all applicable disclosures of WCC 21.03.045 within twelve months of approval of final documents. Failure to record within twelve months of approval means the boundary line adjustment application is expired and must be resubmitted for review and approval. 21.10.020 Definitions. (5) "Building site" means an area of land, consisting of one or more lots or portions of lots, that is: a. Capable of being developed and statutes, including zoning and us minimum lot area, minimum lot width, shoreline master program and health and safety provisions; b. Currently legally developed. er Current federal, state, and local e provisions, dimensional standards, area for construction, minimum lot provisions, critical area provisions or 312 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 2009-179 CLEARANCES Initial Date Date Received in Council Of fhce Agenda Date Ass i ned to: Originator: ?J- I [E C LE � V [ D 1/31/09 Introduction Division Head: MAR 2 4 2009 4/14/09 4/28/2009 Hearing Introduced/ Dept. Head: It11;HATCDM COUNTY COUNCIL Hearin Prosecutor: 5/12/2009 P&D/Hearing Purchasing/Budget: Executive: S% TITLE OF DOCUMENT: Ordinance amending the Whatcom County Code Title 20, Section 20.83.110 ATTACHMENTS. Staff memo and ordinance with amended Title 20 section. SEPA review required? ( ) Yes ( x) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing? ( x ) Yes ( ) NO SEPA review completed? ( ) Yes ( ) NO Requested Date: 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.) Ordinance amending the Whatcom County Code Title 20, Section 20.83.110 to include additional language regarding "reduction of area " in the non -conforming use chapter. COMMITTEE ACTION. • COUNCIL ACTION.• 4/28/2009: Introduce substitute ordinance 3/31/2009: Introduced tonight and have a public hearing on 5/12/09. 4/28/2009•. Council held, Hearing to be Schedule in committee again. scheduledon revised version 5/12/09. 4/28/2009: Introduced revised version. *4/28/2009: Second Hearing -Bellingham Herald did not run Public Notices on this item Related County Contract #: Related File Numbers: Ordinance or Resolution Number: 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. 313 SPONSORED BY: CONSENT PROPOSED BY: PDS INTRODUCTION DATE: MARCH 31, 2009 ORDINANCE NO. AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE, TITLE 20, NONCONFORMING USES AND PARCELS WHEREAS, the Whatcom County Council requested review of Title 21 with the adoption of the 2007-2008 budget; and WHEREAS, Planning and Development Services staff have undertaken a. review of land division procedures conducted in Whatcom County; and WHEREAS, the amendments to the land division ordinance are procedural amendments that do not change development standards applicable to any land division in Whatcom County; and WHEREAS, the County Council has adopted the following Findings and Conclusions: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS 1. The amendments are exempt from review under the State Environmental Policy Act pursuant to WAC 197-11-800(19) 2. Notice of the proposed amendments was circulated to those expressing an interest in the proposed amendments prior to public hearing. Several opportunities were provided to review a preliminary draft of the proposed amendments prior to consideration by the Whatcom County Planning Commission. 3. Notice of the public hearing was provided in the Bellingham Herald at least ten days prior to the hearing. 4. The Whatcom County Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to consider the proposed amendments on November 13, 2008 and recommended approval to the Whatcom County Council regarding the proposed amendments. 5. Notice of the proposed amendments was provided to Washington State Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development (CTED). CTED acknowledged receipt of the proposed amendments on February 29, 2008. 6. A copy of the proposed amendments was provided to all cities within Whatcom County. No comments were received from cities regarding the amendments. 7. The amendments are consistent with RCW 58.17, Plats — subdivisions — dedications. 314 8. A public hearing on the proposed amendments was held by the Whatcom County Council on December 9, 2008. 9. After considering public testimony, the Whatcom County Council adopted Ordinance 2009-007 which removed criteria for review of boundary line adjustments pending legal counsel review. 10. The Whatcom County Council re -introduced proposed changes to boundary line adjustment criteria on March 17, 2009 and a public hearing was scheduled to consider the proposed changes. 11. After review of testimony, it has been found that the proposed amendments regarding boundary line adjustments are consistent with RCW 58.17, Plats — subdivisions — dedications. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Whatcom County Council that: Section 1: Title 20 is amended as indicated in Exhibit 1 of this ordinance. ADOPTED this day of , 2009. ATTEST: Dana Brown -Davis, Clerk of the Council APPROVED as to for Civi ecutor WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON 16 Fleetwo ' r1council C air ( ) Approved ( ) Denied Pete Kremen, County Executive Date: 315 April 28, 2009 EXHIBIT 1 Amendments to Title 20 — Whatcom County Zoning Code 20.83.110 Reduction of area The Administrator shall not cause or increase the nonconformity of lots that are substandard as to lot area and/or lot width requirements through boundary line adjustments, provided however, that the Administrator or Hearing Examiner may approve boundary line adjustments required to satisfy an unidentified or disputed property line or to identify the same in accordance with RCW 58.04.007. In addition, boundary line adjustments in the Agricultural zone in conformance with WCC 20.40.251 and 20.40.252 shall be allowed. 316 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 2009-231 Clearances initialA Date Date Received In Council Office Agenda Date Assigned To: Originator:. 4/13/09 4/28/09 Introduction Division Head: 5 / 12 / 09 Hearin `06 Dept. Head: % Prosecutor: Purchasing/Bud Executive: SL7 ^OR/ — TITLE OP DOCUMENT. Resolution approving sale of F34 and Laurel gravel pits as surplus real property. County tax parcel Nos.390320 018086, 390320 016043 & 390319 494039. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Memorandum 2. Resolution SEPA review required? ( ) Yes (X) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing ? (X) Yes () NO SEPA review completed? ( ) Yes ( ) NO Requested Date: S UMMAR Y STA TEMENT OR LEGAL NOTICE LANGUAGE: Per RCW and Whatcom County Code, the Whatcom County Property Management Committee has recommended the sale of the F34 and Laurel gravel pits (sometimes referred to as the Murray Pits) as surplus property. The properties, comprising a total area of approximately 11 acres, are to be sold together by sealed bid with the minimum sale price of $1,100,000 (one million, one hundred thousand dollars) per the May 22, 2008, appraisal prepared by Sherwood Appraisals. COMMITTEE ACTION: COUNCIL ACTION: 4/28/2009: Introduced Related County Contract #: Related File Numbers: Ordinance or Resolution Number: Please Note: Once adopted and signed, ordinances and resolutions are available for viewing and printing Lon the County's website at. www.co.whatcom.wa.us/council. 317 WHATCOM COUNTY �GOM Co Jim Perkins PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ��P �� Real Estate Manager CIVIC CENTER FRANK M. ABART 322 N. Commercial Street, Suite 210 DIRECTOR �q o? Bellingham, WA 98225-4042 ING'� Telephone: (360) 676-6876 FAX: (360) 738-2468 www. whatcomc ounty. us JPerkins@co.whatcom.wa.us M E M O R A N D U M To: County Executive.Pete Kremen and Honorable Members of the County Council Through: Frank M. Abart, Director j From: Jim Perkins, Public Works Real Estate Manager Z- Date: April 13, 2009 Re: Petition to approve sale of surplus gravel pits The attached petition asks for authorization per RCW 36.34.005 and WCC Chapter 1.10, to sell gravel pits F34 and Laurel (also known as Murray Road Pits) and designated by Whatcom County tax parcel Nos. 390320 018086, 390320 016043 & 390319 494039, as surplus real property. The Whatcom County Property Management Committee has recommended the sale. If approved for sale, the properties combined together (approximately 11 acres) would be auctioned to the highest bidder above a minimum bid of $1,100,000.00 (one million, one hundred thousand dollars). The. minimum bid was established by an independent contract appraisal. • Recommended Action It is recommended that the County Council set a hearing date for the requested sale, publish a notice of sale, and direct the Whatcom County Treasurer to carry out said auction by sealed bid. If the minimum bid is not reached, the property should not be. sold. . Please contact me at extension 50798 if you have any questions regarding this action. Encl. 318 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 SPONSORED BY: Public Works PROPOSED BY: Property Management Committee INTRODUCTION DATE: April 28, 2009 RESOLUTION NO. IN THE MATTER OF APPROVING THE SALE OF SURPLUS GRAVEL PITS WHEREAS, RCW 36.34.005 authorizes counties to establish comprehensive procedures for the management of county property, including the sale of surplus real estate where it is found to be in the best interest of a county to sell same; and WHEREAS, in Whatcom County Code (WCC), Chapter 1.10, Whatcom County has established those procedures; and WHEREAS, the Whatcom County Property Management Committee has recommended the sale of Whatcom County real property known as F34 and Laurel gravel pits (sometimes known as Murray Pits) and the gravel aggregates, minerals and ores contained therein to the highest bidder, by sealed bid, for not less than the appraisal amount as listed below, plus costs; and WHEREAS, WCC 1.10.310 authorizes the Council, after receipt of estimated market values from the Property Management Committee, to establish limitations and conditions upon sale of property, such as the minimum price for said units of property and whether or not a contract will be allowed, or if it will be a cash price; and WHEREAS, WCC 1.10.310, as well as state law, allows the County to reserve from the sale oil, gas, timber and other resources if the Council finds that it is the best interest of the public to reserve these; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that it is the best interest of the County to sell the F34 and Laurel gravel pits, comprising a total combined area of approximately 11 acres, more or less, to the highest bidder by sealed bid LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTIES TO BE SOLD Sell parcel No. 390320 018086 0000 (Approximately .94 acres, more or less) The south 132 feet of the north four acres of the west 10 acres of the Southwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section 20, Township 39 North, Range 3 East, W.M.; EXCEPT the west 20 feet thereof. Sell parcel No. 390320 016043 0000 (Approximately 5.95 acres, more or less) The south six acres of the west quarter of the Southwest quarter of the Southwest quarter; the west 20 feet of the North four acres of the west half of the Southwest quarter of the Southwest quarter; and the west 20 feet of the Northwest quarter of the Southwest quarter: all in Section 20, Township 39 North, Range 3 East, W.M. EXCEPT Axton Road along the southerly boundary thereof. Situate in Whatcom County, Washington. 319 2 Sell parcel No. 390319 494039 0000 (Approximately 4.09 acres, more or less) 3 That portion of the Southeast quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 19, Township 39 4 North, Range 3 East, W.M. described as follows: 5 Beginning at a point on the east line of said section, 30 feet north of the southeast corner 6 thereof; thence North, along the east line of said section, 660 feet; thence West 270 feet; thence 7 South parallel with said east line, 660 feet to the northerly right-of-way line of the Axton Road; 8 thence East, along said right-of-way line, 270 feet to the Point of Beginning. 9 10 Situate in Whatcom County, Washington. 11 12 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the minimum bid for the parcels listed above shall be no less than 13 their combined appraised value of $1,100,000.00 (one million, one hundred thousand dollars) and that 14 Buyer will pay any additional Buyer closing costs normally associated with such a real property 15 transaction; and 16 17 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that transfer of said real properties be by quitclaim deed and that Buyer 18 will represent and warrant in writing to Seller Whatcom County, that Buyer has thoroughly inspected and 19 evaluated the properties for sell, to Buyer's complete satisfaction and Buyer accepts the properties AS -IS 20 with full knowledge of potential liability the Buyer could incur for any environmental hazards or 21 conditions affecting the properties, including, but not limited to, state or federal -mandated reclamation of 22 the properties. Buyer agrees that the purchase price of the properties reflects the agreed upon value of the 23 properties AS -IS, taking into account the aforementioned disclosures; and 24 25 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said purchase of said real properties shall not be allowed under 26 contract and shall be paid either in cash, certified check or money order to the Whatcom County Treasurer 27 at the time of sale; and 28 29 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Whatcom County Treasurer is hereby directed to sell said 30 properties together at no less than the combined appraised value of $1,100,000.00 (one million, one 31 hundred thousand dollars) and that said sale shall take place in accordance with the duties as established in 32 WCC 1.10.290-1.10.390. If the minimum bid is not reached, the properties shall not be sold. 33 34 APPROVED this day of , 2009. 35 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL 36 ATTEST: WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON 37 38 39 Dana Brown -Davis, County Clerk Seth Fleetwood, Council Chair 40 41 42 APPROVED AS TO FORM: 43 44��J 45 Senior Civil Deputy Prosecuting Attorney 46 47 48 320 WHATCOM COUNTY PROPERTY MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE �G0M C COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES �9SH'"G�o� April2, 2009 Steve called the meeting to order at 10:50 A.M o A quorum exists with the following in attendance: o John Romaker, Chief Deputy Assessor, o Michael McFarlane, Parks & Rec. Director; o Frank Abart, PW Director; Jim Perkins, PW Real Estate Manager; o Brad Bennett, Finance Manager; o Steven N. Oliver, W.C. Treasurer; Debbie Hayes, Revenue Deputy / Secretary for the committee Minutes: February 26, 2009 Pg. 1-2 Frank stated he wasn't at the meeting but will make a motion to approve the minutes from February 26, 2009 as written. Mike seconded the. motion. Voted and approved, 5- 0 to accept the minutes as written. Old Business: • Jim Perkins: Tax Parcels: 390319.494039.0000 (F34 Pit) 390320.016043.0000 & 390320.018086.000(Laurel Pit) Frank said the adjacent property owner, Granite Northwest, has expressed an interested in acquiring these parcels. Frank motioned to surplus and sell by sealed bid at public auction for no less than the appraised value of $1.1 mil. Mike McFarlane seconded. Voted and approved, 5- 0, to sell by sealed bid at public auction for no less than the appraised value of $1.1 mil. Public works will prepare agendas and resolutions and forward to Council. New Business: • No new business Other Business: • No other business Meeting Adjourned: 11:05 A.M. Refer to tape for full discussion321 EPA �i � }2 I7 Z � Y SV' •"4�" Jr \ M y.' � F' Ye .� j . i -i ■ D I DO -........ CJ I. • m ZO O i o I- ► P g 8 " 1 F m ; 5. �x MCON SHORT PLAr • o W J . �! ip �� a 6� s n • s u 6.- � � i p gip_ d L� 1 x ! •.•G `.K Q 00 .. l.•. V pi L W_ �W a. G.-wyaaV J�OO ON n: W X m w w w n b w uJ m m o o t T' ._r .�g'.-, ...—. .--... ..—..._...—..-- _ ..—. y g ..—. .._.-. ° G� y �• � I R 9 G SHORR T PLAT a N 1 x KX ,.r 9 I . m Yr -oa m an - b ) iNA O a Q ' 6 w. DAvis sty RT PLAT 4. 7 10 1X m N 0 0 ri i O _ 1 K 1 X N SOT m WLn c tiv o y �$ If. I j Wx E6o57w�GK U �O D►°e' �`4 • <F >>S 1 QE + �X �.7aw�ucea u �VG�gO� GNl7BBAR° Mo L L .Mp0.6CW Aa �LX ° s ► u N �� i O ep i•. VY \P • ... S � c I �x � -'t X � � a'e 0 �N �x el s� Ste,• � V� TV 0. i i 1 • m- I w,xb, b O . s ' m� , • b wa j c 2 vn s .nm� op W 1 N f• i In 323 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. AB2009-088A CLEARANCES Initial Date Date Received in Council Office Agenda Date Assigned to: Originator: Roland `�, i' 3123109 3 / 31 / 2009 Introduction Middleton (/ " Division Head: 4/ 14/ 2009 Public Hearin Dept. Head.• David ` r/ 4/21/2009 Work Session Stalheim Prosecutor: Royce Buclangham 3`3a-a 4/28/2009 Introduction Purchasing/Budget: 5/12/2009 Hearing Executive: Pete Kremen TITLE OF DOCUMENT: Ordinance adopting the Whatcom County Lummi Island Subarea Plan. ATTACHMENTS: (1) Proposed ordinance Notes: Background materials, including the Planning Commission recommendations, are available or review at the County Council office, SEPA review required? ( x ) Yes ( ) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing? , (X ) Yes ( ) NO SEPA review completed? ( x ) Yes ( ) NO Requested Date: 5 / 12 / 2009 SUMMARYSTATEMENT OR LEGAL NOTICE LANGUAGE. Adopt the Whatcom County Lummi Island Subarea plan. This is an update to the 1979 Lummi Island subarea plan. The subarea plan is a part of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan. COMMITTEEACTION: COUNCIL ACTION. 4/21/2009: COTW — Ordinance discussed and 3/31/2009: Introduced amended. Revised version to be introduced 4/14/2009: Council held to a work session on April 21, 2009 4/28/2009: Introduced Related County Contract #: Related File Numbers: Ordinance or Resolution County Planning File # Number: PDS File # CMP 2008-00009 . i {- Ole � Please Note: Once adopted and signed, ordinances and resolutions are available for viewing and printing on the Coun 's website at. www.co.whatcom.wa.us/council. 324 3/23/09 SPONSORED BY: PROPOSED BY: INTRODUCTION DATE: ORDINANCE # ADOPTING WHATCOM COUNTY LUMMI ISLAND SUBAREA PLAN — A COMPONENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHEREAS, The Lummi Island Subarea Plan is a component of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, additional information necessitates updating the 1979 Lummi Island Subarea plan; and WHEREAS, Legal notice of the Planning Commission hearing was published in the Bellingham Herald; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposal; and WHEREAS, The County Council has considered the Planning Commission's recommendations. The Council makes the following findings of fact and conclusions: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. On November 21, 2003 a staff report was issued for Lummi Island proposed plan to the planning commission (file number CMP2003-00011). 2. On November 24, 2003 the Deputy SEPA Official issued a SEPA Determination of Nonsignificance (SEP03-00208). 3. On December 4, 2003 a supplemental staff report was issued. 4. On December 4, 2003 the Planning Commission held a public meeting to review the plan, receive public testimony, and propose amendments. 5. On January 22, 2004 the Planning Commission held a public meeting to review the plan, receive public testimony, and propose amendments. P. 1 325 6. On January 29, 2004 the Planning Commission held a public meeting to review the plan, receive public testimony, and propose amendments. 7. On February 20, 2004 Staff issued the Lummi Island Subarea Summary of Options and Recommendations. 8. On February 26, 2004 the Planning Commission held a public meeting to review the February 20, 2004 Summary of Options and Recommendations and moved to forward the plan to the County Council as amended. 9. On March 23, 2004 the County Council introduces ordinance for review and adoption of the Draft plan. 10. On May 12, 2004 the Deputy SEPA Official withdraws the DNS based on the requirement for new information on groundwater protection. 11. On May 12, 2004 Sylvia Goodwin, Planning Division Manager issued a memorandum to the County Council informing them the plan must be tabled until the Groundwater Study is complete. 12. On October 26, 2005 Aspect Consulting began the Groundwater Study. 13. On December 31, 2006 Aspect Consulting completed the Groundwater Investigation and proposed a methodology for aquifer protection. 14. Pursuant to RCW 36.70.590 legal notice for a public hearing was published in the Bellingham Herald on October 12, 2008. 15. A new Determination of Non -Significance was issued under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) on September 19, 2008. Comments were received from Darlyn DelBoca and David K. Ernst. The comments were reviewed by the Deputy SEPA Official. The comments did not change the Determination of Nonsignificance. 16 The stated goals of the Lummi Island Subarea Plan are: Natural Resource Sustainability (e.g., protection of water supply, water quality and environmentally sensitive areas) Preservation of Island Rural Character (e.g., density of development, protection of open space, etc.) Protection of Property Rights (e.g., fairness in applying new rules that impact the ability of property owners to achieve economic gain from their property and their investment in land). 17. The Lummi Island Planning Committee (LIPC) held 26 monthly meetings scheduled throughout 2002 and 2003, terminating on November 10, 2003, the public was invited. Whatcom County Planning and Development Services held two educational Land Use P. 2 326 Meetings in June 2002, and sponsored a Land Use Attorney Public Meeting in August 2003. Mark Personius, the Planning Consultant, participated in three Public Community Meetings to obtain input on the Draft Plan and answer questions. Whatcom County Planning and Development Services and Aspect Consulting conducted a public workshop to introduce and answer questions regarding the groundwater study on January 28, 2006. A public meeting was held on December 7, 2006 to announce the findings of the groundwater study. A public meeting was held on September 24, 2008 to discuss the proposed amendments from the Ground Water Study and changes to the maximum density. 18. The Plan is consistent with the County Comprehensive Plan, the County -wide Planning Policies and Growth Management Act (GMA) planning goals regarding Citizen Participation, Environment, Open Space and Recreation, and Historic Preservation. 19. The proposed Subarea Plan goals and policies increase the ability to provide services and facilities that can benefit the public health, safety and welfare of the residents and property owners of Lummi Island through transportation, recreational, and water quality goals etc. 20. The island has a resident population of 822 and a potential peak seasonal population almost double that according to the 2000 US Census. 21. Increased rates of dry wells, arsenic contamination and chloride levels have been documented by the Whatcom County Environmental Health Department (P. Chudek, personal communication, August 2003). The December 31, 2006 Conceptual Methodology for Evaluating Groundwater Withdrawal Proposals on North Lummi Island by Aspect Consulting provides a methodology for protection of the aquifer system. 22. Most of the north island remains rural with a settlement pattern of one unit per three or five acres; however, there are some areas that have already developed at suburban rather than rural character. These include higher density developments approved prior to the advent of the Growth Management Act such as the Beach Club Condominiums, Scenic Estates, Lane Spit, and Isle Aire. In other areas shorelines have been densely developed on old small non -conforming lots —often less than an acre. 23. The ferry capacity and level of service are important growth variables that could significantly encourage or retard future growth. Currently the LOS established for the Lummi Island ferry service does not meet the adopted level of service of 513 trips/capita. Therefore, no further subdivisions of land may be approved on Lummi Island until the ferry is upgraded or the LOS is revised. However, short plats and building permits are exempt from the concurrency requirements and these activities have continued on the island in spite of the ferry LOS. The next review of the Capital Facilities Plan will address the revised LOS for the ferry. 24. Both the Lummi Island Planning Survey and the small group discussions of alternative growth management strategies indicated support for increased protection of unique components of the built and natural environment that constitute the island's rural P. 3 327 character, including open fields and woods, hedgerows, farm buildings and old homesteads, open vistas, groundwater recharge areas and environmentally sensitive areas and undeveloped shorelines. Clustering was supported by a majority of respondents on the Planning Survey —most notably "if the reserve tract is legally guaranteed never to be developed". 25. The additional policies recommended regarding development of a Lummi Island Water Management Plan, update of the County Critical Area Ordinance policies on aquifer recharge area protection, and revision of the Lummi Island Aquifer Recharge Area map will help protect groundwater quality and quantity on the island. Mapping of individual drainage basins and specific protection measures and policies should be added when additional data is available. 26. The recommended policies and tables regarding lot consolidation will reduce density in three subdivisions with existing substandard lots where two or more lots are in common ownership. 27. The adoption of the revised zone text for the Rural Residential Island zoning district, will reduce the density on most of the unplatted RRI zoned land to one dwelling unit per 5 acres. 28. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 23, 2008. The Planning Commission approved the staff recommendation with amendments. Amendments included portions of the draft Subarea Plan, maintaining the clustering language for RRI, and changes to the proposed WCC 16.16 to include an exempt well provision and notification to surrounding property owners of the pumping test. CONCLUSIONS The subject amendments are consistent with the approval criteria of WCC 20.10.080 and serve the public interest. The amendments will not create an undue burden under section 1.11 of the County Charter. P. 4 328 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Whatcom County Council that: Whatcom County's Lummi Island Subarea Plan is hereby amended as shown on Exhibit A. ADOPTED this day of , 2008 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL ATTEST: WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Dana Brown -Davis, Council Clerk APPROVED as to form: Ci Dep ecutor P. 5 Seth Fleetwood, Chairperson () Approved () Denied Pete Kremen, Executive Date: 329 Lummi Island Subarea Plan A Component of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan Revised Final Draft Mareh April 2009 330 LUMM ISLAND SUBAREA PLAN A Component of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan March 2009 Whatcom County Executive Pete Kremen Whatcom County Council Seth Fleetwood, Chair Carl Weimer L. Ward Nelson Laurie Caskey-Schreiber Sam Crawford Bob Kelly Barbara Brenner Whatcom County Planning Commission Ken Mann, Chair Jean Melious - Vice -Chair John Belisle David Hunter John Lesow Rabel Burdge Geoff Menzies Ron Roosma John Steensma Whatcom Countv Planning and Development Services Department David Stalheim, Director Hal Hart, AICP, Past Director Sylvia Goodwin, AICP, Past Manager Elizabeth K. Olsen, Planner II, Past Project Manager Roland Middleton, LEG, Special Projects Manager, Public Works Department Becky Boxx, Planning Commission Coordinator Troy Holbrook, Past PDR/TDR Specialist Mike Pelela, GIS Specialist Sarah Watts, Senior GIS Specialist Lummi Island Planning Committee as ADnointed by Pete Kremen Charles Anholt Victor Armfield Gwendolyn Bass Robert Busch Samya Clumpner Kent Doughty Dave Ernst Bob Fodor Rich Frye Pam Gould Polly Hanson David Harmoney Earle Jewell Dana Kershner Wynne Lee Al Marshall Sheila Marshall Gerald McRorie Ria Nickerson Ian O'Callaghan John Robinson Steve Schneider Craig Smith Art Thomas Consultant Mark Personius, AICP, Growth Management Consultant 10223 62nd Ave. South Seattle, WA 98178 Whatcom County Planning Northwest Annex, 5280 Northwest Dr. Bellingham, WA 98226-9094 360-676-6907 Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 331 Table of Contents I. Introduction Major Planning Issues Page 6 The Planning Process & Opportunities for Public Involvement Page 7 II. Existing Conditions & Issues Population & Housing Characteristics Page 12 Land Use Page 20 Groundwater Resources Page 34 Critical Areas Page 41 Shorelines Page 46 Recreation Page 50 Public Services and Facilities/Utilities Page 53 Sewage Disposal Page 54 Transportation Page 55 III. Growth Management Strategies Growth Management Strategies Page 60 Land Use .& Zoning Alternatives Page 61 Policy or Regulatory Alternatives Page 65 IV. Preferred Plan, Policies and Implementation Measures Preferred Plan, Policies and Implementation Measures Page 78 Subarea Plan Goal Page 78 Land Use Implementation Measures Page 78 Shorelines and Critical Areas Implementation Measures Page 81 Recreation & Open Space Implementation Measures Page 84 Public Services and Facilities Implementation Measures Page 86 Transportation Implementation Measures Page 86 V. Appendices Appendix A — Lummi Island Planning Survey Appendix B — Growth Management Alternatives Public Evaluation Appendix C — Conceptual Methodology for Evaluating Groundwater Withdrawal Proposals on North Lummi Island Appendix D — North Lummi Island Hydrogeologic Investigation Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 332 Tables Table 1 — Housing Stock Age Distribution Page 13 Table 2 — Lummi Island Peak Seasonal Population (1966-2000) Page 14 Table 3 — Lummi Island Buildout Analysis (Pre -Existing Zoning) Page 22 Table 4 — Lummi Island Open Space Inventory Page 26 Table 5 — Lummi Island Economic Activity by Location Page 31 Table 6 — Lummi Island Commute Trip Patterns Page 56 Table 7 — Land Use Alternatives Buildout Scenarios Page 64 Table 8 'r..1.L. n — Distribution of Vacant Non -conforming Lots T .... _: T..1__A 1 n0/ A...... 1 TJ...._:__ T L.:♦ !'_-,....A, f1__ Q........-:.. Page 67 TT. -- 17c Table 10 — Platted Lots of Record Prior to 1978 Not Subject to Lot Consolid. Page 88 Figures Figure 1 — Lummi Island Sub Area Planning Process Page 10 Figure 2 — Lummi Island Resident Population Growth & Housing Growth Page 13 Figure 3 — Lummi Island Peak Seasonal Population (1966-2000) Page 14 Figure 4 — Lummi Island Peak Seasonal Population Forecasts (2000-2020) Page 17 Figure 4A — Lummi Island Dwelling Unit Growth Forecasts (2000-2020) Page 17 Page18- Forecasts (2000 2020) Fiffe 5 Lamm} island GFOURw48f-Dependent Pe Page 19 A (Maximum) Figure 6 — Existing Zoning Page 21 Figure 7 — Existing Development Potential Page 23 Figure 8 — Open Space Page 27 Figure 9 — Prime Agricultural Soils Page 29 Figure 10 —Number of Economic Activities by Type Page 31 Figure I I Figure 12 — Cultural and Historic Sites Private Wells Aquifer- Reeharge Areas Page 32 Page 36 Figure 13 and — Public Water Systems (Group A & B) Page 37 Figure 14 — Aquifer Recharge Areas Page 39 Figure 15 — CAO Articles V & VI Aquifer & Wetlands Page 44 Figure 16 — CAO Article VII Wildlife HCA's Page 45 Figure 17 — CAO Articles III & IV Geohazards & FEMA Flood Hazards Page 47 Figure 18 — Shoreline Designations Page 48 Figure 19 — Public Tidelands Page 51 Figure 20 —Non-Conforming Lots Page 66 Figure 21 — Open Space Design and Clustering Page 71 Figure 22 — Example Building & Site Design Standards Page 73 Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 333 Introduction Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 334 Introduction This plan is intended to guide the physical development of Lummi Island for the twenty- year planning period from 2003-2023. It serves as an update to the Lummi Island Subarea Plan originally adopted in 1979. Lummi Island is the largest island in Whatcom County. It comprises the easternmost part of the San Juan Island chain in Puget Sound and is located between Bellingham Bay on the east and Rosario Strait on the west. It is separated from the mainland and Lummi Peninsula by Hale Pass. The island is approximately nine miles long and, on average, one mile wide. The island comprises over 5,600 acres, is home to more than 800 full- time residents, and is served by Whatcorn County public ferry service from Gooseberry Point on the Lummi Indian Nation. The island experienced significant growth in the last twenty plus years that led to the call for a new plan to better deal with the impacts of growth. Residents concerned over the growth -related loss of open space and rural character of the island worked with Whatcom County to establish the Lummi Island Planning Committee (LIPC) and began work on revising their comprehensive plan that was over twenty years old. Among many concerns, the preservation of the community's rural character and protection of groundwater resources are of top priority. The plan discusses the context for growth and its related impacts on the island, identifies potential strategies and techniques to preserve the rural character and mitigate the impacts of growth. It concludes by laying out clear policies to guide the implementation steps necessary to achieve the vision outlined by the community. Major Planning Issues Based on LIPC meetings, discussions with individual residents, business and property owners on the island, the survey results, the vision statement, the adopted 1979 Plan and other input, the most significant issues related to future growth on the island can be summarized into several broad themes. • Natural Resource Sustainability (e.g., protection of water supply, water quality and environmentally sensitive areas) • Preservation of Island Rural Character (e.g., density of development, protection of open space and rural activities like agriculture, preserving socio-economic diversity in the community, building size and appearance, etc.) •--Protection of Private and Public Property Rights (e.g., fairness in applying existing and new rules to all properties) Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update 6 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 335 To be sure, there are other issues of concern to islanders —but they are, in most - -" Formatted: Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: cases, derivatives of these broader thematic issues. Note that discussion of a new 0.25" + Tab after: 0.5" + Indent ferry is specifically excluded here, except in the context of transportation infrastructure issues in Chapter 11. On April 15, 2008 the Whatcom County Council decided to not pursue a new larger ferry at this that time. This 20-yeaz subarea plan assumes ferryFeffy service will be limited to the capabilities of the current ferry to provide that service. The Planning Process & Opportunities for Public Involvement Lummi Island Planning Committee (2001-2003) The Lummi Island Planning Committee (LIPC) began to address the need for an updated growth management plan for the island in January 2001. Comprised of more than twenty members and open to all residents, the LIPC meets monthly to foster discussion about growth issues on the island. Several senior members of the LIPC even served on the original steering committee for the 1979 plan. The LIPC coordinated with the Whatcom County Planning and Development Services Department to: develop an on -going dialogue about growth impacts on the island; brief islanders about important growth issues; and to develop a scope of work for a new subarea plan update. In 2001, a budget was approved to fund a new plan and in 2002 a consultant was retained to help develop the plan. To help drive the new plan, an island -wide survey about growth issues was developed, in coordination with the County, and mailed to over 800 resident and non- resident property owners. The results of the survey are reported in the Appendix. The LIPC has been ::=__'_:fa met monthly to help coordinate and participate in the plan update process. The committee meetings are advertised, open to the public and contain a public comment period to encourage public involvement. To help facilitate the plan update and involve LIPC members to the maximum extent possible in the process, the LIPC established subcommittees to address specific elements of the Plan and advise the County and the Consultant about specific issues. Subcommittees helped utilize the expertise of local residents in helping to put together the best plan possible. The subcommittee's main tasks during the process coincided with the appropriate phase of the planning process. These tasks included: Data Collection and Inventory (Define Existing Conditions) Identify Issues and Alternatives (using the Survey and local knowledge) Recommend Solutions (Implementation Strategies) Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 336 i Subcommittees include: • Shorelines and Critical Areas • Public Services and Utilities • Recreation and Open Space • Transportation • Rural Character • Privacy and Property Rights Public Involvement (2002-2006) In addition to the LIPC meetings, public outreach activities included interviews with selected residents, business owners, and large property owners outside of the committee. The interviews were conducted by staff and the consultant to inform and gather as broad and complete a picture of stakeholder interests and concerns about growth and the planning process as possible. Three island -wide public workshops (town meetings) that coincided with major milestones during the planning process were also held to inform the public about the process and gather public input. Many islanders gave additional, unsolicited input to Planning and Development Services staff, Planning Commissioners, County Council members and the County Executive. Additionally, public workshops and public meetings were held to discuss the Groundwater investigation and proposed methodology for groundwater withdrawl. Visioning on in In 2001 the planning process the LIPC developed a "vision statement". The Vision Statement is intended to look forward into the future, to describe a vision of what islanders would like to see the community look like in the next 20 years. The vision is broken down into specific categories that help provide a clear picture of how the community sees itself and therefore provides guidance in applying growth management tools and techniques to achieve the desired outcomes. The vision statement was presented to the public and validated during a series of public workshops during the planning process. The degree of islanders agreement and disagreement with this statement was obtained in several ways, including: The l?sion Statement Lummi Island's natural beauty, its rural character and community, and the tranquility that accompanies them are preserved. Because these highly valued attributes are fragile, the Island is treated with special care and on -going vigilance. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 337 • Natural Setting —The Island's natural features are a primary source of satisfaction and feeling of well-being for residents. Large open spaces, wooded areas, wetlands, undeveloped shorelines, wildlife habitat, open vistas, air and water quality, and quietness are preserved. Rustic walking trails and access to the water are available. Islanders are dedicated to sustainable management of the Island's marine and terrestrial ecosystems. Community —The Lummi Island communityfunctions as a single neighborhood distinguished by marked levels of interdependence, mutual support, citizen involvement, and socioeconomic diversity. Residents share a sense of history, a safe ambiance, a wide range of community activities, neighborliness, belonging and tolerance within their small cohesive community. Islanders embrace community interaction and cultural activities including small-scale public and commercial enterprises. Rural Character —The Island's natural setting and close-knit rural community, which contribute to the rural character, are enhanced by safe rural roads, an unhurried pace of life, and a sense of privacy. Human activities include small- scale agriculture, cottage, service, and sustainable resource -based industries. Residents are resourceful and self-reliant. They appreciate the calming effect of the rural setting and they understand the effect that their actions have on the island as a whole. Private and public property rights and responsibilities are supported in coordination with sustainable growth management. Subarea Planning Process The island's subarea planning process was comprised of three main phases (see Figure 1). What Do We Have?— This is the data gathering phase. It identified the current conditions and issues to be addressed by the Plan.. The Survey already accomplished much of what this phase is intended to achieve in terms of the public's involvement. The first phase of the subarea planning process presented the goals underlying the 1979 Island Subarea Plan, discussed existing conditions and issues, presented the vision statement and results of the island -wide survey, identified historic and current growth trends and illustrated "what if " scenarios of growth continuing for the next twenty years based on observed trends. These highlights were presented to the public during the first "town meeting" on the plan held in December 2002. 2. What Do We Want?— Based on the issues raised in the Survey and from the LIPC and the public in Phase One, identify and prioritize the major issues to be addressed by the Plan. Analyze those issues and present alternative solutions or strategies to address sustainable growth management —one of the underlying Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 338 foundations of the vision for the island. These alternatives included: 1) land use alternatives (i.e., mapping potential zoning changes); 2) policy alternatives such as establishing preferences for changes in the levels of service for public services and facilities and the imposition of new fees to fund needed improvements; or 3) regulatory alternatives such as adopting new regulations aimed at consolidation of small non -conforming lots or requiring new conditions on future subdivisions and building construction. Findings of this phase were presented during another island -wide public workshop in March 2003. The nominal small group process was utilized at the conclusion of this workshop to allow opportunity for public discourse on the alternatives and to characterize the relative preferences of the attending public towards the various alternatives presented. The summary results of this exercise are presented in the Appendix B. 3. How Do We Get What We Want? —This is the implementation phase. It brings informed consent to the Preliminary Draft Plan. It includes identification of preferred alternatives, policy directives and suggested regulatory changes needed to implement the findings of the Plan. The findings and conclusions of the Preliminary Draft Plan will be were presented for public review and comment during a final island -wide public workshop in September 2003. Public comment and LIPC review and comment will was incorporated into a Final Draft Plan prior to submission to the Whatcom County Planning Commission for their review and recommendation to the County Council who have ultimate authority to adopt the Plan. Additional Data Collection (2004-2006) - Formatted: Left puring May 2004 the Deputy SEPA Official withdrew the Determination of _ Formatted: Font: Times New woman, lz pt, Nonsignificance based on the requirement for new information on groundwater Not Italic protection, thus putting the County Council•'s discussion of the plan on hold. Aspect Consulting began work on the Groundwater Study on October 26, 2005. On December 31, 2006 Aspect Consulting completed the Groundwater Investigation and proposed a methodology f�quifer protection. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 10 ------ f Formatted: Left 339 Figure I Lummi Island Subarea Planning Process WHAT DO WE WHAT DO WE HOW DO WE GET HAVE? WANT? WHAT (Data Collection/Analysis) (Plan Preparation) WE WANT? (Implementation) Identify Issues in the Survey Land Development and Collect Data on: Alternative Plan # 1 Regulations • Land Use (Zoning, Subdivision Regulations, Development Housing Standards, etc.) (2009) • Population Alternative Plan # 2 • Economic Activities • Transportation Recreation u , ,.. ,L , Adopt Subarea Plan & Whatcom County • Public Utilities Alternative Plan # 3 Comprehensive Plan • Community Facilities Amendment (2009) • Environment Town Meeting Town Townes Meeting Meeting Draft Subarea Plan Update e December 2002 Lununi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 March 2003 4 September 2003 — January 2009 M 340 Existing Conditions & Issues Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update 12 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 341 Population & Housing Characteristics History The first permanent white settlers arrived on the island in the late 1800s. Early settlers were primarily loggers, fishermen and farmers. By the turn of the century, portions of the north half of the island were logged to create pastures for livestock grazing and fields for early farms that supported grain, potatoes, fruits and vegetables. Legoe Bay supported a plentiful and popular salmon fishery that, during its peak, supported as many as three salmon canneries employing hundreds of workers on the island. Fish traps and a fleet of purse seiners supplied the canneries until the fish traps were banned in 1935. It was then that the reef netting boats were re-established. In the 1920s the island became a popular recreation and vacation destination for visitors from around the Northwest. Lodges and resort cabins were built to accommodate summer visitors. After World War II, the tourism trend shifted to the construction of second homes, as almost 700 lots were platted in the twenty years following the war. By the advent of the 1970s most of the resorts closed but the number of seasonal homes continued to increase and a large condominium development was built on the north side of the island. The increased rate of growth and density generated the initial concern over the island's rural character and prompted development of the first island land use plan adopted in 1979. During the 1980s and 1990s the development trend shifted to more permanent residents with many seasonal housing units converted to year round occupancy both by retirees and working -age residents who commuted to work in Ferndale and Bellingham. The increased settlement rate placed even greater strains on the limited ferry service capacity. T,aday In 2000 the island has had a resident population of 822 and a potential peak seasonal population almost double that according to the 2000 US Census. A strong commuting population as well as small-scale agricultural industries, forestry, bed -and - breakfast establishments, artisans, a store and other trades currently comprise the economy of the island. There are no major employment -generating industries or businesses located on the island. Growth Trends Lummi Island experienced slow resident population growth from WWII up to 1970 even though subdivision activity was extensive during that time. Population growth lagged behind the subdivision and seasonal housing unit market heading into the 1970s. Table 1 indicates the age distribution of the island housing stock. Figure 2 exhibits the population and housing unit growth for almost the past forty years. The surge in construction of seasonal units during the 1970s brought on the first significant visual impact of growth on the island's rural character and, subsequently, the need for the first subarea plan prepared in 1979. Overall new housing units grew at an Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update 13 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 342 astonishing 3.2% annual average growth rate during the 1970s. The 1980's returned to a period of relatively slow housing unit growth (1.6% average annual growth rate). New housing starts increased again in the 1990's housing boom (2.1% average annual growth rate) as more permanent residents moved to the island which again brought up the concern over loss of rural character and the call for new subarea plan. Table 1 Housing Stock Age Distribution RYearousm Uri�)s`BurTt„ ,ry, s;,,,x , ,_ * �ercelut °u=,ofTo al Ion�n S%ck 1990-2000 28% 1980-1989 12% 1970-1979 22% 1960-1969 14% 1940-1949 12% Prior to 1940 12% Source: Whatcom County Assessor 2002 Interestingly, as more and more undeveloped land was consumed for new housing construction, new subdivision platting activity was dropping sharply. The number of new lots created in the 1990s was half that created in the 1970s. The vast majority of new lots created were in short plats that have four or fewer lots compared to long plats having more than four lots. This is indicative both of the shrinking supply of large undeveloped tracts of land not being used for agricultural or forest resource use on the island and by groundwater constraints. Figure 2 Lummi Island Resident Population Growth & Housing Growth (1966-2000) The housing stock is heavily influenced by seasonal residency. Over the last thirty years housing units occupied on a seasonal or part-time basis accounted for between one-third and one-half of the total island housing stock. According to the latest year 2000 census, year-round occupied homes comprise only 55% of the total housing stock while seasonally occupied or recreational units account for the remaining 45%. Peak seasonal Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 14 343 occupancy occurs during the summer months (particularly weekends and holidays) when the ferry service demand far exceeds capacity and waits for ferry service can be as much as approximately 1 %2 to 2 hours. For planning purposes, resident and peak seasonal population growth trends are shown in Figure 3 and Table 2. Figure 3 Lummi Island Peak Seasonal Population (1966-2000) 1600 1400 1200 0 1000 ■ Estimated Peak a800 Seasonal Population 0 600 400 ®Actual Resident 200 Population 0 1966 1978 1980 1990 2000 Year Table 2 Lummi Island Peak Seasonal Population (1966-2000) 392 335 72 506 458 96 538 460 998 620 550 1,17 822 665 1,48 The average age of island residents is increasing. Residents age 19 and under decreased from 23% of the population in 1990 to 21%today while resident's aged 55 and older . increased from 29% of the population in 1990 to 31 % today. The average household size is decreasing (2.1 in 2000). Lummi Island experienced significant in -migration of resident population in last decade. 61% of residents in year 2000 lived in the same house on island in 1995-39% of permanent residents either lived in a different house on island or moved onto the island in last seven years. In a departure from national and state trends, median incomes on island grew faster than median housing prices during the 1990s. Median home values on the island increased from $117,300 in 1990 to $179,900 in 2000—a 4.4% average annual increase. Median household income increased from $25,500 in 1990 to $42,279 in 2000—a 5.2% average annual increase. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 15 344 As housing and land values increase, housing affordability is becoming a more significant problem. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development generally defines housing as being "affordable" if a household spends no more than 30% of its monthly income for housing costs. The number of Lummi Island owner -occupied households who spent more than 30% of their monthly income on housing costs increased from 5% in 1990 to 34% in 2000—a startling increase reflecting the growing housing affordability gap on the island. The numbers for renter -occupied households are even higher. The rental housing market has tightened considerably in the last decade. Of all year-round occupied units, 79% are owner -occupied and 21% are renter -occupied today compared with 72% owner -occupied and 28% renter -occupied in 1990. Even as the island is becoming more affluent, some lower income residents are leaving due to rising housing costs. 12% of the population earned incomes below the poverty level in 2000 compared with 16% in 1990. The Lummi Island Community Land Trust is in the process of developing a cluster housing project as one means to try and provide more affordable housing opportunities on island. The island has a relatively high level of employment self-sufficiency. Nevertheless, a greater share of the labor force works off - island today than did 10 years ago. 21 % of employed residents in 2000 are self- employed compared with 29% in 1990. About 33% of residents are retired. Future Growth Projections One of the greatest unknowns to growth on Lummi Island is the availability of groundwater in adequate quantity and quality to serve future residents. The previous 4979 subarea plan 1( 9791 was predicated on the conservative assumption that the island's groundwater aquifer could support a net carrying capacity of approximately 2,380 persons —not including those residents dependent upon surface water supplies (i.e., Scenic Estates). The surface water supply is estimated to be able to support a maximum potential of 1,000 persons. However, due to variations in the island's physical geography, the availability of groundwater and surface water supplies is not distributed evenly across the island. Essentially the 2,380 capacity estimate applies to the flatter terrain groundwater -dependent north end of the island (the Rural Residential Island zone) while the mountainous southern end of the island (the Rural Forestry zone) is dependent upon surface water supplies (lakes and impoundments). In total, the previous plan estimated a total island -wide population potential at buildout of approximately 3,400 persons. These carrying capacity estimates were derived from a water budget analysis carried out in 1978 for the island by Dr. Ronald G. Schmidt of Robinson & Noble, Inc. Dr. Schmidt's findings were reported in Water Resources of Northern Lummi Island (Robinson & Noble, Inc, 1978). Dr. Schmidt estimated the amount of recoverable groundwater on a sustained yield basis based on climatic, hydrogeologic and well log data. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 ------- Formatted: Normal -- -- Formatted: Font: 11 pt Formatted: Font: 11 pt 16 345 Dr. Schmidt's work made several critical assumptions insofar as estimating groundwater demand. Calculations of the sustained yield 2,380 ultimate groundwater -dependent population capacity assumed an average daily requirement of 100 gallons per person — while acknowledging that the national standard for such use was 150 gallons per person per day (gppd). The 2,380 population capacity figure also assumed no implementation of water resource management measures and continuation of a very low density dispersed pattern of private individual wells and only seven water associations, or public wells. At the time of Dr. Schmidt's study in 1978, there were only seven water associations on the island. may In 2003 there are were twenty six. However, Dr. Schmidt reasoned that the population carrying capacity could be doubled on the island with implementation of "water resource management and engineering measures ". Suggested measures included creation of surface water impoundments, storage reservoirs, aquifer interties, more community wells, and formation of a public water (and sewer) utility, among others. However, save for the growing number of small community water systems, there has been no significant implementation of water resource management measures or water metering on the island. [For further discussion about the hydro -geologic assumptions used by Dr. Schmidt please refer to the Groundwater section of this chapter]. The 2006 Groundwater Investigation by Aspect Consulting showed a vast complex of aquifers on Lummi Island, thus it is nearly impossible to determine a water budget and defined net carry capacity for the island (Appendix D). Though the water mana eg ment measures as proposed by Dr. Schmidt would help in recharge of the aquifers, Aspect Consulting concluded that a proscriptive methodology for protecting the aquifers was the best immediate measure. The 2006 Proposed Methodology by Aspect Consulting addresses both quantity and quality of water. Proscriptive measures are recommended for all new water withdrawals (Appendix Q. If the measures identified by the proposed methodology are put in place, then the aquifers--- Formatted: indent: Left: 0 First line: o on the island might be sufficient for the population projection of the next 20 years, However, given that the 2006 Groundwater Investigation by Aspect Consulting and previously reported data have determined that there already are existing and increasing problems with water quality and quanti , at the present level of development, it is also recommended to immediately develp and adopt a Water Management Plan consisting of Best Available Science (BAS) water retention practices. Population and Housing Projections (2000-2020) Total Lummi Island population and housing projections for the period 2000-2020 are shown in Figure 4 and 4A respectively. The projections indicate a 2020 maximum peak seasonal population in excess of 2,500 (assuming full occupancy.) and from about 900- 1,100 total dwelling units islandwide. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 17 346 1 1 Figure 4 Lummi Island Peak Seasonal Population Forecasts 2000-2020 Figure 4A Lummi Island Dwelling Unit Growth Forecasts (2000-2020) ■Existing Dwelling Units ■ Projected Peak DU (1.87%) 13Projected Peak DU (2.13%) ❑Projected Peak DU (3.17%) 1966 1978 1980 1990 2000 2010 2015 2020 Year 1966-1960 Average Annual Dwelling Unit Growth Rate = 3.17% 19W2000 Average Annual Dwelling Unit Growth Rate = 1.67% 1990-2000 Average Annual Dwelling Unit Growth Rate = 2.13% Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update 18 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 347 Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 2,500�° 2,000 \a�asa� t ."gg "ON 1,500 \ ■Resident Population 1,000 '` ■Projected Peak Seasonal 500 Popn. \ DEstimate imum Peak 8 Population 0 2000 2010 2015 2mn Groundwater -Dependent Dwelling Units based upon 1.9 % Average Year Annual Growth Rate from 2000-2020 Ferry Capacity The ferry capacity and level of service are also important growth variables that could significantly encourage or retard future growth. Guffentl-y-In 2003 the ferry is not to did not maintain its adopted level -of -service. The Capital Facilities Plan will need a a separate fianty planning s4udy is under -way to resolve those level -of -service issues. Nevertheless, the alternative growth projections are intended to provide the public and policy -makers with a better understanding of what future population and housing unit levels might look like in the next twenty years based on historic growth trends as well as look at the potential impacts on groundwater supply and quality, open space and rural character. Land Use Existing Conditions The topography of the island has been a key determinant to its settlement pattern. The northern portion of the island is relatively low-lying and gently rolling, with elevations to Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 20 349 362 feet above sea level. The southern portion is mountainous with a maximum elevation of 1,665 feet. The northern end of the island is zoned Rural Residential Island (RR -I) and the southern end is zoned Rural Forestry (RF) and includes a large portion of land, which is owned by the Department of Natural Resources and the Department of Wildlife. Most of the residential population is located on the north part of the island while most of the southern part of the island is comprised of the undeveloped flanks of Lummi Mountain with the exception of the Scenic Estates subdivision. The 1979 Plan established the Rural Residential Island (RR -I) zone with a density of one unit per five acres inside identified aquifer recharge areas and one unit per 3 acres in areas outside the aquifer recharge areas. The Rural Forestry designation allows a density of one unit per twenty acres. See Figure 6, Existing Zoning. The RRI zone is essentially a mixed -use rural zone allowing residential and agricultural uses outright and limited commercial activities by conditional use permit. The Rural Forestry (RF) zone allows forestry practices including the operation of forestry equipment, watershed management, single family dwellings and accessory buildings, home occupations, utilities, mining and. living quarters for employees. Existing land use is predominantly residential with several large tracts still held for agricultural and grazing use and limited forest practices. Significant public land holdings on the southern end of the island are used for wildlife management. Commercial activities are most concentrated close to the Ferry Dock and include the Islander Store, Post Office, Library, Latte Dah, and Beach Cafd. Other commercial activities are scattered across the island and include a restaurant and inn and bed and breakfast establishments. Although most employed residents commute off -island, there are also a significant number of self-employed residents, home -based businesses and cottage industries on the island. See Figure 10 and Table 5, see page 2&. 32. The Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan (WCCP 1997) recognizes cottage industries, home occupations, small businesses and natural resource -based jobs as the main base for rural resident's livelihood. These are compatible with the rural lifestyle of the island. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 FT 350 Figure 6 — Existing Zoning Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update 22 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 351 Currently commercial development is allowed as a conditional use, in accordance to the RR -I zoning, on the northern half of Lummi Island. Cottage industries are allowed as an administrative use and are subject to requirements regarding numbers of employees, square footage limitations on the use of existing structures, location, parcel size, materials needed for the business and signage. Commercial development is restricted from being built anywhere on the northern -half of the island where the distance between the ordinary high water mark and the county road right-of-way is less than 100 feet. If the distance is 100 feet or greater, commercial uses are restricted to home occupations only, or cottage industries. All light industrial, commercial and multi -family residential uses are allowed only through conditional use permits. Stand-alone commercial uses are encouraged to locate in close proximity to the Ferry Dock or Legoe Bay. There are also design and location considerations in the 1979 Plan that apply to commercial development. There is recognition that any form of future development should have "a positive relationship between man-made structures and the island... and should be an important determinant in preserving the desired character and in enhancing the quality of life. " These considerations in the conditional use application process ensure applicants are aware of design considerations that complement the current rural character of Lummi Island. Size, scale, visual appearance, view blockage, light and glare, noise, smoke and fumes are all identified as aspects that should be reviewed on proposed commercial projects. Development Potential To assess the pre-existing development potential of the island a buildout analysis was prepared. Buildout analysis is a tool to help understand what might happen if everybody developed their property to the maximum density allowed under the current zoning code. The analysis examined developed, undeveloped and underutilized lands on the island to ascertain the remaining development potential. The results are illustrated in Figure 7 and in Table 3. Table 3 Lummi :Island Buildout Analysis (Pre -Existing Zoning) RRI - 3 ac. 427 445 872 RRI - 5 ac. 133 118 251 RF 83 340 423 643 903 1,546 Notes: *Based upon Assessor Land Use Code and Improvement Value **Includes vacant and underdeveloped/redevelopable parcels. See map for category definitions. Source: Whatcom County Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 23 352 RI Wry hY]/1 Lumml Peninsula 0—*Mm M ff"SPL Flpere 7 -Existing Development Potential Legend C6— 11.6 um`vi mar�rxo.�.numeu uar ® Fully Developed Lot Vacant Lot Underdeveloped Parcel 0 Redevelopable Parcel 0 Undeveloped Parcel ® Publialconservaton ® Recharge Areas -1979 Plan W.1 Ilsh DRAFT Lummi Island subarea Mw a ab 1 1.5 Figure 7 — Existing Development Potential Lumini Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 24 353 The analysis indicates that potential buildout under pre-existing zoning is approximately 1,546 dwelling units or about 3,247 residents. Meaning that under current zoning the island could accommodate more than double the number of existing housing units and up to four times the current population. The potential buildout of northern Lummi island alone (based on 1978 groundwater carrying capacity estimates) is 1,123 dwelling units or about 2,358 persons. In 2003, the The entire island is was ewFently-at 42% of zoning buildout potential. The North Island (RR -I zone) is eaFfe�}y-was at 49% of potential buildout based upon .upon current zoning These two buildout scenarios provide a reference point for examining future growth management strategies. Whether one sees the development "glass" as half -empty or half -full, the potential threat to rural character is evident. Rural Character Rural character is a sometimes hard to define concept but it is often remarked that "you know it when you see it". The Growth Management Act [at RCW 36.70A.030] defines it this way: "`Rural character'refers to the patterns of land use and development established by a county in the rural element of its comprehensive plan: (a) In which open space, the natural landscape, and vegetation predominate over the built environment; (b) That foster traditional rural lifestyles, rural -based economies, and opportunities to both live and work in rural areas; (c) That provide visual landscapes that are traditionally found in rural areas and communities; (d) That are compatible with the use of the land by wildlife and for fish and wildlife habitat, (e) That reduce the inappropriate conversion of undeveloped land into sprawling, low -density development, (fl That generally do not require the extension of urban governmental services; and (g) That are consistent with the protection of natural surface water flows and ground water and surface water recharge and discharge areas. " Several surveys were conducted leading up to the preparation of this Subarea Plan that specifically looked at the issue of rural character on Lummi Island. The first of these was a Visual Preference Survey prepared by planning students from Western Washington University and published in the Lummi Island Rural Character Study (2002). The second was the Lummi Island Planning Survey conducted in 2002 by the LIPC. Respondents to the Visual Preference Survey indicated very strong preferences for landscapes and roads with open spaces and woods, modest "non -suburban subdivision Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 25 354 style" housing set naturally into the environment with small stores and farms, and an absence of suburban "amenities" such as commercial strip malls. The Lummi Island Planning Survey indicated that the majority of residents wanted to see slower growth than that experienced in the 1990s. The Survey also asked several specific questions about rural character; including the following (answers are in percentages of total respondents): • How valuable to you are the following aspects of the Island's rural character? ! j Very Somewhat Not at all a. Rural character of roads 6868 21 10 1b. Small scale of public and commercial enterprises �! { 65 ! 27 8 ic. Unhurried pace of life 75 19 6 Id. Sustainability of resource -based enterprises 50 1 38 12 1 e. Sense of privacy f. Housing & landscaping appropriate to rural community 61 27 12 • The current 1979 land use plan relies heavily on water availability as the primary tool for managing growth. Which of the following factors do you think should be considered as management tools in forming the new land use plan? (Mark all that you support) a. Water quality and quantity. 90 b. Transportation time and costs (roads, ferry, etc.). 52 c. Economic or market forces 13 d. Maintaining rural character of the island. 77 e. Maintaining a strong sense of community. 48 f. Maintaining healthy natural environment and wildlife habitat 78 g. Commercial opportunities 10 Results from these two questions reinforce the importance of protecting the island's rural character. In the first question, respondents overwhelmingly found the attributes of rural character on the island to be of very high value. As seen in the latter question, maintaining that rural character ranks a close third in importance only to protecting water quality and quantity and maintaining a healthy natural environment as the foundation for this Subarea Plan. Elements of Rural Character Open Space —Open space areas are used both for human purposes such as agriculture, forestry, and passive recreation, as well as natural purposes such as wildlife habitat, groundwater recharge, and connection of critical areas. According to the Lummi Island Planning Survey, loss of open space is perceived by Lummi Islanders as a significant adverse impact to the quality of life. Lummi Island residents value natural landscapes with little development. Areas suitable for open space include wetlands and ponds, undeveloped shorelines, woodlands, portions of larger lots with little or no built structures, and agricultural lands. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 26 355 Open space provides important habitat for plants and animals. Recreational open space such as trails provide peace of mind and contributes to the rural character of the island. Many people live on Lummi Island because of open space amenities and want to maintain and protect these areas. Table 4 indicates the existing open space inventory on the island. A variety of methods act to encourage the retention of open space. These range from regulatory restrictions to incentives and public land purchase. Under the provision of the Open Space Taxation Act (RCW 84.34), Whatcom County provides for an equitable tax climate for rural landowners by designating "Open Space" farms, forests, and beneficial open lands upon request by individuals landowners when such land meets adopted criteria and policies. Table 4 Lummi Island Open Space Inventoryfas of 20031 Protected Open Space Ownership Lummi Island Heritage Trust LIHT Owned 48 .84% Lummi Island Heritage Trust Preserves 106 1.86% LIHT - Private Conservation Easements 158 2.77% Salvation Army 32 .56% WA Dept. of Fish & Wildlife 611 10.73% WA Dept. of Natural Resources 652 11.45% United States 50 .88 Sub -Total 1,657 29.1 % Current Use Taxation Open Space Agriculture 452 7.94% Open Space/Open Space 189 3.32% Open Space/Timber 106 1.86% Designated Forest 1,103 19.37% Classified Forest 920 16.15% Sub -Total 2,770 48.6% Note:* The overlap in Open Space is as follows: LIHT has 144 ac. in current use taxation; LIHT (Conservation Easements) has 104 ac. in current use taxation; WA Dept of Fish & Wildlife has 114 ac. in current use taxation Almost one-third of the island has some form of permanent open space protection in the form of either public or non-profit metivated organization ownership (Figure 8). Most of the public lands on the island that comprise the largest blocks of open space (i.e., DNR and WDFW lands) are located on the mountainous southern less -populated end of the island. While most of the conservation easements and Lummi Island Heritage Trust owned or managed parcels are found in the more populated northern part of the island. The Heritage Trust is a private non-profit conservation organization dedicated to preserving open space on the island. It provides conservation easements and manages donated lands for conservation purposes on the island. Almost one-half of the island land Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update 27 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 356 area is enrolled in the county's open space tax program providing public open space benefits and/or private property tax benefits. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 28 357 Kown 1-10 6-601R 0 9/IPR Figure B 2001 -Protected Open Space Legend == Lummi Island Heritage Trust -Preserves -Trust Owned -Private Conservation Easements 0 Other -WA. Dept. of Fish & Wildlife -WA. Dept. of Natural Resources -United States -Salvation Army ® Panels with Current Use Designation (RCW 84.33, ROW 84.34) Figure 8 — Open Space Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 riw 29 358 However, this program does not offer permanent open space protection as property owners can always "opt -out" of the beneficial assessment. Environmentally Sensitive Areas —Freshwater and saltwater wetlands, natural shorelines, groundwater aquifers, steep slopes and geologically hazardous areas, and fish and wildlife habitat areas are all examples of environmentally sensitive areas present on Lummi Island. On Lummi Island most of these lands remain undeveloped and rural in character. The Lummi Island Planning Survey reported that 78% of respondents identified maintaining a healthy natural environment and wildlife habitat as an important goal for this Subarea Plan. Prime Agricultural Soils —Agriculture is practiced on the island and there are extensive areas containing prime agricultural soils. Some of those acres ,-� are being actively utilized for agriculture, while other areas remain largely undeveloped or subject to residential development, and some have become primarily residential lots. at the pFesent t Prime agricultural soils on Lummi Island identified by the U.S. Department of Agriculture are shown on Figure 9. Agricultural Resource Lands —On the north end of Lummi Island there is a significant amount of high quality agriculture soil. To the fullest possible extent, land with such soil should be preserved for future agricultural uses. Although property values on the island are high, land ]eased for agricultural use is economicallv viable. Agriculture has been an important activity on Lummi Island since the arrival of the first Europeans. Early on, a considerable amount of land was acquired from the Federal Government for the purpose of grazing sheep (in 1875, one farmer reported having 700 head). For several years, fruit production (berries, cherries) was important, a considerable amount of cattle have been run on the land, and several daires have operated there. For a number of years the raising of chickens for meat and eggs was a very important business for islanders. An idea of the scale of operations can be obtained from a 1937 Lummi Isalnd directory that lists 7 daires and 10 poultry breeders. Today, sheep and cattle are being raised on several farms. Eggs can be had from several sources. Two farms produce a considerable amount of produce. A comminifty garden has been established and is pro rg essing well. Activities that Foster Traditional Rural Lifestyles and Rural -Based Economies — The LIPC conducted an assessment of economic activity on the island to help define the broader aspects of the island's rural character. A wide range of activities were identified —many traditional some, perhaps, not so traditional —that provide opportunities for rural residents to both live and work on the island. The survey found well over 100 distinct economic activities occurring on island. More than three-quarters of all island - based economic activities were comprised of three main types: home -based businesses; followed by artisans (artists and craftsmen); and building trades (contracting and construction). Many of these activities, however, include off -island business. Most of Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update 30 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 359 the on -island activities occur either in the primary residence or in associated outbuildings, garages, shops, studios or barns. Areas of tie -traditional small-scale natural resource related agriculture, fHar-i8HltHFe-,fishing, mineral resources, and forest practices activities are also found on the island —ranging from animal husbandry and small farms growing specialty crops to commercial fishing operations, rock quarrying, and small logging activities. Limited tourism -based activities are also found on island, including several -two restaurants, an inn and bed and breakfast establishments. The Visual Preference Survey conducted by Western Washington University indicated that islanders rated small-scale agricultural and fishing activities among the most highly valued rural characteristics on the island. Although the size and quantity of productive farms and farmland may have decreased in the recent past, farmland is still utilized and valued as a major component of the island's rural character. In 2003, CAHTeady-,there am 48-1zLwere about a dozen diverse small-scale farms on the island, whieh-that are used for cattle and other livestock, chickens, eggs, grapes, vegetables, and flowers. The seasonal fishing settlement of Legoe Bay includes marine Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update 31 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 360 h �1 Lumml Panhlsula �..we �R Y� h a P� and -Prime Agricultural Sails Legend NRCS Prime Soils NRCS Prime Soils when drained - DRAFT Lummllsland {a Subarea Plan �h er 2e®e6x Swore: UMk IB wW R.—Me Co mgtioo SKrvioe o 0.6 1 1.6 2 MRE& Figure 9 — Prime Agricultural Soils Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 32 361 rail haul outs for fishing boats with boats and reef -net fishing gear set close to the beach and an old marina and associated buildings. ft-Legoe Bay is also home to small-scale resident commercial fishing operations. The broad range and location of island -based economic activity speaks to the independent nature of island residents —as many as one-third of all households are -were self- employed in 2003, see Table 5 and Figure 10. It also speaks to the need for both business and residential property owner to be being -"good neighbors" and4he-to implementatiea of effective yet efficient development regulations to promote harmonious development. Interestingly, neither the Planning Survey nor public testimony during the planning process indicated any significant incompatibility issues regarding residential development and island -based economic activities. Very Low Density Residential Development—Lummi Island is primarily a rural residential community. But a eemmunity that highly values the independence, privacy and remoteness that comes with living on an island. Most of the north island remains rural with a settlement pattern of one unit per three or five acres; however, there are some areas that have already developed a suburban rather then rural character. These include higher density developments approved prior to the advent of the Growth Management Act such as the Beach Club Condominiums, Scenic Estates, Lane Spit, and Isle Aire. In other areas shorelines have been densely developed on old small non -conforming lots — often less than an acre —with little sensitivity to the natural setting or critical areas. Much of the current planning effort, therefore, focused on maintaining rural character on the remaining larger undeveloped tracts of land. Yet at the same time the potential threat to rural character from incremental buildout of the hundreds of remaining small non- conforming lots remains an important issue. The visual and functional impact of development on rural character is evident too as rural and natural vegetation (e.g., pastures, hedgerows and forests) are being replaced with houses and lawns. Historic and Culturally -Significant Buildings and Sites —The island has a rich and varied history of settlement and economic use. Many of the historic remnants of the past such as canneries, homesteads, lodges, native spiritual and burial sites, and civic buildings remain in some form today, either as structures, sites or places of historical interest. The Lummi Island Rural Character Study documents many of these sites as important components of the island's rural character. Figure 11 indicates the island's important cultural and historic sites. Five historical sites are legally recognized on the island. The Beach Store is listed on the Washington State Historic Registry. The Whatcom County Registry includes the Carlisle Cannery, the Coxan House (locally known as the "Rat Palace"), the Beach School, and the Lummi Island Congregational Church. There are no sites on the island currently listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Rural Roads —The island's public roads are built to rural standards in most areas — meaning narrow two lane asphalt roads with no shoulders. The road system provides an efficient but scenic transportation network for movement around the island. In many Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 33 362 Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 34 363 Table 5 Figure 10 Number of Economic Activities by Type 2�O3) Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 35 364 tiNw" AWEY aaWSAW Lumml Peninsula me Art MUSEnd ar.�an. a �wytL /at�1001 m cab coxwff� FrtlDwk calmWbPFL RglNM Flrapay LOYM 8bam a®R a� 4 � CEO ) e,► saJP4aaa Almycm -Cultural and Historic Sites Legend • Cultural and Historic Sites x DRAFT Lumml Island Subarea Plan IRA mm _ IN Caarx Vftmt o Cd ly POR L m l htind f w`I Chrtrcbrftk*, WN 2902 O O.5 t 1.5 2 MILES Figure 11— Cultural & Historic Sites 2( 003) Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 36 365 cases, vegetation and trees grow close to the road creating an aesthetic canopy effect. The roads also offer some of the best "public" views of the surrounding shorelines and Puget Sound, especially since there is so little public shoreline access on the island. Speed limits range from 25-35 miles per hour across the island encouraging a slower travel pace that reflects not only the road design but allows residents and visitors to enjoy the surrounding rural landscape. However, localized bursts of speeding traffic are not uncommon. There are safety concerns in some areas due to limited site distances from intersections, erosion, drainage ditches, obstructions placed on shoulders and rights -of -way, and speeding traffic. In addition, bicyclists must use the vehicle travel lanes due to the lack of shoulders. In the absence of significant public trails on the island, many residents use the roads for walking and jogging trails which can also be a safety issue, especially at night and where the road shoulders are inadequate (width and slope) for walking or even standing. The County still owns right-of-way along of a few county "road ends" that could be incorporated into new public beach access points. The 1979 Plan and Protection of Rural Character The 1979 Plan was based upon two main goals: • Preservation of open space and rural character; and • Protection of groundwater resources The 1979 Plan and subsequent zoning for the island assumed that the minimum/maximum density of 1 dwelling unit/3 acres outside of aquifer recharge areas and 1 dwelling unit/5 acres inside recharge areas was adequate to protect the rural character of the island. The Plan anticipated the island would be able to maintain its rural character even while accommodating a 3% average annual population growth rate. It also assumed that clustering and shoreline management regulations would serve to preserve the island's rural character. Development regulations put in place to implement the 1979 plan included: • 3 acre zoning (outside of mapped aquifer recharge areas) in the RR -I zone which covered the majority of the northern part of the island; • Density transfer (i.e., density averaging on parcels partially in/out of recharge areas) effectively allowing density bonuses on affected parcels; • Cluster subdivisions with only 30% required open space outside of recharge areas and 55% open space inside recharge areas and no requirement for permanent dedication of the open space; • Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU's) allowed subject to underlying density; and • Pre-1978 platted non -conforming lots —most less than an acre in size — recognized as legal lots of record and exempt from lot consolidation requirements. In hindsight, some of these implementation measures may have done more to hasten the demise of rural character on the island rather than protect it. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update 37 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 366 Building new homes visually impacts rural character on a permanent basis —whether those homes are occupied year round or seasonally —but the most significant impacts to groundwater occurs when the seasonal units are occupied during peak periods- and when those units are converted to year round homes. This suggests that density alone may be too blunt a tool to protect both rural character and groundwater. The increased resident settlement rate in the 1990's suggests even greater pressures in the future on both rural character and groundwater resources. Other techniques may be necessary to protect the long-term rural character of the Island. The LIPC has been leeking-Mconsidered ideas such as: • Density reductions (i.e., downzoning) • Lot consolidation for small non -conforming lots • Rural design standards as potential means to ensure the long-term rural character of the island • Purchase/transfer of development rights to preserve open space • Allocating new development based on a sustainable annual growth rate over the next twenty years Groundwater Resources Groundwater recharge areas were originally established in the 1979 Plan based on hydrogeologic studies in the late 1970's (see Water Resources of Northern Lummi Island (Robinson & Noble, Inc, 1978). Lower densities were assigned to recharge areas as a means to protect the groundwater quality and quantity. There has been a significant increase in the number of private wells since 1979. However, there has been no analysis of groundwater levels or recharge potential since 1979 (Figure 12). There has been more recent analysis of groundwater quality indicating increasing rates of dry wells (V. Armfield, personal communication, August 2003) as well as arsenic contamination and saltwater intrusion in island wells (P. Chudek, Whatcom Co. Environmental Health, August 2003, Aspect Consulting 2006). Whatcom County Environmental Health Department has enacted more stringent standards for arsenic treatment in new wells. Whatcom County should pursue research and grants to fund additional groundwater studies including analysis and mapping of individual drainage basins for groundwater levels, recharge potential, threats analysis and protection recommendations. Public Water Associations serve more than two connections and withdraw significantly more groundwater per well than individual systems but are also subject to higher water treatment standards. Group A systems have 15 or more connections or serve 25 or more persons per day. Group B systems have 3-15 connections and serve less than 25 people per day (Figure 13). Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 38 367 In 1979, there were seven (7) "Public' Water Associations (Group A and Group B systems). In 2002, there were twenty-six (26) "Public' Water Associations (Group A and Group B systems). The island experienced an almost four -fold increase in the number of high capacity wells pumping groundwater out of the aquifer in the last twenty years. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 39 R.I GkF unw -Priva ells and ' e A r Reeharge Areas egemEc Mw o�p�ah6r aPldttamEr'mivn@�tri nd �IIUU lei�dta9afAr7Hbj A Wells Prior to 1978 • Wells 1978-Present * Arsenic Contaminated Wells Primary Recharge Areas '1 Secondary Recharge Areas Sensitive Recharge Areas Boom Wlwom CaumyPU6; vet=w c-.uy HmO UN; Vh*,rA-ffi dd Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 Lummi Peninsula 6YormyR m A> Lff= lkhmi5lr* £aYbmomrAwiM Loud d� u t -DRAFT' Lummi Island Subarea Plan 0 0.6 1 1.15 2 VMS 40 369 Figure 13 — Public Water Systems 2( 003) Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update 41 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 370 Groundwater Aquifers and Best Available Science The original groundwater carrying capacity estimates for the island were developed during hydro -geologic studies conducted in the late 1970s by Dr. Ronald Schmidt of the consulting firm Robinson & Noble. The estimates are contained in the report The Water Resources of Northern Lummi Island (1978) and reflect certain assumptions regarding best available science at the time. Lacking comprehensive data, Schmidt himself noted in his study that some of his assumptions regarding the island's water budget were preliminary and should be reevaluated when more comprehensive data became available. Some have noted that Schmidt's estimates of groundwater carrying capacity, for example, do not take into account the effect of drought conditions, and may, in fact, overestimate groundwater carrying capacity. Recent review of Schmidt's 1978 study by geologists from Western Washington University also cast doubt as to the veracity of the conclusions reached regarding designation of aquifer recharge areas and groundwater capacity and recharge rates. A recent analysis of the methodology utilized by Schmidt in his 1978 study was conducted by William Sullivan (WWU) in a report entitled Overview Lummi Island Groundwater Study (2003). Sullivan writes: "Unfortunately, Schmidt was unable to identify hydrostratigraphy, delineate aquifers, or provide reliable static water levels. It appears that Schmidt used a topographic map to estimate well -head and aquifer surface elevations, introducing large errors into his aquifer surface map. [His] mapping of aquifer recharge zones is generalized because he used only data from his aquifer surface map. The water budget conducted by Schmidt is based only on climatic data. Soils, geologic, and land cover data that could be used to better quanta [evapotranspiration], infiltration and runoff were not available. " It is also interesting to note that the aquifer recharge areas identified by Schmidt in the 1979 subarea plan —that came to form the basis for the 5 acre/3 acre recharge/non- recharge area split zoning on the northern part of the island —are inconsistent with the critical aquifer recharge areas (CARAs) mapped on the island utilizing the criteria established in the Whatcom County Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO). See Figure 14. According to the CAO, designated CARAs may comprise a much larger percentage of the north island than the aquifer recharge areas identified under the 1979 subarea plan. Some data pertaining to groundwater quality is available from a report entitled Lummi Island Groundwater Study (1994) prepared by the Whatcom County Environmental Health Department and the Washington State Department of Ecology. That report indicates an increasing presence of chlorides (at levels in excess of 100mg/1) in some shoreline wells (from seawater intrusion) and naturally -occurring arsenic levels in some wells scattered across the north part of the island. However the 1994 study made no effort to quantify a water budget for the island or aquifer capacity or recharge rates. Analysis by Dr. Schmidt of 1978 well surveys found only one well on the island with high chloride levels at that time. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 42 371 R NrN/ WYhK Q� ip Lumml Peninsula Y�wpR �• 7a V Ike *.. -Aquifer Recharge Areas Legend CAD Article V - Aquifer Recharge Areas' NRCS Hydrologic Soil Groups A or 8 Overlap of Hydrologic Soil Groups and Geologic Units Aquifer Recharge Areas - 1979 Plan �, �{ • • • • . Primary Recharge Areas �y Secondary Recharge Areas V Sensitive Recharge Areas D mml Lutld I SrdxwBa 8a Wb.R—iamb PM -amf W Cm ra¢, L*,PW in WCC O Ole Figure 14 — Out of Date Aquifer Recharge Areas from the 1979 Plan Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 G7 ■ 43 372 A similar survey conducted by Whatcom County Environmental Health in 2003 found seventeen (17) wells subject to serious saltwater intrusion. Further development on the northern half of Lummi Island will result in a declining water supply. Both local residents and the Whatcom County Environmental Health Department have documented increasing numbers of dry and low -producing wells (personal communication, V. Armfaeld and P. Chudek August, 2003). With increased development comes the addition of new impervious surfaces including roads, driveways, and roofs that replace the vital vegetative cover that helps retain the rainwater for infiltration and aquifer recharge and holds the soil in place. There are also threats to groundwater quality that must be addressed. The ground water is recharged by precipitation and surface water seeping directly into the ground. Contamination of ground water including improper use of pesticides can be a major threat to potable water sources. Septic tanks that are not properly maintained can also contribute to major degradation of ground water quality. Increased demands on the current water source from development and well pumping are also likely to contribute to increased levels of saltwater intrusion. Seawater intrusion is the movement of seawater into fresh water aquifers. The causes of seawater intrusion are known to be from a decrease in ground water levels. The ground water level can be lowered from reduced precipitation or less ground water recharge due to removal of natural groundcover and more intense development. For example, development projects that include impervious surfaces, such as paved driveways and roads; prevent rainwater from draining directly through the soil into the aquifer. Water generated from impervious surfaces is usually collected in a drainage "ditch" and may discharge directly into the saltwater without having a chance to be fully absorbed on the land. Such -Aactivities, whieh can cause a lowering of the groundwater level, --ate reducin the amount of fresh water recharge in lower proportion to the and pumping and withdraw rates that eyweed the rate effeehafg . Areas closer to saltwater sources, such as shorelines, are at higher risk. Pumping a well or wells can also cause a local decline in the ground water level in the immediate vicinity of the pumped well and may cause local seawater intrusion or affect the quality of the water at nearby well sites. The proposed methodology by Aspect Consulting should lessen the effects of withdrawals by new wells. Freshwater is a finite resource on Lummi Island. Rainfall —which averages 32" per year —is the only source of water supply for the island. Total rainfall can vary widely across the island, however, and drought years can exacerbate water supply problems. Alternative public water supply sources such as a pipeline from the mainland or a regional seawater desalination plant are not presently feasible. The lack of a reliable and thorough understanding and estimate of current groundwater conditions on the island, the indications of increasing groundwater quality degradation, and the inconsistency between aquifer recharge areas identified on the island under the 1979 plan and in the more recent CAO suggests that a conservative approach be taken to allocating future land use until a more thorough groundwater evaluation can be completed. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update 44 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 373 On May 12, 2004 the Deputy SEPA Official required a groundwater study to mitigate the impacts of new wells, specifically for seawater intrusion and arsenic concentrations. Whatcom County hired Aspect Consulting (including William Sullivan) to perform the investigation and make a recommendation as to a methodology for protection of the Lummi Island aquifer system. On December 31, 2006 Aspect Consulting concluded the groundwater study for North Lummi Island. As stated in the Executive Summary: "The purpose of the Lummi Island Groundwater Study is to develop standards and policies for island groundwater development that are protective of the groundwater resource, natural environment, and human health. This memorandum summarizes conceptually a set of requirements the County can consider implementing to achieve this objective. The methodology stems from a hydrogeologic investigation of Lummi Island (Aspect Consulting, 2006b) and is based on an antidegradation standard for the aquifer. Table 1 summarizes the conceptual methodology for evaluating groundwater withdrawal proposals." The December 31, 2006 Conceptual Methodology for Evaluating Groundwater Withdrawal Proposals on North Lummi Island by Aspect Consulting is attached as Appendix C. The hydrogeologic investigation completed by Aspect Consulting on December 31, 2006 is attached as Appendix D. Critical Areas Environmentally sensitive areas (or critical areas) are usually associated with valuable ecosystems, wildlife habitats or natural hazard areas. The Growth Management Act (GMA) identifies critical areas that include: wetlands; areas with critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water; fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas; frequently flooded areas and geological hazardous areas. The GMA requires Whatcom County to identify and manage critical areas in such a manner as to prevent destruction of the resource and reduce potential losses to property and human life. The Critical Area Ordinance (CAO) (Title 16 WCC) is the primary regulatory tool that implements the critical area protection requirements of the GMA. Balancing private property rights with the need to protect environmentally sensitive areas is an important goal of the Subarea Plan. Land development on and around critical areas should be discouraged. Development should be discouraged in known natural hazard areas and environmentally sensitive areas in order to minimize potential loss of life, damage to property, expenditures of public funds and degradation of natural systems. Wetlands Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 45 374 Wetlands are an abundant and crucial environmental feature on Lummi Island. Wetlands provide invaluable functions for fish and wildlife habitat, aquifer recharge, groundwater storage, erosion control, and stormwater containment. Growth may significantly reduce and degrade natural systems like wetlands. For example, development on or around wetlands can cause incremental loss of wetland values and functions over time. Development that avoids wetland loss altogether is most preferred. Where unavoidable, loss of important wetlands due to development should be contingent upon full mitigation measures that equitably compensate for wetland function lost. Property rights and public services are an essential component of the county's political and economic system. Where such rights and public services are significantly compromised by the goal of wetland preservation, adverse wetland impacts may be permitted through mitigation. This may include restoration, enhancement, creation, or off -site compensation for loss of wetland functions. Ground Water Recharee Areas Regulating land use can protect Lummi Island's ground water recharge areas and water supply. Ground water is recharged by precipitation and surface water seeping directly into the ground. Contamination of ground water is a major threat to potable water sources. Potential groundwater contamination threats include, but are not necessarily limited to, over pumping, hazardous chemical spills, agricultural inputs such as fertilizers and improper use of pesticides, and poorly maintained septic tanks and drain fields. All of these factors can contribute to degradation of ground water quality. Identifying and mapping all wells and other areas from which groundwater are drawn will help prevent contamination. Educating residents of Lummi Island about groundwater contamination and prevention is critical. The Lummi Island Planning Survey indicated that groundwater protection was the most highly ranked goal of this Subarea Plan —identified by 90% of respondents as the single most valuable basis for development of the new plan. The Critical Areas OrdinanceThis GAO seeks to protect aquifer recharge areas from contamination, and to prioritize the management, protection and conservation of groundwater recharge areas that are used or have the potential to be used as a source of potable water. Figure 15 illustrates in a general way the critical wetlands and aquifer recharge areas on Lummi Island. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas The island has significant fish and wildlife habitat areas remaining, including woodlands, meadows, wetlands and shorelines, that are host to populations of deer and various small mammals, waterfowl, wading birds, woodpeckers and songbirds, eagles, turkey vultures and falcons, as well as marine mammals such as seals and various types of seabirds. Important off -shore aquatic habitats include shellfish beds and macro -algae and eel grass beds —important spawning areas for pacific herring. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update 46 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 375 Legoe Bay and its associated wetlands support important local spawning and rearing habitat areas for crab, clams, surf smelt, and pacific sand lance. The Bay is also home to the largest remaining seasonal reef -net salmon fishing fleet in the state. Lummi Mountain located on the southern tip of the island also provides diverse habitat for birds and mammals, including nesting sites for seabirds, bald eagles and the peregrine falcon. The CAO identifies wildlife habitat associated with "listed species" and "species of local concern" in the county. Listed species refers to those officially designated by the State Department of Fish & Wildlife and/or U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service as endangered, threatened, sensitive or a candidate for such listings. Where a project is proposed within an area where listed species have a primary association, a habitat management plan is required to avoid or mitigate the impact of development on the listed species. Species of local importance include vulnerable and recreationally important species susceptible to population decline due to their rarity in the region, limited distribution or special habitat requirements. Where a project is proposed within an area where species of local concern have a primary association, a habitat management plan may be required to avoid or mitigate the impact of development on the listed species. A complete listing of affected species is published in the CAO. The Lummi Island Planning Survey indicated that protection of fish and wildlife habitat necessary to ensure a healthy natural environment was highly ranked —second only to groundwater protection —as a fundamental basis for development of the updated subarea plan. Figure 16 illustrates the fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas on Lummi Island. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009\ 47 376 hy4 Lwnrid PBnlnspls O�YgR R4 R •t b .&0 Articles V & VI Aquifer and Wetlands Legend 0 NRCS Hydrologic Sol G roups A or B 0vertap of H}rdrelogic Sol Groups and GeDbpC Units Ndonal Wetland Inventory Wetlands+ 100 ft. Butters v DRA FT Wmmlldand Subarea Plan�� h Bmo whEomcmwpos 7 7.6 2 NRPB Figure 15 — CAO Articles V & VI — Aquifer and Wetlands Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 48 377 Lumml Peninsula .—Omm Legend MCI Wildlife HCA +>. DRAFT -�: Ej Su barea SVUM 0.6 Figure 16 — CAO Article VII — Wildlife HCAs Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 swim.; Npiom 49 378 Areas of Flood (FEMA) Storms or high tides can cause localized flooding on Lummi Island. Houses built too close to low -bank shorelines are at higher risk during storms or extremely high tides — especially those with eastern, southern or western exposures. The beachfront settlements of Legoe Bay and Lummi Point (Lane Spit) are the most susceptible. Legoe Bay Road at Village Point continues to has experienced roadbed erosion from southwesterly winter storm wave action. A new concrete barrier was r-eeerttly erected to help reduce further impact from flooding, however, erosion continues on the west end of the barrier, impacting the roadwaybut has air-eady meved eresion to the west end of the baffi Tuttle Lane, where it crosses the slough iust north of Legoe Bay Road, also usually floods one or more times annually after heavy rains, especially during high tides. The chance for an inland flood on the island, however, is minimal. Geological Hazardous Areas The southwestern area of the island along the flanks of Lummi Mountain has steep slopes, which are susceptible to sliding. Development should be avoided or restricted in these areas. Figure 17 illustrates the FEMA 100-year flood and geologically hazardous areas on the island. Coastal Flood_ Zones are areas that can be expected to experience flooding due to wind/wave action and h i g__ h tide levels. The degree o f flooding is dependent on factors such as the strength and direction of wind, distance of open water (fetch), expected wave height, beach configuration, and atmospheric effects on tidal levels. Similar to the Riverine Flood Zones, Coastal Flood Zones are mapped and regulated according to the 100-Year Flood Event 0% Annual Chance Flood Event). Shorelines There are more than 20 miles of saltwater shorelines on Lummi Island ranging from high - bank bluffs to gravel and cobblestone beaches, rocky headlands and steep cliffs, wave -cut rock ledges and tidal flats. Public access to the shorelines is extremely limited on the island due the prevalence of private land ownership (including tidelands). The Shoreline Management Act (SMA) gives primary authority over shoreline development to local governments by requiring the preparation of a "master program". The Shoreline Management Program (SMP) (Title 23 WCC) constitutes the master program for Whatcom County and fulfills the need for comprehensive planning and reasonable regulation of shoreline development. The SMP comprises a separate and distinct plan and zoning regulations just for the limited shoreline areas under its jurisdiction. On Lummi Island, the SMA is only applicable to marine waters and other underlying lands, including "shore lands" which are those areas landward 200 feet from the ordinary high water mark. Although a proposed development may be exempt from substantial development permit requirements of the SMA, it may still require a variance or conditional use permit and must comply Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update 50 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt 379 with local Shoreline Management Program (SMP) policies and regulations. The SMP shoreline use designations for the island are shown in Figure 18. The ever -al 144...taofn Geumy SN4P is due te be updated in the next sever -al yeafs in eemplianee with new SMA The most developed shorelines on the island include the shore side of West Shore Drive and Nugent Road to the McLean Avenue right-of-way, along Seacrest Drive and Island Drive south to the Rural Forestry (RF) zone designation, and along Legoe Bay Road from Village Point to the northwest corner of Peterson's Addition to Bellingham Bay Cities. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 51 ME ftmo, rPIllgpq A S, A Vrq rrrlR nn d` 106 v V� 4=, -CAD Articles III & IV �. Geohazardms� & Flooding aim thH rrDl Le b Ca FidPB� Le4wd 0 Landslie rkazard Areas (Sloven 15-W%) Landslide Hazard Area (Slopes> M) Frequently Flood Areas (FEMA i DO Yr. Floodplaln) 8mw. WhaamCauay'PN DRAFr �o Lumml Island 1 Subarea Plan a�R aow rymm� • rr. D D.6 1 1.6 2 N Figure 17 — CAO Articles III & IV Geohazards and Flooding (2003) Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 52 381 71 Whatcom County Shoreline Master Program T37 - ME Lummi and Portage Islands Area Designatlotre Index MapLx {ffOn w�se.oW�vyW ae•.ebw�se. ta•gW� Mavntb•wvvvW �n.«Nsr.vm•m•r•uvwinae lmwab v -INWnRmal a �w.rxa __ __ __ mom' -: M' 91RiRN RaNfen6X w �iN ����� M1v�wnm��.r�e•w�w •a m`e�•�d ' _Rvel N•��w�eu•ve�ua FeY J�m•�waaw��oa•. •v��w�•n�m�.•om�.4a� -1' S _ yl�f�� i� '�J _R euvwanemr�tvo•n•w�wam�e•afovmav oeo.we� �wvmw Cmansiq �• mv.•N _Henna wel•aww• .. _j i � *i MLA • •+' _T� •svmav�r�Me.TM..�mn•nm•i:vo�n.r. smv ®aNan FL WnepemNM1Nni awee•.aiemv�wvw..v.a•.� si01""w�.uww.m.m••r re�•.fmvewn sebb •li am y d2 Figure 18 — Shoreline Designations Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 53 382 Although there are significant remaining platted but not yet developed small non- conforming shoreline lots, most are on the eastern side of the island. No new residential or commercial structures maybe constructed on any area of a parcel where the distance between the ordinary high water mark and the county road right-of- way is less than 100 feet. On any area of a parcel where the distance between the ordinary high water mark and the county road right-of-way is 100 feet or greater, residential uses are limited to single-family structures and any accessory uses that are clearly single-family residential in character. Commercial uses are limited to home occupations, except on Legoe Bay Road from Road 656 (just north of Lover's Bluff area) to and including Village Point where commercial and light industrial uses other than home occupations may be allowed as conditional uses. Under the policies of the adopted SMP, only businesses that require shore location or allow a significant number of the general public to enjoy shorelines should be allowed to locate there. Any new businesses should be required to provide shoreline access for customers and the public where feasible and appropriate. Commercial uses should be given preference over other commercial uses if they include boat rentals, marine service stations or fishing piers or if they "promote physical or visual use of shorelines by the public, including but not limited to resorts, rental campgrounds and restaurants" (SMP 1998). Commercial development is also encouraged to conserve natural and cultural features on the site. On shorelines with conservancy area designation, commercial resorts, restaurants, bed and breakfast facilities and campgrounds may only be authorized as a conditional use. Along any shorelines with a natural area designation commercial development is prohibited (SMP 1998). Almost all of the shorelines south from Legoe Bay all the way around the southern tip of the island to Inati Bay on the east side of the island are undeveloped and in pristine natural condition. This shoreline is predominantly characterized by steep rocky slopes and narrow boulder beaches. Most of this area is undeveloped (except for some limited forest practices) and held in very large tracts comprised of both private and public ownership. Although there are significant areas of public tidelands in this area, public access is extremely difficult due to steep slopes and lack of improved access routes. Public ownership includes Washington Department of Natural Resources trust lands and Department of Fish & Wildlife lands managed for wildlife habitat as well as federal lands that include Carter Point and Lummi Rocks managed by the Bureau of Land Management. Public access to the shoreline will be an increasing concern as the island grows. On the more populated northern end of the island, most of the shoreline and tidelands are in private ownership, which further discourages public access. Much of the shoreline on the southern mountainous end of the island is in public ownership but not conducive to easy access or heavy public use. The greatest demand for shoreline use is on the more populated northern end of the island where public tideland ownership is limited to small and non-contiguous stretches at Migley Point, parts of shoreline south of Blizard Road, and other isolated areas. There are small undeveloped potential "road end" public beach Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update 54 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 383 and viewing access areas including but not necessarily limited to the east end of Blizard Road, the Alf Addition, the west end of Constitution Avenue, and the east end of the McLean Avenue right-of-way. Property rights include public property as well as private property. When considering vacation of public road ends RCW 36.87.130 shall be followed: "Vacation of roads abutting bodies of water prohibited unless for public purposes or industrial use. No county shall vacate a county road or part thereof which abuts on a body of salt or fresh water unless the purpose of the vacation is to enable any public authority to acquire the vacated property for port purposes, boat moorage or launching sites, or for park, viewpoint, recreational, educational or other public purposes, or unless the property is zoned for industrial uses." Recreation Public recreational facilities are quite limited on the island. There is one public park located at -south of Reil Harbor on the southern part of the island and one public (Whatcom County -owned) shoreline access site on the northern end of the island at the old ferry dock site (located just north of the current ferry dock). The Reil Harbor facility is a marine recreation site owned by the Department of Natural Resources —part of the Marine Trail in Puget Sound. It is a primitive camping and picnicking site for kayakers and boaters. only accessible from the water. The Ferry Dock park site consists of a viewing deck, picnic table and stairs to the rocky beach that access a very limited amount of public tideland. Seatember of 2008 Whatcom County received a donation by Harold and Judy Eldred and Formatted: Font: lz pt -- - - - - - - - ---------------- - - - - Essex ----- Family L.L.C. of 64.8 % interest in 1,200 feet of low bank beach and full interest in adjoining second class tidelands for public park use on Lummi Island. The site consists of approximately 3-acres of west facing beach and upland along with 3-acres of second class tidelands. This is a beautiful beach located on the northwest shore of Lummi Island overlooking the Georgia Strait and San Juan Islands. Physical location is due west of the Willows Inn located at 2579 West Shore Drive. The Beach Elementary School (operated by the Ferndale School District) has recreational facilities that include a playground, tennis/basketball court, soccer and baseball field, and picnic tables. The public road system on the island is used for scenic driving, bicycling, walking and bird watching. It also includes several County "road end" right-of-way public shoreline access points, ineludi Tfor exam le the east end of Blizard Road. There are also state and federal lands located primarily on the southern end of the island. These include large tracts owned and managed for wildlife habitat conservation purposes by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and the DNR. Federal lands Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update 55 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 include the area around Carter Point and Lummi Rocks owned by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Most of these lands are also only accessible by water. There are also areas of state and federal tidelands scattered around the island. Figure 19 indicates the generalized areas of major public tideland ownership on the island according to the Marine Shorelines Study of Public Access and Recreation Sites in Whatcom County prepared in 1976. However, the upland areas associated with these tidelands are either in mostly private ownership or in very remote areas —both characteristics that discourage public access. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 56 385 Figure 19 — Public Tidelands Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 57 m However there are also recreational opportunities available on private lands and shoreline access points that may be utilized by other island residents through payment of fees or certain conditions. In 2003 Tthese included: • Hiking and wildlife -viewing on the Lummi Island Heritage Trust owned and managed lands such as the 42-acre Curry property and the 70-acre Otto Preserve; • Private "for -members -only" facilities at Inati Bay leased and managed by the Bellingham Yacht Club; • Village Point boat launching ramp on a pay -per -use or yearly membership basis; • Private "for -members -only" facilities at Scenic Estates including tennis court, swimming pool, lake, boat launch and dock; • Shoreline public access occasionally provided by the Lummi Island Congregational Church; • Boys and Girls Club Building; and • Salvation Army Youth Camp The Whatcom County Comprehensive Park and Recreation Open Space Plan (1991) noted the increased need for public recreational shoreline access on the island and proposed the development of a small public park and trail system for the island. The various segments, sited appropriately, could include natural beach areas, small boat and kayak launch facility, and a community center (Whatcom Comprehensive Park and Recreation: Open Space Plan, 1991). However, a suitable location and funding sources have never been approved. The LIPC identified the following future recreational needs based on the findings in the Lummi Island Planning Survey: • Walking Trails —many residents like to walk and hike the island to enjoy its natural setting, shorelines and Lummi Mountain. But since most of the island is in private ownership (including large tracts of Lummi Mountain), trespass and loss of privacy is becoming an increasing concern for many private property owners on the island — especially on Lummi Mountain. • Shoreline Access —new public access is needed to public tidelands from the shoreland or upland portions of the shorelines. • Boat Launch —primarily for use by island residents since creating a destination launch could induce more tourism adversely affecting the ferry level of service. Public trail access to Lummi Mountain (and surrounding public lands) could provide wonderful opportunities to see wildlife and the natural beauty of the island. Respect for privacy and private property within and surrounding the Lummi Mountain area, however, Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update 58 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 387 remain paramount considerations. Preservation and management to prevent resource damage to critical habitats and the aesthetics of a natural setting as well as protection of privacy for adjacent properties are important elements when considering access. Trails can also serve to increase mobility. An interior trail system to primary destination such as the ferry dock, Legoe Bay and the Heritage Trust preserves, for example, could be accessible by a combination of road rights -of -way and public easements. As the island continues to grow, increased demand for public access to shorelines and woodlands could result in increased trespass on private property. The community must either work toward some form of public or quasi -public trail system (such as obtaining public access rights through easements) or find workable ways to retain significant amounts of open space in the face of continuing growth. if neither- goal ean be aehieved then islemdefs must pr-epffe themselves fer- inereased ffietien ever. trespass and privae), eeneems. -These goals will reduce friction over trespass and privacy concerns. '""--- f Formatted: Normal Public Services and Facilities/Utilities Public community facilities on island include one school, one post office, a volunteer fire department, a library, a cemetery, and a community grange hall. The Beach Elementary School is the only school located on Lummi Island and is a part of the Ferndale School District. It serves kindergarten through Oh grade. In general, even though growth is increasing on island, total school enrollment is falling due primarily to the smaller and older average households on the island. The Beach School enrollment declined from 57 students in 1995 to 56 Grade School students in 2002. Approximately 50 El./Junior/High School students go off -island to Ferndale High School daily. Whatcom County Fire District No. 11—known as the Lummi Island Fire Department —is responsible for providing fire protection from its centrally located fire station on Legoe Bay Road. Personnel include 25 volunteer firefighters. Equipment includes two engines, a water tender and one EMS aid vehicle. During the past several years the number of fire calls has averaged between 10 and 15 calls per year and the number of aid calls averages 25-35 annually. There are 4 island landing areas for emergency helicopter pads - north near the condos, Beach El. School playfield, the Salvation Army property near L. I. Scenic Estates and the Fire Hall. Water supply is the primary limiting factor in fire insurance ratings with supply limited by the capacity of the equipment. However, the island is also characterized by potential wild land fire hazards from its rural character, including prevalence of wood construction and wood shake roofs, steep and narrow roads, poor access to some remote areas, a limited water supply, and the proximity of woodlands to development (natural fuels located close to homes and structures). The district is increasing its public education efforts to residents about fire hazards, including the creation of "defensible space" — clearing dense underbrush and other volatile vegetation away from structures —in order to reduce the danger of a potential wild land fire. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update 59 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 im As one of two special taxing districts on island —the other being the cemetery district the fire district has the authority to ask voters for additional revenue to fund improvements needed by growth and/or to replace aging equipment. The district may also require certain development to meet special conditions such as increased water storage capacity and special fire -fighting equipment. The Whatcom County Sheriff provides public safety protection for the island. The crime rate for the island is consistent with the overall crime rate for the rest of the county. From 1998-2002 there were, on average, 21 reported crimes per year on Lummi Island ranging from trespass to burglary and assault. In years past, one resident deputy was assigned to Lummi Island. Currently, however, there is no active police protection located on Lummi Island. Calls for public safety mean that deputies must utilize the ferry to access the island. For emergency calls, ferry priority is given for emergency vehicles. If the ferry is not running (e.g., late at night) and an emergency call is received, the ferry is called into service. However, non -emergency calls may result in longer response times. As the need for police services increases, additional monies will have to come from county taxes to provide and maintain the higher level -of -service necessary to once again maintain an on -island deputy. Telephone and internet service is provided by Qwest via submarine cable across Hale Pass from Gooseberry Point on the Lummi Nation. type ef impr-evement at the present time. The current cable is able to provide service to the island for the foreseeable future. Electricity is provided by Puget Sound Energy. PSE operates several cables across Hale Pass from Gooseberry Point. A new cable was installed relatively recently and is expected to be able to accommodate the projected energy demand for the next twenty years on the island. There are currently no plans to bury more cable across the pass. Sewage Disposal All development on Lummi Island utilizes on -site sewage disposal systems. Most systems serve single-family residences that both treat sewage and dispose of the effluent on the owner's property. Some systems dispose of effluent off -site on adjacent properties through easements. There are a limited number of community septic systems that serve multiple single-family attached and detached residences (e.g., the Beach Club Condominiums). Most systems use a septic tank and gravity flow drainfield. Systems using newer technology are also in use, including pressure distribution, pressure mounds, sand filters, aerobic treatment and biofilters. Improperly treated effluent from septic systems poses a potential threat to ground water quality. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update 60 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 KW Whatcom County Public Health Department regulations govern system design and installation (WCC 24.05). Public Health is currently developing updated treatment standards for systems in use along all freshwater and saltwater shorelines in the county. Sewage treatment and disposal regulations are an important factor in determining minimum lot sizes on the island. The Zoning Code establishes overall density provisions, but if new subdivision lots are clustered in close proximity to one another (as encouraged to preserve open space) minimum lot sizes are often determined by public health regulations. Present public health rules allow for various minimum lot sizes, depending on soil type and water supply type. Lots as small as 12,500 square feet may be allowed with certain soil types and in conjunction with a public well. Even smaller lot sizes could be allowed if overall density requirements are met and if community septic systems are used rather than having each residence construct their own individual system. The minimum lot size rules only apply to newly platted lots. Sewage disposal systems that meet public health requirements for soils, terrain and setbacks are sometimes allowed on much smaller lots, depending on when the lots were created. In other cases, sewage disposal requirements may prevent building on non -conforming or "grandfathered" lots if the public health rules cannot be met. Potential cumulative development on small grandfathered lots with septic systems in close proximity to marine shorelines is a potential threat to both surface and groundwater quality. The Public Health Department, depending on available funding, occasionally monitors septic systems in particularly sensitive environments —such as along marine shorelines — in order to identify failing systems and urge owners to take corrective action. Public Health estimates that only about 2% of all septic systems countywide fail annually (mostly older systems). However, there is no regular program for septic system testing or evaluation on Lummi Island. Given the island's reliance on groundwater for public water supply and the potential threat from malfunctioning septic systems, regular periodic septic system monitoring by the Public Health Department should be encouraged. Transportation Lummi Island is a remote rural community. Almost all residents are dependent upon both automobiles and the ferry for access to their homes, jobs, health care, education, mainland transportation (including air) and shopping needs. Since the ferry capacity is fixed —there are no current plans to expand capacity —and demand presently exceeds capacity, mobility for automobiles between the island and the mainland remains static. In the face of continuing population growth and fixed automobile ferry capacity, ferry service is becoming more of a mobility tool for "walk-on" pedestrians going from one automobile parking space (on island) to another (Gooseberry Point) during peak periods. Since 2003, Whatcom County added a new parking lot with 74 spaces on the island Theis trend towards more "walk-on" use is likely to continue resulting in increased interest and need for more parking spaces both en island and at Gooseberry Point and perhaps on the island. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 61 390 Roads The island's public roads are primarily two-lane asphalt roads built to rural standards — meaning narrow shoulders. The main travel access roads on island are classified as minor collectors. Traffic volume is very low but, due to the ferry, it often occurs in spurts. Congestion only occurs around the ferry dock during peak travel times. Vehicle accidents have averaged about two per year for the last three years. Problems occur in some locales where roads narrow even more than usual, (e.g., portions of Nugent Road and Seacrest Drive) or areas where bank erosion or wave action required stabilization (West Shore Drive and Legoe Bay Road). Speed limits,range from 25-35 miles per hour although speeding is closely associated with the ferry schedule. Pedestrian safety is a growing concern since many islanders utilize the roadway travel lanes for walking (due to the lack of improved shoulders and public trails). Periodic road maintenance and resurfacing is performed by the Whatcom County Public Works Department. Islanders rely heavily on automobiles for intra-island and off -island transportation —there is no public bus service on island. Limited bus service from Gooseberry Point to Bellingham is provided by the Whatcom Transit Authority (WTA). Commute trip patterns (shown in Table 6) are indicative of (and contribute to) both transportation constraints and isolation of the island labor force —carpooling decreased and those who drove alone to work increased significantly during the 1990s. The reliance of islanders on automobiles also seems to be growing. Approximately 30% of island households had 3 or more vehicles in 2000; compared to 28% in 1900. While vehicle ownership is increasing it is not necessarily an indicator of increased automobile dependency —if other quality mobility alternatives are available in the community. Table 6 Lummi Island Commute Trip Patterns Commute Tn to Work, ; ' 1990, % of totaltri s ? :2000; % of;total tr s Single Occupancy Vehicles 64% 70% Carpool 13% 4% Walked to Work/ Worked at Home 20% 26% Source: U.S. Census The Ferry The Whatcom Chief ferry, operated by the Whatcom County Department of Public Works, provides ferry service to the island across Hale Pass from Gooseberry Point. (The Gooseberry Point dock and associated facilities utilize property leased by Whatcom County from the Lummi Indian Nation). The ferry can carry about 20 vehicles, on average, per trip. It operates from 5:40 AM on weekdays and 7 AM on weekends (and Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update 62 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 391 on major holidays) to midnight and makes emergency runs when needed and extra runs whenever vehicles are left at the dock after a scheduled run. The ferry makes the three- quarter mile crossing in less than 10 minutes and has a maximum three round trips per hour, or about 60 cars per hour at peak. There are no alternative public transportation routes between the island and Gooseberry Point. All islanders (and visitors) use the ferry to access the mainland. Over the last 10 years ferry ridership increased significantly —total trips jumped more than 28% from 1990-2000. Ridership also exhibits strong seasonal variations with July and August the peak months. Mobility, however, is becoming an increasing challenge for island residents. Data suggests that islanders overwhelmingly use automobiles as their preferred mode of transportation mobility. Analysis. of ferry ridership data in the Lummi Island Ferry 20 Year Plan —Phase 1 Charrette Report (2001) indicate that (in winter) approximately 87% of resident ferry users drive vehicles onto the ferry to get to the mainland while 11% park vehicles at Gooseberry Point and 2% utilize the WTA for mobility. Significant parking constraints at both terminals as well as limited bus service at Gooseberry Point are contributing factors to low pedestrian mobility. However, the sheer number, size and type of vehicles requesting service are overloading the current ferry capacity. In 2002 Tthe ferry capacity became unable is fie longer -able to accommodate the daily vehicle crossing demand for timely service as both morning and evening peak periods are extended -several -Hears. Capacity is also reduced due to large vehicles such as construction trucks, boats and trailers, horse trailers, SUV's and RV's that are heavier and wider. Ferry traffic associated with construction activities (serving new growth) and household service trades as well as visitors also contribute to the congestion. Parking is at a premium at both ferry terminals. There are 26 parking spaces at the Gooseberry Point terminal and 33 107 spaces at the Lummi Island ferry dock and nearby parkinglot. Parking issues peak during the annual two -week ferry dry dock every fal I when no car ferry service is available. The adopted level -of -service (LOS) for the ferry is 513 trips per capita. The ferry level - of -service is determined by a mathematical formula that incorporates total ferry trips (including passenger vehicles, pedestrians, trucks, and motorcycles) in addition to parking space availability, WTA bus service, one-way use, uses for official trips, and other provisions in relation to resident island population. Amendments to the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan, Six Year Capital Improvement Program in 2002 indicate that the ferry has not been able to meet its adopted level of service since at least the year 2000 and "it appears that it would be difficult to meet the adopted level of service over the [next] six year planning period. " The CIP indicates that there are no improvements planned to the ferry in the next six years that would increase ferry capacity. Until such time as ferry capacity improvements can be made to meet the adopted level -of -service, the concurrency requirements of the Whatcom County Code (WCC) require that no further long subdivisions be approved on Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update 63 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 392 the island. However, short plats (subdivisions of four lots or less) are exempt from this provision. On April 15, 2008 the Whatcom County Council decided to not pursue a new ferry at this time. Ferry service will be limited to the capabilities of the current ferry to provide that service. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 64 393 Growth Management Strategies Lummf Island Subarea Plan Update 65 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 394 Growth Management Strategies The Lummi Island Planning Survey indicates that the majority of residents think the island is growing too fast and they want to slow growth. The analysis of current trends indicates that future growth based on past trends may not be sustainable. Current zoning (i.e. density) would, at buildout, allow a level of development not likely to be consistent with the vision of maintaining the island's rural character. Both groundwater quality and quantity are diminishing at rates that may not be sustainable. The ferry system is overloaded and the adopted level -of -service cannot be maintained under the present schedules. There are technological solutions to many of these growth -related issues such as: constructing a water pipeline from the mainland; surface water reservoirs or a de- salination plant to address water shortages; and building a bigger ferry to accommodate more vehicles. But the challenge islanders must face is how consistent those solutions are with the vision statement. Growth management strategies include a wide range of techniques that could be applied to mange growth more effectively, mitigate the impacts of new development and help maintain the island's future vision. These strategies are grouped into several different alternatives: 1) Land use alternatives include mapping potential density and zoning changes to preserve rural character and protect groundwater resources; 2) Policy alternatives such as establishing preferences for mechanisms to acquire open space, recreational facilities or shoreline public access; or 3) Regulatory alternatives such as adopting new regulations aimed at consolidation of small non -conforming lots or requiring new conditions on future subdivisions and building construction. The different alternatives were presented to the Lummi Island Planning Committee (LIPQ and the public at a Town Meeting in March 2003. A questionnaire and small group discussion format was utilized to allow islanders to discuss the alternatives and identify their preferred solutions. Following that meeting and associated public comment, the Committee was asked to develop a preferred plan or set of preferred solutions —that included land use map and zoning changes, policy and regulatory changes or some combination of both —as the basis for the Subarea Plan. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update 66 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 395 Land Use & Zoning Alternatives In 0003, 8several alternatives were developed to identify the land use or zoning map and density changes that could help to manage growth more effectively on the island. The alternatives were mapped and analyzed using the County's Geographic Information System to determine relative development capacity and buildout potential for easier comparison between and among the alternatives. The land use and zoning alternatives include: No Action Alternative —It presumes to make no changes and would keep the current land use and zoning in place as well as other growth management regulations (i.e., maintains the status quo from the 1979 Plan). The rationale for this approach is to establish a baseline against which to measure other alternatives. Small group discussion indicated a distinct lack of significant public support for this alternative. Northern Island Rural DownzoneAlternative--This approach would redefine the RR -I (Rural Residential Island) zoning density. It would eliminate the one unit per three acre density applied to property outside of the groundwater recharge areas identified on the current zoning map. It would equalize allowable density in the RR -I zone throughout the island at one unit per five acres. This is a downzone that would reduce the development capacity of lands currently outside of mapped aquifer recharge areas. It would treat the entire RR -I zone the same from an allowable density standpoint. The rationale for this approach is that it serves to both protect rural character and water supply —the latter more so from the standpoint of reducing potential future demand for existing water resources. The basis for this approach is that evidence indicates that the groundwater supply is coming under increasing stress (i.e., increased rates of arsenic contamination and saltwater intrusion in local wells). At the same time the rate of groundwater withdrawal has increased four -fold (due more so to population growth rather than agricultural uses) since the original plan was adopted in 1979. In other words, the ability of the aquifer recharge areas alone to absorb and hold adequate groundwater for the entire island at present buildout capacities (excluding Scenic Estates) is in doubt. More so, the rate of development (i.e., consumption of groundwater) is greatest outside of recharge areas —both in terms of density and overall area. Even more importantly, the potential for new development is significantly greater outside of recharge areas suggesting that density changes would be most effective in these areas rather than inside recharge areas. Therefore the nexus, or connection, today between differences in density within and outside of recharge areas is not nearly as cogent as it was when the zoning was originally adopted in 1979. The present density transfer provisions of the County Code (WCC 20.34.251) currently allow an effective density of one dwelling unit per 1.5 acres on portions of parcels outside of groundwater recharge areas. The Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board has ruled in Whatcom County (and elsewhere) that densities of one unit per acre are not rural and are not in compliance with the Growth Management Act Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 67 396 (GMA). Rezoning the North island to 5 acre minimum density would be more consistent with the GMA and help maintain the island's rural character. The Scenic Estates subdivision could also be proposed for a density change more consistent with or appropriate for its existing development pattern. The Scenic Estates development is technically included within the Rural Forestry (RF) zone on south Lummi Island and should be corrected and assigned a RR -I zoning designation. Such a rezone would not affect the non -conforming status of most lots within the development but would make them less non -conforming compared to uses and densities allowed under the RF zone. This approach was strongly supported in the Lummi Island Planning Survey. This alternative could also be refined to identify specific and distinct properties for voluntary downzones consistent with the intent of the property owner(s). For example, properties subject to a conservation easement from the Lummi Island Heritage Trust could be rezoned to a lower density that more accurately reflects their true development potential such as a resource land density. Buildout reduction from these alternatives are shown in Table 7. Two additional downzone variation scenarios were examined for the RR -I zone, including 1) density reduction from one unit per 5 acres to one unit per 7.5 acres; and 2) a density reduction to one unit per 10 acres throughout the RR -I zone. Downzone alternatives provide less buildout reduction than one might think due to the large presence of non -conforming lots on the island which are immune to a downzone Small group discussion of the downzone alternatives indicated greatest preference for the 5 acre alternative. This is consistent with the findings of the Lummi Island Planning Survey that indicated stronger support for a 5 acre downzone compared with a 10 acre downzone alternative. One mitigation measure of a downzone should be to designate parcels subject to a loss in zoning density as new eligible "sending areas" in the Whatcom County TDR Program based on their pre-downzone density (i.e., affected property owners could sell the net loss in density (development rights) derived from the downzone and still develop at the new lower density on -site. Village Commercial Alternative —This approach would seek to utilize provisions within the Growth Management Act —specifically RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d) that recognizes limited areas of more intensive rural development or LAMIRDs—to establish a rural commercial center around the ferry dock. This would rezone portions of the area around the ferry dock and existing commercial enterprises from RR -I to Rural Commercial. The intent is to create a compact commercial village core that incorporates the existing commercial activities (e.g., from the Islander Store north to the Beach Caf6 and Post Office) and designates some additional limited land for infill development that could accommodate and encourage new commercial, mixed use or higher density housing in close proximity (i.e., within walking distance) to existing commercial activities and the ferry dock. This alternative could promote opportunities for more affordable housing and for more diverse commercial enterprises aimed either to serve islanders or promote small- scale tourism. Care must be taken to ensure that the density and intensity of uses allowed Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update 68 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 397 is consistent with the existing rural character of the island and can be supported on a sustainable basis by available levels of service for water and other infrastructure needs. A new Rural Commercial Island zone could also be created that differentiates uses deemed appropriate only for the island —distinct from other uses allowed in the Rural Commercial zone on the mainland. Small group discussion indicated a lack of significant public support for this alternative. This is consistent with the findings of the Lummi Island Planning Survey. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 69 WV Table 7 Land Use Alternatives Buildout Scenarios 2_( 003) Zoning Existing Total Buildout Potential Potential Net Total Groundwater % of Groundwater DU DU Add. DU New Peak Pop. Buildout Dependent Peak Carrying Capacity Peak Pop. Buildout Pop. (1) Utilized @ Buildout RRI - 3 ac. 427 872 445 935 1,831 1,831 RRI - 5 ac. 133 251 118 248 527 527 RE/Scenic Est. 78 346 268 563 727 RF/Other 5 77 72 151 162 Total 643 1,546 903 1,897 3,247 2,358 98% RRI - 5 ac. 560 1,058 498 RF/Scenic Est. 78 346 268 RF/Other 5 77 72 Total 643 1,481 977 838 417 E 346 268 77 72 Total RRI - 10 ac. 643 560 1,400 948 757 388 RF/Scenic Est. 78 3461 268 RF/Other 5 77 72 Total 643 1,371 728 1511 1621 1,760 3,111 2,222 93% 1,590 2,941 2,052 86% 815 1,991 1,991 563 727 151 162 1,529 2,880 1,991 84% Notes: (1) Groundwater dependent population assumes only the north island area presently zoned RRI; Scenic Estates and remainder of south island (e.g. the Mountain) assumed to rely on surface water supplies. (2) Assumed groundwater carrying capacity (@ 100 gppd) based on the 1979 Lummi Island Subarea Plan = 2,400 persons. Sources: Includes private vacant and underdeveloped/redevelopable parcels based upon Whatcom County Assessor Land Use Codes and Improvement Value. Factors such as environmental constraints and ROW issues have not been considered. Assumes no additional development potential on Lummi Island Heritage Trust properties (including easements and preserves. Zoning Designations: RRI - 3 ac. Rural Residential Island (1 unit per 3 acres density) RRI - 5 ac. Rural Residential Island (1 unit per 5 acres density) RRI - 7.5 ac. Rural Residential Island (1 unit per 7.5 acres density) RRI-10 ac. Rural Residential Island (1 unit per 10 acres density) RF/Scenic Estates Rural Forestry (applied to Scenic Estates) RF/Other Rural Forestry (applied to Lummi Mtn.) Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update 70 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 399 Policy or Regulatory Alternatives These alternatives represent potential changes to county development regulations or Comprehensive Plan policies insofar as they affect development on Lummi Island. These "alternatives" could be combined with or complement any of the zoning alternatives or they can stand alone. A variety of different regulatory techniques were examined that address unique aspects of managing growth more effectively on Lummi Island: • Non -Conforming Lots and Lot Consolidation • Transfer of Development Rights (TDR), Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) & Land Donation • Open Space Design and Clustering Provisions for New Subdivisions • Building and Site Design Standards • Low Impact Development and Best Management Practices for Groundwater Protection • Growth Rate Limit and Residential Building Permit Allocation System • Growth Management Indicators Program Non -Conforming Lot Consolidation —These types of programs seek to reduce the number of buildable lots by requiring some form of mandatory lot consolidation of non- conforming or substandard lots (i.e., those lots created prior to 1979 that are less than 3 acres in size) in order to develop. Upon institution of the RR -I one unit per three acre/ one unit per five acre zoning split in the 1979 Subarea Plan, all lots in existence on the island at that time, less than 3 acres in size, were recognized as legal lots of record — meaning that even though they did not meet the new zoning minimum they could stil l be built upon —provided they could meet all other requirements (e.g., setbacks, environmental health standards for wells and septic systems, critical area requirements, etc.). See WCC 20.34.254. Today there are more than 500 vacant non -conforming lots on the island —almost 90% of which are less than one acre in size. Which, if built out, would constitute urban development patterns that seriously threaten the island's rural character. The distribution of vacant non -conforming lots is shown on Figure 20 and potential buildout impacts from vacant non -conforming lots is shown in Table 7. It is not certain how many of these lots are truly developable and could meet all applicable standards necessary to authorize development. Nevertheless, substandard lots could pose problems of potentially excessive development that would further degrade the groundwater carrying capacity and the rural character of the island. Historic growth trends indicate average development of about eight non -conforming lots per year over the past two decades. Many of these lots are concentrated along shorelines in close proximity to marine waters posing special challenges for wastewater treatment and may be a potential threat to water quality if developed to their full potential. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update 71 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 Figure 20 — Non -conforming Lots 2( 0031 Lvmmi Island Subarea Plan Update 72 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 401 Table 8 Distribution of Vacant Non -conforming Lots 2003 Non -conforming Lots Zonin Designations Total # of Lots % of Total Island JTotal # of Lots % of Total Island 2591 45.7%1 3081 54.3% Size of Non -conforming Lots Total by Zone % of Total Zone Total by Zone % of Total Zone 0.9913.99 Acres 0 0.0% 15 4.9% <3.9912.99 Acres 0 0.0% 13 4.2% <2.99-1.99 Acres 0 0.0% 16 5.2% <1.99-0.99 Acres 4 1.5% 26 8.4% <0.99 Acres 255 98.5% 238 77.3% Potential Additional DU's 259 76.2% 308 64.7% 340 Total R 563 Total RRI Source: Whatcom County PDS GIS 2003, Whatcom County Assessor Current Whatcom County Code (WCC 20.34.254) exempts non -conforming lots in common ownership on the island from lot consolidation requirements as expected in other areas of the county (WCC 20.83.079) unless required to meet health department requirements for operation and separation of septic systems and wells. Since these non- conforming lots were recognized as legal lots of record back in the 1979 Plan there may be some legal challenges to overcome in order to institute a mandatory lot consolidation program. Legal non -conforming lots are subject to "vested rights" under Washington state law and are immune to a downzone. A voluntary program could also offer some incentives for participation. Many counties utilize clustering provisions as an incentive to property owners to consolidate antiquated platted lots —similar to the current clustering provisions in Whatcom County Code. The Lummi Island Community Land Trust is currently utilizing such provisions to build a low-income affordable housing development on the island. There was strong support in the small group discussions of the alternatives for requiring non -conforming lots in adjacent common ownership to consolidate in order to obtain a building permit (to the extent allowed by Washington state vesting law). Transfer of Development Rights —A Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program establishes a mechanism to buy and sell development rights without buying and selling the land from which they originate. Generally, TDR programs designate some lands as preservation areas, where development at very low densities is allowed, and other land as growth areas, suitable for high density residential or commercial use. The development rights from the designated preservation area, often referred to as the "sending" area, are allowed to be sold and transferred to another piece of property located in designated growth areas referred to as "receiving" areas. TDRs recognize that real estate ownership involves the possession of a "bundle of rights," and any one right (e.g., the right to Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update 73 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 402 develop at a given density) can be separated from the bundle and sold. TDR takes the unused development portion of the "bundle of rights" from one property and transfers them to another property. The development "rights" are usually purchased in open - market transactions by developers and utilized to construct additional units on other parcels. TDR programs are intended to be mutually beneficial —the buyer in the receiving area gains additional density, the landowner in the sending area profits from the sale, and the County benefits by preserving the rural character and lifestyle and lowering its costs to provide public services. TDRs are a density transfer technique between different properties. This is an important distinction from a regulatory standpoint. For example, density transfers within a single property, or adjoining property, have been fairly widely used in the County (e.g., clustering options) and have served as the jumping-off point for the longer distance transfers proposed under TDR programs. However, TDR programs are far more complex and require much greater public education and understanding in order to be successful. TDR programs can be either voluntary or mandatory. TDRs are also very market - oriented and, as such, are dependent upon the vagaries of the market for their success or failure. The basic approach of most TDR systems involves a density reduction of the areas subject to protection (i.e., sending areas) to a level considered adequate for the resource being protected (e.g., rural lands, agricultural lands, forest lands, scenic open space areas, environmentally sensitive areas, shorelines, etc.). A "conservation easement" is usually required to be included in the deed to the property after a transfer occurs. A conservation easement is a legal agreement between a landowner and a qualified private conservation organization, such as Lummi Island Heritage Trust, or government entity that permanently limits a property's uses in order to protect its conservation values. The value of the development rights "lost" on the property are then determined through a variety of approaches and allowed to be "bought" by another developer and transferred to a receiving area designated for growth or where the higher density gained by the transfer can be accommodated without significant impact on the receiving area (e.g., where adequate public facilities and services can be provided). TDR has been used as a planning tool to preserve agricultural and environmentally sensitive lands, as well as historic buildings, since the 1970s. The Growth Management Act itself expressly promotes and authorizes the use of "innovative land use management techniques ... including the transfer of development rights" under RCW 36.70A.090. Whatcom County and the City of Bellingham have been working together for several years to create TDR programs that would allow for the transfer of development rights from rural areas of the County into the Bellingham Urban Growth Area (UGA). The County and City initially created a TDR program in the Lake Whatcom watershed —the sole source water supply for the City of Bellingham —several years ago and are currently seeking to expand that program into the Lake Samish watershed and perhaps elsewhere. Lummi Island would be an appropriate "sending area" for development rights that could be transferred into the Bellingham UGA (or possibly the Ferndale UGA) to promote higher density and more affordable housing. Potential "sending areas" candidates might be small but "buildable" non -conforming lots on the island and properties affected by downzoning, if implemented. A TDR program on Lummi Island could open up more options for island property owners who might otherwise be forced to sell or develop their Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update 74 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 403 properties for economic reasons, but with a TDR program could still receive compensation for their development rights, remain living on the property and help preserve the rural character of the island. In so doing the development capacity of the island (and the commensurate need for future groundwater withdrawals) would also be reduced. There was strong support in the small group discussions of the alternatives to institute a TDR Program for the island. Purchase of Development Rights (PDRs)—Similar to TDRs in that they compensate land owners for the equity of their land in return for a deed restriction which precludes use of the land for development. However, in PDR programs the rights are not sold (transferred) to a receiving area. They are purchased by a public or non-profit entity (e.g., the Lummi Island Heritage Trust) and are usually permanently extinguished. This is typically a more expensive approach, which requires either a dedicated public funding source and/or significant private fund raising efforts. The major difference between the two approaches is that where PDR programs usually involve some level of public monies in the purchase of development rights, TDR programs may operate exclusively in the private sector (i.e., exclusive of public purchasing of development rights) between a property owner and a developer. Therefore, TDRs can be a more efficient technique in which to preserve rural character, and/or open space via the private real estate market. However, there are many other factors that influence the ability of a TDR program to succeed based on local market conditions: In general, the most important variable being the strength and type of the development market (i.e., demand). Lummi Island Heritage Trust has used direct acquisitions of land with donated funds (most notably the Otto and Curry properties) as a tool for purchasing and extinguishing development rights. The Heritage Trust also has received donated development rights in the form of conservation easements. While the Trust has not purchased conservation easements, it could purchase development rights with donated funds (in effect, starting a private PDR program). Land Donation —Land donation is a growth management strategy property owners can use to maintain their open space land and protect it for future generations outside of any local government -sponsored action. Donating land releases the owner from the responsibility of managing the land and can provide substantial income tax deduction and estate tax benefits. One can still live on the donated property and receive a life income. Another way to donate land is through a bargain sale, in which the property owner sells the land to a qualified organization, like the Heritage Trust, for less than its market value. This not only makes it more affordable for the land trust, but offers several landowner benefits including cash, avoidance of some capital gains taxes, and a charitable income tax deduction based on the difference between the land's fair market value and its sale price. Conservation easements are another way to protect rural character and open space. A conservation easement (or conservation restriction) is a legal agreement between a Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 75 I , I landowner and a qualified conservation organization that permanently limits uses of the land in order to protect it. Conservation easements are an excellent way to create a flexible use of land to serve multiple purposes. For example, an owner may give up the right to build additional structures, while retaining the right to grow crops. Open Space Design and Clustering Provisions for New Subdivisions —Good open space design and clustering incorporates sensitive open space and rural character features into the design and lot layout process. It preserves more functional and better quality open space than traditional subdivisions. It serves to conserve open space, maintain rural character and protect environmentally sensitive areas such as wildlife habitat, wetlands, and critical aquifer recharge areas. Clustering lots can actually reduce development costs (fewer roads, lower infrastructure costs due to economies of scale, etc). Research in other communities indicates that lots in open space subdivisions incorporating design standards and clustering provisions typically appreciate in value 10-15% more than traditional "large lot" subdivisions. The current Whatcom County Code allows optional clustering subdivision process (WCC 20.34.305) but —in spite of the policy intent in the 1979 Subarea Plan ---contains weak provisions to ensure good design: Existing design standards (WCC 20.34.310) provide little guidance on how lots are laid out on the land relative to the open space characteristics & resources intended for protection; Code only requires a mere 30% of the total site area to be open space (termed a reserve tract) outside of aquifer recharge areas and 55% inside recharge areas (WCC 20.34.252); and Code does not require permanent dedication of open space (e.g., reserve tracts can be developed later in life of the parcel, see WCC 20.34.320) which defeats the purpose of clustering. Both the Lummi Island Planning Survey and the small group discussions of alternative growth management strategies indicated support for increased protection of unique components of the built and natural environment that constitute the island's rural character, including open fields and woods, hedgerows, farm buildings and old homesteads, open vistas, groundwater recharge areas and environmentally sensitive areas and undeveloped shorelines. Clustering was supported by a majority of respondents on the Planning Survey —most notably "if the reserve tract is legally guaranteed never to be developed". Examples of good open space design and clustering principles are shown in Figure 21. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 76 405 Figure 21 Open Space Design and Clustering Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update 77 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 For large remaining undeveloped tracts on the island, "landowner compacts", or contracts, through the use of GNIA-authorized "development agreements" should be encouraged as a means to maintain rural character, preserve open space and sensitive areas and still retain development values for large-scale private property owners. This technique allows adjacent property owners to jointly develop their properties in a coordinated and consistent fashion that can best preserve rural character and unique site characteristics yet still return full value to all property owners subject to the development agreement. It also presents an opportunity to plan for development, critical area protection and open space in a broader and more coordinated fashion. Building and Rural Site Design Standards —Rural design standards are regulations that typically address how development occurs on a piece of property rather then the density or intensity of use allowed. They are usually intended to address the visual impacts of new development on the character of surrounding areas. For example design standards could regulate such things as building setbacks from roads, the size of buildings, the placement of structures on the parcel, the appearance of lights, signs, landscaping, etc. Design standards may be either voluntary —typically referred to as guidelines for new development —or mandatory —enforced through a more rigid design review process prior to the issuance of permits. These types of standards are most often applied to higher density residential uses or commercial activities since the more intensive developments generally create greater impacts on surrounding properties. Single-family homes are usually exempt from such standards due to the added costs of design review and enforcement of such standards that would be home by the property owner and the permitting agency. Such standards are often enforced privately, however, in new subdivisions through CC&Rs (Codes, Covenants & Restrictions). Such standards often address building height limits to preserve views of neighboring structures, exterior building materials, color, building mass and size, exterior lights, etc. A site plan review process that looks at the development of the entire lot at the time of or prior to application for a building permit could be a workable solution for Lummi Island. Under this scenario, such things as the building envelope (where structure(s) can be placed on the lot), clearing and preservation of vegetation and trees, setbacks from roads and adjoining parcels, location of well and septic system, etc. can be laid out in advance of development and aesthetic issues that impact rural character can be addressed. Again, though some of these standards —such as building placement or design —are typically best received as voluntary guidelines rather than strict de rigueur regulations. Small group discussion of the growth management alternatives and the Lummi Island Planning Survey indicated cautious support for such standards provided they are reasonably based and applied. Examples of such measures are shown in Figure 22. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 78 407 Figure 22 r�F �.: .'+Y.. "b): -e+i. T'.: �f±�E`^i•J:-h.S'`•fG.;:.Yf-da ba?117a6:a.. EB Z IO.i 71lIMi♦!d iffmt rabLtn wvegeftflon stamp"wide:'_ Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 79 m Low Impact Development and Best Management Practices for Groundwater Protection —Aquifer protection is a key attribute in land use planning for Lummi Island. Development standards and best management practices (BMPs) for groundwater protection affect on -site development activity such as building, storm water management and other aspects of construction in order to encourage storm water infiltration and aquifer recharge to the maximum extent practical. BMps are most closely associated with managing storm water and trying to maintain the pre -development storm water hydrologic conditions on particular parcels as much as possible after development. The most significant of these standards place limits on the construction of impervious surfaces in new development. Impervious surfaces are those hard surfaces such as roofs, roads, hard -packed gravel or paved driveways, sidewalks, patios, etc. from which rainwater is not readily absorbed back into the ground. Instead storm water runoff from impervious surfaces is often directed off -site and lost to potential aquifer recharge. Another valuable development technique is to retain vegetated buffers and construct "bio-swales" (shallow vegetation lined depressions) to hold and accommodate on -site storm water runoff for eventual recharge. Adopting impervious surface limitations and design standards to ensure that more storm water runoff can percolate back into the ground could help to increase the aquifer recharge rates. Other effective development measures to protect groundwater can also be implemented after construction by residents such as: utilizing rain barrels or cisterns to harvest rainwater for potable and non -potable use; utilizing "gray water" systems for irrigation and other non -potable water needs (not allowed under current county code); utilizing alternative water supplies such as surface water and saltwater desalination systems; using native vegetation for landscaping that does not require supplemental watering (xeriscaping); and other household water conservation measures. Small group discussion of the alternative growth management strategies and the Lummi Island Planning Survey both indicated support for such standards and practices provided they are reasonably based and applied. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 80 M Management A ..t (GMA). ) AR e e«t:.,« is the City „F Dedm.,«d. that has adopted ., its 1,.,«ss:«., supply i .,.de. le maintain ., des;.e61e obsMe«s:«., 1,.,1.,«ee ' ' it may veFy well be eensistent with ether- RqUiFeffiefttS of the GMA, ■ _ I. IN* ON . ■ 1 Sueh in diff-efent FOF the a system eould work a number- ef ways. eXaMple, Ofte flumbef v supplies until adequeAe gr-eundWatff studies and water- 5upply planning we eempleted This ;vei:ypuffed a et.,el ., ,.Id he I.,,,.e. A;! I;ighe. but .,.:11 example;., system ., Fe.- i , : island the 1 90/_ housing ,.«:t .. seenaf under- shovm in Table 9. annual growth Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Dro, March, 2009 81 410 T-fible.* ° Annual Housi ,tOjnit Growth Cap Seenerio Resident Pepulfition ieffrs 2003 202-0 HiStOFie 2003 643 949 20" 6-79 SS9 2& A 739 9" 204 -99 41;84-� 2M 859 4,125 Total Net Gaon 200i 2020 2" 274 90NOWN-1400 NO. PUB �. .�. - - . - �V ......... Growth Management Indicators Program —This strategy establishes benchmarks and monitors key public facility service levels, as well as environmental, population growth and other community quality -of -life indicators for the next 20 year planning period. Thresholds for key indicators could be established (say for example the number or rate of contaminated wells, building permits issued, new lots created, etc.) so that when certain thresholds are reached the Subarea Plan could trigger certain actions such as temporary moratoria or review and amendments to the Subarea Plan or County regulations to correct deficiencies or address specific issues of concern, such as water quality and water supply planning. Small group discussion of the growth management alternatives indicated public support to pursue this strategy in the implementation phase of the Subarea Plan. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 82 411 Preferred Plan Policies & Implementation Measures Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 83 412 Preferred Plan, Policies and ImplementationYMeasures 41 The Lummi Island Subarea Plan —a component of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan —is a policy plan that is to be used to guide the land use decisions affecting both the private and public sector. Goals, policies and implementation measures are intended to "make it happen" —to define and identify the steps needed to carryout the recommendations in the Subarea Plan necessary to maintain the long-term future vision for Lummi Island. Implementation measures are identified for each "element" of the Subarea Plan and a time -frame priority is assigned for each measure based on the following system to define when "action" on the particular policy or implementation measure is needed: IMMEDIATE: (action should occur within 1-2 year time -frame of Subarea Plan adoption) • SHORT-TERM (action should occur within five year time -frame of Subarea Plan adoption) LONG-TERM (where implementing action is already adopted, such enforcement should occur on a recurring basis, as applicable to the issue, or where specific action is more likely to occur more than five years after Subarea Plan adoption) Subarea Plan Goal The overall goal of this plan is to allow growth within the limits that will preserve the island's ground water resources, rural character and sense of community. Rural character is understood to mean both the amenities of the natural environment —the open spaces, views, wooded areas and wildlife ,ag iculture resource protection end the lack of urban -scale development, utilities and requirements for government. The term applies to the non -visual aspects of rural life on the island --the self-sufficiency, sense of community and mix of land uses —as much as to the visual appearance of Lummi Island. Land Use Implementation Measures IMMEDIATE 1.1 Amend the RR -I District zoning regulations and other regulations, as applicable, to establish one unit per five acres as the minimum maximum density throughout the RR -I zone. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 84 413 1.2 For the Lummi Island Scenic Estates subdivision, amend the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan from Rural Forestry to Rural and the Zoning Map from Rural Forestry to Rural Residential -Island (RR -I) District. This change will not affect the status of the platted lots of L. I. Scenic Estates. 1.3 Amend the RR -I District zoning regulations (WCC 20.34.251-253) to eliminate provisions of the code authorizing different density provisions within and outside of groundwater aquifer recharge areas, including elimination of the density transfer provisions contained in WCC 20.34.251 (3) and WCC 20.34.330. 1.4 Encourage non -conforming lots (less than one acre in size) in adjacent common ownership to consolidate in order to get a building permit for a new home (to the extent allowed by State vesting law). Consider incentives to promote voluntary lot consolidation. In 2003 -Vv_acant non- conforming lots in adjacent common ownership account for about one - quarter of all vacant non -conforming lots on the north island and more than one third of such lots in Scenic Estates. 1.5 Pursue a down zone through public support of some properties. Resource ands such as those in Designated or Classified Forestry and/or Current Use Taxation lands could be conducive to this approach. SHORT-TERM 1.6 Adopt a Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Program with downzoned parcels and non -conforming lots as initial density sending areas on Lummi Island consistent with potential receiving areas in the City of Bellingham UGA or Ferndale UGA in order to encourage buildout reduction on the island. 1.7 Coordinate with the Department of Planning and Development Services (PDS) to institute a program to identify and monitor key growth indicators on island and establish an annual report from PDS to the Lummi Island community regarding the status of specific community development issues of interest, including, but not necessarily limited to: • Ground water quality and quantity; • Well monitoring and number of dry wells annually; • Voluntary septic system monitoring; • Number of new housing units permitted; • Affordable housing data; • Ferry planning and ferry usage data; and • Subarea Plan policy implementation. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 85 414 Also, under Title 2 of the Whatcom County Code (WCC), establish a standing island committee of island property owners and residents, representative of all island stakeholders whose purpose would be, but not limited to: Overall monitoring of the implementation of the updated subarea plan; Take the lead in establishment of growth indicators and the initiation and implementation of studies related to the issue areas identified in 1.7 of the revised Lummi Island Subarea Plan; and Cooperate with the County's Planning and Development Services. 1.8 Amend the WCC to adopt site and building design standards to maintain existing rural character on Lummi Island, including: • Determine and use site clearing and grading techniques to maintain existing native vegetation on site and reduce soil compaction to the maximum extent practicable. • Bright lights should be located and shielded so that their light is directed toward the areas needing illumination, and prevented from casting glare onto neighboring property. LONG-TERM Maintain the following shoreline land use regulations in the RR -I zone put in place following adoption of the original 1979 Lummi Island Plan and codified in WCC 20.34.170: 1.9 On the shore side of West Shore Drive and Nugent Road to the McLean Avenue right-of-way, along Seacrest Drive and Island Drive south to the Rural Forestry (RF) zone designation and along Legoe Bay Road from Village Point to the northwest comer of Peterson's Addition to Bellingham Bay Cities, land uses are designated as follows: On any area of a parcel where the distance between the ordinary high water mark and the county road right-of-way is less than 100 feet, no residential or commercial structures may be constructed. On any area of a parcel where the distance between the ordinary high water mark and the county road right-of-way is 100 feet or greater, residential uses are limited to single- family structures and commercial uses to home occupations, except along Legoe Bay Road from County Road 656 (just north of Lover's Bluff) to and including Village Point where commercial and light industrial uses other than home occupation may be allowed by conditional use. 1.10 Within the remainder of the RR -I zone land uses may include single- family dwellings (including duplexes), farming, forestry and woodlots, Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 86 415 home occupation and cottage industries associated with agriculture, forestry and fishing. Retail commercial activities are encouraged to locate in the vicinity of existing businesses at Legoe Bay and the Ferry Dock to maintain the island's rural character. Commercial, light industrial and multi -family residential uses are not prohibited elsewhere in the RR -I zone but may be allowed subject to the conditional use process in order to ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses. 1.11 Conditional use applications for light industrial and commercial uses should be reviewed in terms of size, scale, visual appearance, view blockage, amount of traffic generated, light and glare, noise, smoke and public access to shorelines (as appropriate). 1.12 Amend WCC 20.34.310 to include design standards that require clustering that preserves large open spaces, water recharge areas, prime agricultural soils and wildlife habitat. Such standards should require that buildings on open landscape be sited and designed to minimize disruption of views from adjacent property. This refers to building alignment, setback from roadways, variation of building height and bulk, and careful positioning of structures on the site with regard to existing vegetation and topography. Residential structures are encouraged to locate at the perimeter of fields or within woods. Commercial and light industrial structures, where possible, should be sited with ample side and rear yard setbacks to minimize disturbance to adjacent property. 1.13 Development approvals should be based, and conditions applied, in part, on the availability and adequacy of water resources, the protection of water quality and control or avoidance of pollution, and the satisfactory management of sewage and storm water. Shorelines and Critical Areas Implementation Measures IMMEDIATE 2.1 Make the Subarea Plan consistent with the Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) by revising the existing mapped designation of Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas (CARAs) on island consistent with the designation in the current CAO (WCC 16.16.510) based primarily on soil types. 2.2 Assess the feasibility of establishing an Aquifer Protection Area (APA) (under RCW 36.36) as a means to provide funding for the protection, preservation and rehabilitation of ground water resources on Lummi Island. APAs are created by majority vote of property owners residing in the APA (within the proposed area). They impose fees on groundwater users and/or septic system users (with exceptions for low-income persons) in order to fund groundwater protection studies and the costs of Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 87 416 monitoring and inspecting groundvt ater quality and quantity and on -site sewage disposal systems as well a& other implementation measures. 2.3 Identify unstable shorelines (i.e., beaches subject to erosion) and develop strategies and plans to address significant beach erosion areas. Continually monitor such shorelines for erosion movement, direction and quantity. 2.4 Acquire funding for and complete a more definitive Groundwater Aquifer Study and Groundwater Management Plan for the island to more accurately determine groundwater capacities and recharge rates, current and projected water use and withdrawal rates for residential, commercial and agricultural uses, and recommend measures to protect groundwater quality and avoid aquifer contamination. 2.5 The County should initiate a data collection program for all existing public and voluntary participating private wells to collect data on well locations, elevations, use, depth, and size as well as water quantity yield, and water quality (specifically for arsenic contamination and seawater intrusion). 2.6 Amend the Whatcom County Critical Areas Ordinance to implement the recommendations of the December 31, 2006 Aspect Consulting: Conceptual Methodology for Evaluating Groundwater Withdrawal Proposals on North Lummi Island. 2.7 Adopt a Water Management Plan consisting of Best Available Science (BAS) water retention practices. 2.8 Consider adding Lummi Island as a Stormwater Special District under Whatcom County Code WCC 20.80.635 SHORT-TERM 2.8-9 Amend the unstable slope regulations in WCC 20.34.656 to be consistent with Article III of the Whatcom County Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) regarding development restrictions in geologically hazardous areas. 2.9-10 Require "low impact development" standards for new development to protect groundwater resources and increase recharge rates, including: • Minimizing impervious surfaces in new development; • Require construction techniques that increase storm water retention to the maximum extent practicable on -site; and Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 88 417 • Protect wetlands from be* drained due to the impacts of clearing, grading and new construction. • Utilizing vegetated buffers and "bio-swales" and "rain gardens" to retain on -site water runoff and aquifer recharge. • Require incentives to contractors to implement low impact guidelines. 2.4011 Allow the development of small-scale surface water sources such as rooftop collection, cistern storage, and grey water systems for non - potable water use on Lummi Island. 2.4412 In review of all shoreline substantial development or conditional use permits, consideration of public access to public shorelines should be required. Unless the applicant demonstrates that unavoidable health or safety hazards to the public exist or the cost of providing the access is unreasonably disproportionate to the long-term cost of the proposed development. LONG-TERM 2.4-214 Incorporate "Best Management Practices" (BMPs) in land use, development and building regulations to encourage water conservation, such as: • Design and operational standards for water suppliers and purveyors, including point -of -use demand management and water meters for new construction; • Encouraging new and existing homes to utilize collection systems to capture and recycle rain water; • Utilizing water -efficient landscaping that does not require irrigation. 2.4314 Water system providers should encourage, through education and incentives, the retroactive installation of water conservation measures by their members. 2.4415 Since higher capacity wells can in some cases reduce the capacity of surrounding wells and also induce saltwater intrusion, a careful testing program should be required for any new well designed to serve more than a single dwelling unit. That program shall provide for regression analysis, removal of tidal effects in neighboring observation wells and for multiple testing for chlorides at the start, during and at the end of the pump test. The County or the Department of Ecology should oversee such testing and Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 89 decisions concerning establishmt ;of capacity limits for such wells should be based on this data. ,e 2.4516 Ensure that appropriate steps are taken to protect groundwater aquifer(s) from potential contamination from the use of pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers and hazardous substances. Prohibit use of pesticides and herbicides on County land, easements and rights -of -way, in order to protect the quality of the island's limited water resources. Require that adequate containment measures are in place for petroleum storage facilities of over 500 gallons and for the storage of over 500 lbs of other hazardous substances on island. 2.4617 Pursue designation of Lummi Island as a sole source aquifer under the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standards to protect against aquifer degradation from future developments. Recreation & Open Space Implementation Measures IMMEDIATE 3.1 Amend the RR -I District zoning regulations (WCC 20.34), and other regulations as applicable, to incorporate the following clustering and open space design provisions on Lummi Island: 3.1 a Retain at least 60% of the site as permanent open space either in common or single ownership. Amend the "reserve tract" provisions of WCC 20.34.310-320 to state that "a reserve tract must be created for perpetuity and be unbuildable beyond any building density remaining at the time of land division This is intended to ensure that the reserve tract open space will remain in the same location adjacent to the clustered lot is serves for perpetuity. " 3.1b Establish nonbuildable portions of new parcels contiguous to one another and to contain the most sensitive open space areas (including aquifer recharge areas and other environmentally sensitive areas). 3.1c Encourage open space areas to be held in common ownership and in perpetuity by a conservation organization such as the Lummi Island Heritage Trust. 3.1d Retain existing open fields to the maximum extent practicable for use as farmland, pasture, groundwater aquifer recharge areas, etc. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 90 419 3.1e Incorporate existing historic and cultural features (houses, hams, rural roads, pastures, scenic views, public shoreline access points, etc.) into the site design. 3.1f Site new buildings and roads to the maximum extent practicable to avoid removal of existing trees, reduce soil erosion and maximize aquifer recharge potential. 3.1g Locate new buildings so that they can be screened from view of public rights -of -way to the maximum extent practicable by existing vegetation or terrain (e.g., locate houses behind trees, at forest edges and below ridgelines). 3.1h Within cluster housing developments, individual housing clusters shall not exceed fifteen six (436) single-family residential units. 3.1i Design standards for housing to be developed that will ensure clustering preserves large open spaces, water recharge areas, good agricultural soils, and wildlife habitat. SHORT-TERM 3.2 Advise the County to assess the feasibility and requirements for the island to establish a Recreation Service Area or District (under RCW 36.69) to require that a portion of the property taxes collected from island property owners be dedicated for acquisition of recreational facilities on Lummi Island with the intent to purchase easements or outright properties (including non -conforming lots) for recreational purposes (e.g., for public trails, boat launch, or shoreline public access) on island. 3.3 Start a public education campaign to inform residents and visitors alike of the property rights and responsibilities of each party regarding trespass on private property and to educate all parties about the sensitive island environment. 3.4 Assess the creation of a Whatcom County Land Bank to help protect open space on Lummi Island. 3.5 When considering vacation of road ends, RCW 36.87.130 shall be followed. LONG-TERM Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 91 420 3.6 Work with local landowners, the Whatcom County Parks and Recreation Department, and other agencies to identify potential sites and funding sources for public trail and shoreline access use (including the potential use of County -owned road ends for public trail access). 3.7 Pursue dedicated funding sources for a Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) program such as the potential for redirecting all Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) monies generated from the island for expenditure back on island for PDRs that protect open space. Public Services and Facilities Implementation Measures SHORT-TERM 4.1 Work with Whatcom County Public Health Department to establish a septic tank monitoring program for all septic systems with drain fields located less than 200 feet from shorelines and groundwater aquifers. LONG-TERM 4.2 Coordinate with electrical power and telephone utility providers about the need for improved broadband communication. 4.3 Explore the use of utility easements and public rights -of -way for public trails and public access points. 4.4 Encourage utility companies to establish a schedule of placing utility lines underground. 4.5 Work with the Whatcom County Sheriff to increase public safety on island. 4.6 The Lummi Island community supports the continued operation of the Beach School. 4.7 Maintain adopted Levels -of -Service per capita (LOSS) for fire protection and emergency medical services. Transportation Implementation Measures IMMEDIATE 5.1 Continue working with the Whatcom County Public Works Department and the Lummi Nation on improvements to the Lummi Island Ferry System and associated parking and public transit needs to secure long- Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 92 421 term increased mobility for island residents. The first step in the process should be to complete the 20 Year Ferry Plan and determine workable long-range solutions for the Lummi Island Ferry System. 5.2 Work with Whatcom County and the Lummi Nation to secure adequate parking as close as practicable to each ferry terminal. SHORT-TERM 5.3 Work with Whatcom County to reduce excessive driving speeds on the island's rural roads (such as the use of information speed signs to alert drivers to their actual vs. posted speeds on specific road segments on island). 5.4 Initiate a "smart driving" campaign to promote increased carpooling, park —and -rides, and rideshares for island commuters. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 93 422 Table 10 Platted Lots of Record Prior to 1978 Not Subiect to Lot Consolidation Provisions of WCC 20.83.070 �xc Qaw ..cresM Nu_i44s,��_._,�_ 1800's to 1930's Dates unknown AIPs Grove Addition 5.5 24 Bonnie Brae Add. To B'ham Bay 5.0 14 Bowden's Add. To B'ham Bay 110.0 20 Hansen's Sportsman's Park 32.4 52 Hunter Park 40.0 50 New World Addition 3.0 15 New Port Add. 20.01 72 North Sear -rest Tracts 16.0 20 Petersen's Add. To B'ham Bay Cities 50.0 11 Seacrest 15.0 57 See le Heights Addition 2.5 12 Sunset Addition 5.0 13 POST WWII Hansen's Echo Point Tracts 1946 4.0 10 Lummi Bay Plat 1950 12.5 39 Hansen's Echo Point Tracts 1 st Add. 1954 8.0 18 Georgia View Addition 1957 10.6 17 Isle Aire Beach 1960 23.4 - 78 Gramac Hilltop Add. #1 & #2 1962 10.0 26 Sunrise Cove on Lummi Island 1966 3.2 8 SWBT.OTQfIS'.i�lav��.'.a`�s-x`:-,a�.�nu�;.�73._�s'�``,».si ' �',k?v Lummi Is. Scenic Estates Total 1959-1965 230.01 479 Division 1 1959 47 Divisions 2, 3, 4, 5 1961 254 Divisions 7 & 9 1962 92 Division 6 1963 50 Division 10 1965 36 SUBYWESONIM o �'0 °`N 3� u53 �Y � F PdE •, .. _, Marine View Estates 5.0 16 Hale's Pass Addition 121.6 21 Brown's Short Plat 2.0 3 Feiselman Short Plat 2.5 3 Irene Thomas Short Plat 8.0 2 Richardson's Short Plat 2.0 4 P eatt Short Plat 1.8 2 Beach Short Plat 2.8 2 Oppenheimer Short Plat 9.81 2 Sunset Beach 14.5 31 S.11B�OTALS' TOTAL ALL SUBDIVISIONS 847.81 1317 Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 Appendices 94 423 Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 Appendix A Lummi Island Planning Survey 95 424 Lummi Island Planning Survey PRELIMINARYRESULTS L Numbers listed after each answer choice represent the percentage of all respondents to the question who selected that particular response. 2. Since most percentages have been rounded off to the nearest whole number, sums for each question may differ slightly from 100. Questions 1-3 ask about your level of agreement or disagreement with suggested elements of the proposed Lummi Island lesion Statement. (copy attached) 1. Would you prefer to see more or less of the following elements of the Island's physical environment? Much i About the Much mnro ��nra •�. enmo /acc tocc a. Open Fields —1416 65 3 1 b. Wooded areas 17 - 20 - 58 - 4 - -- f c. _ Roadside and field_ hedgerows. --t ---L- 17 -- -- - ----- 19 -<- -- = -- -- — 50 ; -- 11 ------ _4 - - d_ Wetlands 15 . 17 62 5 1 e. Undeveloped shoreline T 26 20 48 _ 5 _ 1 J f_ Open vistas L 17 23 55 2 3 g. Air and water quality 26 25 48 j _ 0 0 h. Quiet ---- ----- - -- - 1- 22 --- 26 50 - - -- - - 2 --=-- ---- 0-- i. Rustic public walking trails_ 29 �-------- 34 28 5 1 4 j. Public shoreline access for: i. walking 36 25 294 5 _ ii. boat launch 25 31 31 5 8 iii. other ��16 19 51 6 7 k. _ Healthy fish and wildlife habitats 36 28 y _ 34 _ 1 _ 0 2. How valuable to you are the following attributes of the Island community? Vey ; Somewhat Not at all a. Mutually supportive environment -- --- - y 60 32 7 b. Strong community involvement 51 40 8 _ c. Neighborliness 66 �_- 29 j 4 d. Sense of safety -__-_- ----- - -- ----- -- 78 19 3 _ e. Wide range of community activities i3o ss 15 f. Sense of belonging 49 41 to g. Community -based cultural activities h. Social and economic diversity - 32 ----- '- 37 52 - '� ----------- -- 45 - t 16 18 i. Influence in County's decisions affecting the island 77 19 5 Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update 96 Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 425 3. How valuable to you are the following aspects of the Island's rural character? Very Somewhat Not at all a. Rural character of roads 68 21 10 b. Small scale of public and commercial enterprises 65 27 8 c. Unhurried pace of life 75 19 6 j d. Sustainabili of resource -based enterprises 50 38 12 e. Sense of privacy j 79 19 1 2 f. Housing & landscaping appropriate to rural community 61 I 27 12 Questions 4 through 9 ask your general views about growth on Lummi Island 4. Overall, do you think that development on Lummi Island in the last few years has made it a more desirable or less desirable place for you to live? A. More desirable 10 B. About the same 35 C. Less desirable 50 D. Unsure or no opinion 5 5. In your view, have the County s land use policies governing development on the Island been: A. Too restrictive 12 B.. About right 47 C. Not restrictive enough 41 6. How satisfied are you with the County's management of growth and development on the Island in the last few years? A. Very 3 B. Mostly 28 C. Somewhat 49 D. Not at all 20 7. Are there reasons associated with growth or land use that would lead you to consider moving away from Lummi Island? (Mark all that apply) A. Not applicable: I don't reside even part-time on Island 10 B. No, I would not consider moving because of growth 25 C. Deterioration of environmental quality 48 D. Loss of sense of community 28 E. Too many people, houses, and traffic 56 F. Loss of sense of safety 50 G. Loss of sense of privacy 48 H. Length of commute times to mainland 25 Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 97 426 8. The following are potential outcomes that could acmpany growth on the island. How desirable or undesirable is each of the following fg. you personally? Very Somewhat Somewhat Very - Desirable Desirable Neutral Undesirable Undesirable a. _ Street lights on all roads i 2 5 12 20 62 b. Gas station(s) 16 24 18 16 26 c. Shopping center_ 3 7 14 15 60 d. Island medical clinic 16 29 32 10 _ 14 e. _ Public water and sewer treat _ 10 15 23 15 _ _ 37 f. All roads hard -surfaced 8 13 27 17 35_ g. Stop lights at intersection 2 3 T 10 T 17 68_ h. Community center 17 29 29 9 _ 16 i. Island bus/van service I 20 34 23 7_ 16 j. Island law enforcement 14 17 27 16 26 _�ncludin_traffic laws2 —_ k. Professional fire protection j 14 19 39 12 16 I. Movie theater 2 6 20 14 58 M. ___ Senior assisted living 17 _ 26 33 _ 7 �18 9. Please write the names of up to three specific places on the island you would especially like to see preserved: (Write names in space provided on answer sheet) The next questions ask what kind ofgrowth and related issues you would like to see happen on Lummi Island (not what you think is most likely or inevitable). 10. Compared to the current population level (about 1560 residents in peak season), what would you prefer the island population to be? A. Smaller 32 B. About the same 54 C. Somewhat larger 13 D. Much larger 1 11. How fast would you like the population be allowed to increase? A. Current growth rate is fine. (Adding about 230 houses by 2010, and 300 more by 2020) 18 B. Slower growth than the last 10 years 39 C. Faster growth than the Iast10 years 3 D. Zero or negative growth rate (constant or decreased population) 40 Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 98 427 12. The current 1979 land use plan relies heavily on water availability as the primary tool for managing growth. Which of the following factors do you think should be considered as management tools in forming the new land use plan? (Marts all that you support) h. Water quality and quantity. 90 i. Transportation time and costs (roads, ferry, etc.). 52 j. Economic or market forces 13 k. Maintaining rural character of the island. 77 1. Maintaining a strong sense of community. 48 m. Maintaining healthy natural environment and wildlife habitat 78 n. Commercial opportunities 10 13. Would you like to see more or less of each of the following on the Island? More Same Less None a. farming 36 60 4 1 b. forestry 10 50 25 14 c. mining/guaffying 3 31 26 40 d. fishing 40 54 3 2 e. a uaculture 21 39 10 ! 30 f. arts and crafts 34 57 6 3 g. home office/ telecommuting 11 41 53 5 1 h.bed & breakfasts 18 66 12 4 i. marina 40 33 5 22 '. boat launch 55 28 5 12 k. golf course 11 12 4 73 1. restaurant 22 71 3 4 m, tourism 9 43 25 23 n.stores 11 78 2 8 14. Some residents are concerned about glare from outdoor lighting. Do you support regulation of outdoor lighting to preserve a natural sense of nighttime darkness? A. Strongly support 51 B. Somewhat support 16 C. Neutral 13 D. Somewhat oppose 8 E. Strongly oppose 12 15. Is noise on the island (e.g., from machinery, pets, traffic) a problem for you? A. Often 13 B. Occasionally 54 C. Never 33 Lummf Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 99 16. Is smoke a problem in your island neighborhood?,Xe.g., bum piles, wood stoves) A. Often 3 B. Occasionally 27 C. Never 70 17. Should construction guidelines for new and remodeling projects be revised to include any of the following? (Mark all that you support) !a. Provide green barrier (not just lawn) between new houses and road. 41 b. Encourage siting building at the edge of fields rather than in center 38 --- - c. Restrict clearing of trees when building _ _ _ 45 edRestrict construction of impermeable surfaces_ 54 Nnri_ . ewrestrictions should be imposed 28 f Limit proportion of lot that can be filled by man-made structures _ 48 g. No expansion of original foundation footprint in remodeling 45 structures near shorelines or other sensitive areas 18. Should Lummi Island consider forming a Park District (to keep a portion of properly tax dollars presently sent to mainland) for purchase of land for parks, trails, boat launch, or other public use? A. Yes 71 B. No 20 C. Unsure or don't understand 9 19. When growth and development come to a community, new infrastructure and services are needed (for example, more roads„ fire, police, schools, libraries). In your opinion, who should pay for the expansion of services required by new development? A. Current residents should pay these costs. 1 B. Developers and new owners should pay. 56 C. Both should pay. 44 20. Would you like to see a moratorium on the issuing of new land subdivision permits on Lummi Island while the Sub -area Plan is being revised? A. Yes 67 B. No 24 C. Unsure or don't understand 10 Our community will be influenced by the type of development that is permitted by County rules. The next questions ask your views about some County rules for development 21. Currently, much of Lummi Island is zoned RR -I (Rural Residential -island) except for the mountain (including Scenic Estates), which is zoned "Rural Forestry." Many in Scenic Estates believe their interests as a community would be better protected (e. g., from logging or quarry impacts) by RR -I zoning. Do you support such a rezone of Scenic Estates (leaving rest of mountain zoned Rural Forestry) ? A. Yes 59 B. No 19 C. Unsure 22 Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 100 429 22. Do you live or own property in Scenic Estates? A. Yes 25 B. No 75 23. The County Comprehensive Plan suggests the possible creation of a commercial zone on the island (perhaps near the ferry dock) where any new high traffic public and commercial activities (stores, restaurants, businesses) would have to locate. Do you support the idea of such a commercial zone on the island? A. Yes 40 B. No 44 C. Unsure 16 24. Presently, County zoning allows 'multiplex' living units (up to four units in one building) on Lummi Island under conditional use permits, which requires a public hearing and notification of neighbors within 300 feet. Should County policy: A. Remain the same 38 B. Allow only duplexes (including mother-in-law apartments), and require a public hearing? 27 C. Prohibit multiplex housing 32 D. Unsure or don't understand 4 Average and minimum lot sizes. For new subdivisions, current law says that minimum allowable size of lots entirely inside designated groundwater recharge areas is 5 acres, and entirely outside water recharge areas is 3 acres. For parcels partially inside and partially outside recharge areas, individual lots can be as small as 1.5 acres as long as the average lot size for the whole parcel is at least 3 acres. The next three questions refer to these rules. 25. 1 prefer the minimum lot size in new subdivisions entirely inside water recharge areas to be: A. 5 acres (current law) 59 B. 10 acres 21 C. 20 acres 11 D. Unsure or don't understand 9 26. 1 prefer the average lot size in newly platted subdivisions that are partly or entirely outside water recharge areas to be: A. Less than 3 acres 10 B. 3 acres (current law) 38 C. At least 5 acres 30 D. At least 10 acres 9 E. At least 20 acres 5 F. Unsure or don't understand 8 27. 1 prefer the minimum lot size in new subdivisions that are partly inside and partly outside water recharge areas to be: A. Less than 1.5 acres 8 B. At least 1.5 acres 14 C. At least 3 acres 25 D. At least 5 acres 30 E. 10 or more acres 12 F. Unsure or don't understand 12 Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 101 430 Density transfer is a process by which development rights can be moved from one place to another. Density transfer allows more development in the place density is transferred to, in exchange for less density in the place density is transferred from. Current law allows density to be transferred within Lummi Island's Rural -Residential -Island zone, subject to some restrictions. 28. Should density transfer be allowed on Lummi Island under any circumstances? (Mark all that you support) I Yes, from the island to a receiving area off the island _ 27 jb. Yes, from residential zones on island to a possible new commercial 18 zone on island ___ 1c. Yes, within a residential zone, but not into water recharge, 23 shoreline or other sensitive areas e. Unsure or don't understand 13 Lot clustering. The current County Comprehensive Plan includes Policy 2FF-2, "Encourage cluster housing and other innovative development techniques on Lummi Island." In lot clustering, a portion of a parcel may be subdivided into lots smaller than otherwise would be permitted, in exchange for the creation of a single, larger `reserve tract' of undeveloped land that can be used for forestry, open space, or agriculture. Such "reserve tracts" can be subject to further development under some conditions. 29. Which of the following clustering policies do you support? A. Current provisions for clustering should be retained. 19 B. Clustering should be allowed only under special circumstances (See next question) 49 C. Cluster developments should not be allowed on Lummi Island under any circumstances. 28 D. Unsure or don't understand 4 30. If you selected choice "b" in the previous question, under what conditions should clustering be allowed or encouraged? (Mark all that you support) a. If it preserves rural character better than alternatives 3 l' b. If the reserve tract is legally guaranteed never to be developed 47 rc. If it permits development of affordable housing jd. If a reasonable minimum lot size is established 23 le. Unsure or don't understand 3J; The next five questions relate to transportation: 31. How should roads and traffic be changed for improved safety? (Mark whether you agree or disagree with each option) Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 102 431 d. Widen extra narrow roads minimally where visibility is limited 64 1 36 e. Widen all roads minimally 18 82 f. Widen all roads substantially 6 11 94 32. What new protections do you support for pedestrians or bicyclists? (Mark all that you support) a. No new protections are needed. 37 b. Add new road shoulders for trails along only the most dangerous roads 33 c. Add new road shoulders for trails along all roads 15 d. Add trails buffered from most dangerous roads as by drainage ditch 28 e. Add trails buffered from all roads as by drainage ditch 10 f. Addspecial walking and biking trails not necessarily associated with roadways 47 33. What is the average number of ferry round trips you make per week as either a pedestrian or vehicle passenger? A. 0-2 68 B. 3-5 25 C. 6-8 5 D. 9 or more 2 34. What is the average number of round trips a week you make on the ferry as the driver of a vehicle? A. 0-2 60 B. 3-5 33 C. 6-8 7 D. 9 or more 1 35. How much do you support County incentives to increase 'Walk-on" use of the ferry and decrease "car -and -driver" use? A. Strongly 48 B. Somewhat 27 C. Not at all 25 It is important to know how well all groups on the Island are represented by those who actually respond to the survey. The following demographic questions are for statistical purposes only; all oLyour answers will remain completely anonymous. The more of these questions you answer, the better we can tell how well survey results represent the whole range of Islanders' views. 36. How involved are you in community activities or organizations (e.g., Community Club, Fire Hall, Elderberries, Grange, Heritage Trust, Boys and Girls Club, etc.)? A. Very 15 B. Somewhat 51 C. Not at all 34 37. Do you: A. Own home on Lummi Island? 78 B. Rent home on Lummi Island? 5 C. Own property but do not live on Lummi Island? 15 D. Other (e.g., live with a property owner)? 2 38. How much land do you own on Lummi Island? Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 103 432 A. None 7 B. Less than 1 acre 41 r^ C. 1 to less than 6 acres 36 D. 6 to 10 acres 7 E. More than 10 acres 9 39. How much of the past year did you reside on Lummi Island? A. Essentially full time 59 B. More than six months, but not full time 8 C. One to six months 21 D. Not at all 12 40. For how may years have you lived on Lummi Island (full or part time)? A. None 10 B. up to 5 years 22 C. 5+ to 10 years 17 D. 10+ to 20 years 22 E. more than 20 years 28 41. What is your gender? A. Female 50.3 B. Male 49.7 42. What is your age group? A. 20 or under 0 B. 21-34 5 C. 35-49 25 D. 50-64 44 E. 65 or older 25 43. What is your highest level of education? A. High school or less 5 B. Some college or technical school 18 C. 2 year degree 8 D. 4 year degree 24 E. Beyond four-year degree 45 44. How many children do you have in each school -age category? None___; One Two Three 'i Four+ l a. Preschool 92 5 4- r b. Elementsry - 87 9 ------ ---- -- 2 I I j c. Middle school_ d. High School - -- �- 92 -- 89 7 -' - --- - -- 1 - [e. College I 80 _9, 13_ 1 _2_ _ 5 -- - -1— -- 1- J 45. What is your employment status? (Mark all that apply) a. Self-employed 32 b. Full time employee 30 - -- ------------------ --------- C. Part time employee - 13_ Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 104 433 d. Retired 32 e. Other s 46. What portion of your income is from work performed on Lummi Island? A. None 70 B. Less than half 13 C. More than half, but not all 5 D. All 11 47. In what sector of the economy are you normally employed? (Choose only one) A. Retired 24 G. Farming I M. Technology s B. Food service 1 H. Health 8 N. Real estate 2 C. Art, music or writing 4 I. Mining 4 �) O. Tourism I ----------- ----------------------------------- ------ -- D. Homemaker 3 - - -- - J. Fishing i ------------------ - P. Clerical I E. Education 12 K. Forestry (.2) Q. Sales 3 F. Public sector (non-educ) 4 - - - - - - - L. Construction - - ---------°----------------------- 4 R. Other 17 ------- --- --- 48. What is your household gross annual income? A. under $17,500 7 B. $17,501 - 32,000 1s C. $32,001 - 43,000 1s D. $43,001 - 75,000 32 E. $75,001 - 120,000 18 F. over $120,000 13 Thank you for completing the Lummi Island Planning Survey. Please transfer your answers to the enclosed answer sheet using a No. 2 pencil. Fill in each oval completely. Enter any additional comments or concerns on the next page. PLEASE DO NOT FOLD YOUR ANSWER SHEETI Return your completed answer sheet and comment sheet in the enclosed postage - paid envelope. Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 105 434 Individual Comments Please enter on this page any additional comments you would like to make about land use issues important to you personally. What should the next Island land use plan try to protect, preserve, enhance, develop, allow, permit, control, encourage, or discourage? What are your primary concerns or fears? What are your hopes? What is important to you about living on Lummi Island? Note: Since the Lummi Island Planning Committee does not have the resources to retype extensive comments, it would be very helpful if you would submit your comments electronically online at either htti)://www.lummi-island.com/survey.htm or http://www.wwu.edu/—assess/survey.htm rather than submitting them on this sheet. Thanks! If web access is not easily available to you, please write your concerns on this page, and submit it together with your answer sheet in the enclosed envelope. Please be brief and write legibly. Attach additional sheets if necessary. Thanks again for completing the survey. Comments: Lummi Island Subarea Plan Update Revised Final Draft, March, 2009 106 435 Appendix B Growth Management Alternatives Public Evaluation Lummr Island Subarea Plan Update Revrsed Final Draft, March, 2009 107 436 o a) .O 0 O Q 0 y m cyV C > —> N ,d Cd 0to aye o o?�b3 y h Q 0 _0 O c0V y N � 00 X `�' d O 'Cl O cd � 3 _ •� c a — o A .. rn cd ci w U a� a� y ca O rA :L ;P.4-i 7�r M U Ca C O N +' N N t O to /� � � :3 U •� m N p�j QI y .4 0 0 CA as p O cd vi O v > U a U cd N fC � � E'� •� E O 0 Cd 3 o ca A, o c� O Q.o b to �+ ' an O cd ~ U Cd 4 O LL y o M G Nce G ti l Lr �-+ b � F•i Q N Mo a 0 O O N rz 0 00 `� U O y y .�' C. O (V w°'`�3b O . Y Y N •'� ii Ly > W y 0?0 Q � �. cno.�'� LO P4 x 4 y a y U 00 0 437 d UA • 0 0 0 � d e A a ► o • • ► 0 ► d 0 a •� •� C V O CO CCU '� � C C a U O p U 'C 'a U O �•N 6 o O y o C y •0 O V p bA +•' cC w Y p E 4., .}qC, cd cdT� •y C NCO Ww b •C U N .� �., O cq, Cd •^ O V 'b •� ^4 � � �U, N •b a � � .� in •U O a U C cd Ll. ,� V r U � •C V1 � +C§ 3 ��.� cC C ,C, , w O C � fix+ O O U .� U U r. O r. O •4 U b0 �, .b E cad C C a C4 „ n G C p bD °-' 1. c 1. c �". Qo re �., ;� .b r� �� (6 CCii 44 �•Y N ice. ice. f'i Cd y c3 0 Y O ice. '^gym Y 14R '0 •cC C •N •N •O •O C15 •C U �e N `n N y c`d U U •� U ,— � p, ,� � � � c`� C � U rU Co O O y U •C Y Lam' •b rU. C U .b N «f 5 U � •Cp C a� C• U � C`" c� U O O O .5 p •b r 0 O0,0 .Y N bzx 0•_ a a �o Q ani O O O cd 0.! U - o c�i ri iC � '28 vi U A o • o o • o o • 0 a i 0 q a o o b o 0 0 0 • • • • d c � t t t t t 4 � � � � � • •4 0. CID O 0 •y ! 00 2 .0 V yy Y Y N cd .b O� • Ei a ° o°' p r. O 4 7J Gch[V � °� °3 cA c o .RI .y Sb 6 cn tr ii •Y>/ �• d0 U is p o Y �� 3� aooao r4 a > p a� U o a �0 o� X 0 > 0 3 n 0 0 o F Ei v, � Y C.Cc a a x ❑ •� N •:n N td N N s a. O N H 0 Y V y 075 Y c� 0 '^ N U a+ 'b aiCd El Y n. +C4 n � •x 'G ono +6 N O p t`" 0 „ o � yyob� „ r ° , ` a o 'O a', O a �o0�°° a� .,a°b�� . O cd y •N .N cdp In i. 'C CL a� c p: o a Q. •� a� a 3 u :? o �v Y_ a oG w �w ors; `"� yv��.� a �w > 0 �a db�'>� 0 O O O O O O D D .b O O O O O C 06 s0. Ll 439 Cd U Q • • a a o ° a� o ❑ c o _ ° o 14 Cn Ly Cd Cd N ¢' y y '> y CL Cd � w II °o ¢, °' U w o G ai o° a '� o o a Cd n o C n9.- N N 3.-w V Cd 3 N C 3 'y O +UU+ N C X 'O 'O 'c3 � t„) y Z -0 Ly,, °' 3 N a 8 O O° y � Cd c° > ° s. ,. " c0 �w ° w cd �, a 3 _ �' ono y CN ¢.CN a.. N 'C '0 G, ° '� ;: '� O UC° 3 x O O C oww O 'b O a� tq 090 � O a ob F"' '• Npp b 04 c4 O O E V y y�' r. p U y U Cd CL N 'b i~ YO a U f. •� N id U a �"' v°i a cd aU.. N aU.. vi N �'8Cd� 4� C4 � O °i U U y •� 3 0° ao 3„Cd �° �oca3i.GO c°n� o °>? c U N C C� 'V '( 'iC p N C 0 C o O N 'C C cd `- cd ao "-a � �•E ° r 2 w a`di o•c❑ o a'i m c 3 c 3 °' p id i~ U `cd cC ° o p ° cd g8cb .b �.�o Y O 0 3 a� b� C o .c ;°° fi x° 8 2 N 8 :3 3 Yo 0 0 8 jU �+ cdi O O �., G Cd V o C N N y U ° c���O ob 8 o Y x 0 0 0 0 0 G°i Q 0 0 0 X c C o O U cd O cd w C C8 Oi O cd w w ."[.. cad I I , 441 WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FINDINGS OF FACT & REASONS FOR ACTION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Adoption of the Lummi Island Subarea plan of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan; Amendments to WCC Title 20.34 and WCC Title 16.16 WHEREAS, the Lummi Island Subarea plan is a part of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, additional information necessitates updating the 1979 Lummi Island Subarea plan; and WHEREAS, Legal notice was published in the Bellingham Herald; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposal; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission has evaluated the proposed amendments. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: THE PLANNING COMMISSION ENTERS THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT & REASONS FOR ACTION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: FINDINGS OF FACT & REASONS FOR ACTION 1. On November 21, 2003 a staff report was issued for Lummi Island proposed plan to the planning commission (file number CMP2003-00011). 2. On November 24, 2003 the Deputy SEPA Official issued a SEPA Determination of Nonsignificance (SEP03-00208). 3. On December 4, 2003 a supplemental staff report was issued. 4. On December 4, 2003 the Planning Commission held a public meeting to review the plan, receive public testimony, and propose amendments. 5. On January 22, 2004 the Planning Commission held a public meeting to review the plan, receive public testimony, and propose amendments. P. 1 442 6. On January 29, 2004 the Planning Commission held a public meeting to review the plan, receive public testimony, and propose amendments. 7. On February 20, 2004 Staff issued the Lummi Island Subarea Summary of Options and Recommendations. 8. On February 26, 2004 the Planning Commission held a public meeting to review the February 20, 2004 Summary of Options and Recommendations and moved to forward the plan to the County Council as amended. 9. On March 23, 2004 the County Council introduces ordinance for review and adoption of the Draft plan. 10.On May 12, 2004 the Deputy SEPA Official withdraws the DNS based on the requirement for new information on groundwater protection. 11. On May 12, 2004 Sylvia Goodwin, Planning Division Manager issued a memorandum to the County Council informing them the plan must be tabled until the Groundwater Study is complete. 12. On October 26, 2005 Aspect Consulting began the Groundwater Study. 13. On December 31, 2006 Aspect Consulting completed the Groundwater Investigation and proposed a methodology for aquifer protection. 14. Pursuant to RCW 36.70.590 legal notice for a public hearing was published in the Bellingham Herald on October 12, 2008. 15. A new Determination of Non -Significance was issued under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) on September 19, 2008. Comments were received from Darlyn DelBoca and David K. Ernst. The comments were reviewed by the Deputy SEPA Official. The comments did not change the Determination of Nonsignificance. 16 The stated goals of the Lummi Island Subarea Plan are: • Natural Resource Sustainability (e.g., protection of water supply, water quality and environmentally sensitive areas) • Preservation of Island Rural Character (e.g., density of development, protection of open space, etc.) • Protection of Property Rights (e.g., fairness in applying new rules that impact the ability of property owners to achieve economic gain from their property and their investment in land). 17. The Lummi Island Planning Committee (LIPC) held 26 monthly meetings scheduled throughout 2002 and 2003, terminating on November 10, 2003, the public was invited. Whatcom County Planning and Development Services held two educational Land Use Meetings in June 2002, and sponsored a Land Use Attorney Public Meeting in August P. 2 443 2003. Mark Personius, the Planning Consultant, participated in three Public Community Meetings to obtain input on the Draft Plan and answer questions. Whatcom County Planning and Development Services and Aspect Consulting conducted a public workshop to introduce and answer questions regarding the groundwater study on January 28, 2006. A public meeting was held on December 7, 2006 to announce the findings of the groundwater study. A public meeting was held on September 24, 2008 to discuss the proposed amendments from the Ground Water Study and changes to the maximum density. 18. The Plan is consistent with the County Comprehensive Plan, the County -wide Planning Policies and Growth Management Act (GMA) planning goals regarding Citizen Participation, Environment, Open Space and Recreation, and Historic Preservation. 19. The proposed Subarea Plan goals and policies increase the ability to provide services and facilities that can benefit the public health, safety and welfare of the residents and property owners of Lummi Island through transportation, recreational, and water quality goals etc. 20. The island has a resident population of 822 and a potential peak seasonal population almost double that according to the 2000 US Census. 21. Increased rates of dry wells, arsenic contamination and chloride levels have been documented by the Whatcom County Environmental Health Department (P. Chudek, personal communication, August 2003). The December 31, 2006 Conceptual Methodology for Evaluating Groundwater Withdrawal Proposals on North Lummi Island by Aspect Consulting provides a methodology for protection of the aquifer system. 22. Most of the north island remains rural with a settlement pattern of one unit per three or five acres; however, there are some areas that have already developed at suburban rather than rural character. These include higher density developments approved prior to the advent of the Growth Management Act such as the Beach Club Condominiums, Scenic Estates, Lane Spit, and Isle Aire. In other areas shorelines have been densely developed on old small non -conforming lots —often less than an acre. 23. The ferry capacity and level of service are important growth variables that could significantly encourage or retard future growth. Currently the LOS established for the Lummi Island ferry service does not meet the adopted level of service of 513 trips/capita. Therefore, no further subdivisions of land may be approved on Lummi Island until the ferry is upgraded or the LOS is revised. However, short plats and building permits are exempt from the concurrency requirements and these activities have continued on the island in spite of the ferry LOS. The next review of the Capital Facilities Plan will address the revised LOS for the ferry. 24. Both the Lummi Island Planning Survey and the small group discussions of alternative growth management strategies indicated support for increased protection of unique components of the built and natural environment that constitute the island's rural character, including open fields and woods, hedgerows, farm buildings and old P. 3 iii homesteads, open vistas, groundwater recharge areas and environmentally sensitive areas and undeveloped shorelines. Clustering was supported by a majority of respondents on the Planning Survey —most notably "if the reserve tract is legally guaranteed never to be developed". 25. The additional policies recommended regarding development of a Lummi Island Water Management Plan, update of the County Critical Area Ordinance policies on aquifer recharge area protection, and revision of the Lummi Island Aquifer Recharge Area map will help protect groundwater quality and quantity on the island. Mapping of individual drainage basins and specific protection measures and policies should be added when additional data is available. 26. The recommended policies and tables regarding lot consolidation will reduce density in three subdivisions with existing substandard lots where two or more lots are in common ownership. 27. The adoption of the revised zone text for the Rural Residential Island zoning district, will reduce the density on most of the unplatted RRI zoned land to one dwelling unit per 5 acres. 28. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 23, 2008. The Planning Commission approved the staff recommendation with amendments. Amendments included portions of the draft Subarea Plan, maintaining the clustering language for RRI, and changes to the vroposed WCC 16.16 to include an exempt well provision and notification to surrounding property owners of the pumping test. CONCLUSIONS The subject amendments are consistent with the approval criteria of WCC 20.10.080 and serve the public interest. The amendments will not create an undue burden under section 1.11 of the County Charter. RECOMMENDATION Changes to the February 2004 Draft Subarea Plan Page 7, first paragraph Note that discussion of a new ferry is specifically excluded here_ eapaeit-yi tant variable to sustainable growth on the island. On April 15, 2008 the Whatcom County Council decided to not pursue a new ferry at this time. Ferry service will be limited to the capabilities of the current ferry to provide that service. P. 4 445 u9all ............ Pages 34 - 39 Groundwater Resources Groundwater recharge areas were originally established in the 1979 Plan based on hydrogeologic studies in the late 1970's (see Water Resources of Northern Lummi Island (Robinson & Noble, Inc, 1978). Lower densities were assigned to recharge areas as a means to protect the groundwater quality and quantity. There has been a significant increase in the number of private wells since 1979. However, there has been no analysis of groundwater levels or recharge potential since 1979 (Figure 12). There has been more recent analysis of groundwater quality indicating increasing rates of dry wells (V. Armfield, personal communication, August 2003) as well as arsenic contamination and saltwater intrusion in island wells (P. Chudek, Whatcom Co. Environmental Health, August 2003). Whatcom County Environmental Health Department has enacted more stringent standards for arsenic treatment in new wells. University and Wha-teem County is pur-suing grants to fund new groundwater- studio&.- -Whatcom County should pursue research and grants to fund additional groundwater studies including analysis and mapping of individual drainage basins for groundwater levels, rechar e potentiaL threats analysis and protect recommendations. Public Water Associations serve more than two connections and withdraw significantly more groundwater per well than individual systems but are also subject to higher water treatment standards. Group A systems have 15 or more connections or serve 25 or more persons per day. Group B systems have 3-15 connections and serve less than 25 people per day (Figure 13). In 1979, there were seven (7) "Public" Water Associations (Group A and Group B P. 5 M systems). In 2002, there were twenty-six (26) "Public" Water Associations (Group A and Group B systems). The island experienced an almost four -fold increase in the number of high capacity wells pumping groundwater out of the aquifer in the last twenty years. Groundwater Aquifers and Best Available Science The original groundwater carrying capacity estimates for the island were developed during hydro -geologic studies conducted in the late 1970s by Dr. Ronald Schmidt of the consulting firm Robinson 8s Noble. The estimates are contained in the report The Water Resources of Northern Lummi Island (1978) and reflect certain assumptions regarding best available science at the time. Lacking comprehensive data, Schmidt himself noted in his study that some of his assumptions regarding the island's water budget were preliminary and should be reevaluated when more comprehensive data became available. Some have noted that Schmidt's estimates of groundwater carrying capacity, for example, do not take into account the effect of drought conditions, and may, in fact, overestimate groundwater carrying capacity. Recent review of Schmidt's 1978 study by geologists from Western Washington University also cast doubt as to the veracity of the conclusions reached regarding designation of aquifer recharge areas and groundwater capacity and recharge rates. A recent analysis of the methodology utilized by Schmidt in his 1978 study was conducted by William Sullivan (WWU) in a report entitled Overview Lummi Island Groundwater Study (2003). Sullivan writes: "Unfortunately, Schmidt was unable to identify hydrostratigraphy, delineate aquifers, or provide reliable static water levels. It appears that Schmidt used a topographic map to estimate well -head and aquifer surface elevations, introducing large errors into his aquifer surface map. [His] mapping of aquifer recharge zones is generalized because he used only data from his aquifer surface map. The water budget conducted by Schmidt is based only on climatic data. Soils, geologic, and land cover data that could be used to better quantify [evapotranspiration], infiltration and runoff were not available." It is also interesting to note that the aquifer recharge areas identified by Schmidt in the 1979 subarea plan —that came to form the basis for the 5 acre/3 acre recharge/non- recharge area split zoning on the northern part of the island —are inconsistent with the critical aquifer recharge areas (CARAs) mapped on the island utilizing the criteria established in the Whatcom County Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO). See Figure 14. According to the CAO, designated CARAs may comprise a much larger percentage of the north island than the aquifer recharge areas identified under the 1979 subarea plan. eapaeity of the gr-eundwaiteF aquifer- an the island. Some data pertaining to groundwater quality is available from a more ,-eeert report entitled Lummi Island Groundwater Study (1994) prepared by the Whatcorn County Environmental Health Department and the Washington State Department of Ecology. That report indicates an increasing presence of chlorides (at levels in excess of 100mg/1) in some shoreline wells (from seawater intrusion) and naturally -occurring arsenic levels in some wells scattered across the north part of the island. However the 1994 study made no effort P. 6 447 to quantify a water budget for the island or aquifer capacity or recharge rates. Analysis by Dr. Schmidt of 1978 well surveys found only one well on the island with high chloride levels at that time. A similar survey conducted by Whatcom County Environmental Health in 2003 found seventeen (17) wells subject to serious saltwater intrusion. Further development on the northern half of Lummi Island will result in a declining water supply. Both local residents and the Whatcom County Environmental Health Department have documented increasing numbers of dry and low -producing wells (personal communication, V. Armfield and P. Chudek, August, 2003). With increased development comes the addition of new impervious surfaces including roads, driveways, and roofs that replace the vital vegetative cover that helps retain the rainwater for infiltration and aquifer recharge and holds the soil in place. There are also threats to groundwater quality that must be addressed. The ground water is recharged by precipitation and surface water seeping directly into the ground. Contamination of ground water including improper use of pesticides can be a major threat to potable water sources. Septic tanks that are not properly maintained can also contribute to major degradation of ground water quality. Increased demands on the current water source from development and well pumping are also likely to contribute to increased levels of saltwater intrusion. Seawater intrusion is the movement of seawater into fresh water aquifers. The causes of seawater intrusion are known to be from a decrease in ground water levels. The ground water level can be lowered from reduced precipitation or less ground water recharge due to removal of natural groundcover and more intense development. For example, development projects that include impervious surfaces, such as paved driveways and roads; prevent rainwater from draining directly through the soil into the aquifer. Water generated from impervious surfaces is usually collected in a drainage "ditch" and may discharge directly into the saltwater without having a chance to be fully absorbed on the land. Activities, which can cause a lowering of the groundwater level, include a reduction in the amount of fresh water recharge and pumping and withdraw rates that exceed the rate of recharge. Areas closer to saltwater sources, such as shorelines, are at higher risk. Pumping a well or wells can also cause a local decline in the ground water level in the immediate vicinity of the pumped well and may cause local seawater intrusion or affect the quality of the water at nearby well sites. Freshwater is a finite resource on Lummi Island. Rainfall —which averages 32" per year —is the only source of water supply for the island. Total rainfall can vary widely across the island, however, and drought years can exacerbate water supply problems. Alternative public water supply sources such as a pipeline from the mainland or a regional seawater desalination plant are not presently feasible. The lack of a reliable and thorough understanding and estimate of current groundwater conditions on the island, the indications of increasing groundwater quality degradation, and the inconsistency between aquifer recharge areas identified on the island under the 1979 plan and in the more recent CAO suggests that a conservative approach be taken to allocating future land use until a more thorough groundwater evaluation can be completed. On May 12, 2004 the Deputy SEPA Official required a groundwater study to mitigate the impacts of new wells, specifically for seawater intrusion and arsenic P. 7 ii-0 concentrations. Whatcom County hired Aspect Consulting (including William Sullivan) to perform the investigation and make a recommendation as to a methodology protection of the Lummi Island aquifer system. On December 31, 2006 Aspect Consulting concluded the groundwater study for North Lummi Island. As stated in the Executive Summary: "The purpose of the Lummi Island Groundwater Study is to develop standards and policies for island groundwater development that are protective of the groundwater resource, natural environment, and human health. This memorandum summarizes conceptually a set of requirements the County can consider implementing to achieve this objective. The methodology stems from a hydrogeoloidc investigation of Lummi Island (Aspect Consulting, 2006b) and is based on an antidegradation standard for the aquifer. Table 1 summarizes the conceptual methodology for evaluating groundwater withdrawal proposals." The December 31, 2006 Conceptual Methodology for Evaluating Groundwater Withdrawal Proposals on North Lummi Island by Aspect Consulting is attached as Appendix C. The hydrogeologic investigation completed by Aspect Consulting on December 31, 2006 is attached as Appendix D. Page 56, .. deSYY'Ctn d 5 • Gee-.ikiat;..,., m4th the Lummi Na-tie.,, o n,-lr;.,g.,,,,.a e a atiena issues; On April 15. 2008 the Whatcom Countv Council decided to not pursue a new ferry at P. 8 ii• this time. Ferry service will be limited to the capabilities of the current ferry to provide that service. Page 76 Preferred Plan Policies & Implementation Measures Land Use Implementation Measures IMMEDIATE 1.1 Maintain the eydrAing zoning. Amend the RR -I District zoning regulations and other regulations, as applicable, to establish one unit per five acres as the minimum density throughout the RR -I zone. Page 80 Shorelines and Critical Areas Implementation Measures IMMEDIATE 2.4 Acquire funding for and complete a more definitive Groundwater Aquifer Study and Groundwater Management Plan for the island to more accurately determine groundwater capacities and recharge rates, current and projected water use and withdrawal rates for residential, commercial and agricultural uses, and recommend measures to protect groundwater quality and avoid aquifer contamination. raeniter- key eidsting public and veluntaTy paFtieipating private groundwater- wells for levels of arsenie eentaminatien and seawater intrasien as a means te establish baseline of o stir, gr-eundwater- Epaakty ,.,diti ns en island. 2.6 The County should initiate a data collection program for all existing public and voluntary participating private wells to collect data on well locations, elevations, use, depth, and size as well as water quantity yield, and water quality (specifically for arsenic contamination and seawater intrusion). 2.6A Adopt pi=u ent measures needednecessary fie r r.t@et groundwater .. alit ty. Amend the Whatcom County Critical Areas Ordinance to implement the recommendations of the December 31, 2006 Aspect Consulting: Conceptual Methodology for Evaluating Groundwater Withdrawal Proposals on North Lummi Island. 2.6B Adopt a Water Management Plan consisting of Best Available Science (BAS) water retention practices, develepea and r,. e sered by the txn-,.,+,,,,.,., Go ty Wuter Reseur-ces Department-. P. 9 450 Title 20 Amendments 20.34.250 Maximum density, minimum lot size and width. 20.34.251 Minimum lot size and maximum density. Maximum density shall not exceed one dwelling unit per five acres. ■_ - W-1 .. PIN 610. P. 10 451 20.34.252 Maximum density and minimum lot size. Minimum Lot District Gross Size Min. Reserve Area Density Conventional (Cluster Subdivisions) Cluster RR 1. outside reGhaFge areas �T�T 1 dwelling ** dttib RR -I: w+thiR 1 dwelling 5 acres ** 55% Fe^haFge areas unit/5 acres* * F=xGept when density tFansfer it used as nreVided in VVGG 20.34.25i(3). ** The lot size that satisfies the gelling ham .Whatcom County health department requirement for water and sewage services. 20.34.253 Minimum lot width and depth. Width at Street Line Conventional Cluster Width at Bldg. Line Minimum Mean Depth District DD I• ouFraie-le Fenharnc nFear_• sewer OF watef 2W 7-G- W -ttiti- RR -I: within FeGhaFge aFeas 300' 70' ]80' �100' (Ord. 86-29, 1986; Ord. 84-38, 1984; Ord. 82-58, 1982). 20.34.305 Lot clustering. (1) The purpose of lot clustering is to preserve the rural character of Lummi Island and to provide an alternative method of creating economical building lots with spatially efficient sizes. Clustering is intended to reduce development cost, increase energy efficiency and reserve areas of land which are suitable for agriculture, forestry, open space or possible future development in accordance with the adopted zoning density requirements, as applied to the entire subdivision or short subdivision. (2) The clustering option is also intended to help preserve open space and reduce total impervious surface area thereby reducing runoff while assuring continued viable undeveloped natural vegetated corridors for wildlife habitat, protection of watersheds, preservation of wetlands, preservation of aesthetic values including view corridors, and preservation of potential trail and recreation areas. (Ord. 99-069, 1999; Ord. 90-45, 1990). P. 11 452 20.34.310 Design standards. The creation of new building lots, pursuant to this section, shall be governed by the following recommended design standards: (1) Clustered building lots may be only created through the subdivision or short subdivision process. (2) Building lots should be designed and located to the fullest extent possible to be compatible with valuable or unique natural features, as well as physical constraints of the site. (3) Where practical, the majority of building sites should be arranged in a cluster or concentrated pattern to be compatible with physical site features, allow for the efficient conversion of the "reserve tract" to other uses in the future, and have no more than two common encroachments on existing county roads. The arrangement of clustered building lots is intended to discourage development forms commonly known as linear, straight-line or highway strip patterns. (4) Common access to clustered building lots should be provided by short length roads or loop roads. In addition, interior streets shall be designed to allow access to the "reserve tract" for the purpose of future approved development. (Ord. 90- 45, 1990). 20.34.320 Reserve tract. For the purposes of this section, "reserve tract" is defined as that portion of a proposed subdivision or short subdivision which is intended for agricultural, forestry, open space or future development purposes which does not exceed adopted zoning density requirements, as applied to the entire subdivision or short subdivision. All "reserve tracts" created through -the subdivision process shall be subject to the following provisions: (1) After a site is initially subdivided pursuant to this section, the "reserve tract" may, be retained by the subdivider, conveyed to residents of the subdivision or conveyed to a third party. (2) The "reserve tract" may be considered as a building lot; provided, that such lot is included in the overall density calculation of the original parcel of record. (3) The "reserve tract" may be further subdivided only through the long subdivision process and only under the following circumstances: (a) The county finds that in developing adjacent tracts it would help to further the objectives listed in WCC 20.34.305(2) above by dividing the reserve tract and increasing the area of reserve proportionately on the adjacent land being subdivided so that there is no net reduction in reserve area; and when the reserve tract is owned by the original developer or a third party, no property owner within the original subdivision will be significantly adversely affected or suffer a substantial decrease of property value as a result of dividing the reserve tract. P. 12 453 (b) When the subarea Comprehensive Plan and zoning have been updated as part of the normal process (other than a revision initiated by the private sector or done for a specific area) and the public process has been gone through, subject to findings that there is no adverse impact to critical areas and when the reserve tract is owned by the original developer or a third party, no property owner within the original subdivision will be significantly adversely affected or suffer a substantial decrease of property value as a result of dividing the reserve tract. (4) The purpose of the reserve tract as stated in WCC 20.34.320(1), (2), and (3) shall be cornmunicated in writing on the face of the plat or short plat; also, the number of developable building sites remaining (if any) with the original parcel of record, based on the assigned density, shall also be prominently displayed on the plat or short plat. Whatcom County shall make every effort to assist all agents in communicating clearly such information to all purchasers and prospective purchasers of building lots or "reserve tracts." (5) -rhat the above stated requirements WCC 20.34.320(2), (3), and (4) shall be recorded as a deed restriction at the time of filing of the final plat or short plat, and shall constitute an agreement between Whatcom County and the owner of record. Said deed restriction may be amended by mutual agreement between said parties after review for consistency and compliance with the official Whatcom County Zoning Ordinance, the Whatcom County Subdivision Ordinance and the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan. (Ord. 99-069, 1999; Ord. 98-083 Exh. A § 35, 1998; Ord. 90-45, 1990). k, ON - - M 10- MI P. 13 454 Title 16.16 additions 16.16.540 Areas within the Rural Residential District of Lummi Island 16.16.541 Exempt Wells Wells drilled as a replacement of an existing well are exempt from this chapter as Iona as the withdrawal rate is not increased by more han 20 percent of the existing 16.16.542 Minimum Well Spacing for all new wells Wells shall have a minimum of 200 feet distance between a new well and an existing operating well. 16.16.543 In addition to the minimum well spacina. the followina measures are required for Public Water System Wells and Wells Pumping Greater than 250 gallons per day Includes "public water system" wells as defined under Whatcom County Drinking Water Regulations and non -domestic use wells pumping greater than 250 qpd. Public water system is defined under Whatcom County Chapter 24.11 as any water system providing piped water for consumption, excluding a system servinq only one single-family residence and any system with four or fewer connections serving only residences on the same farm. (1) Chloride Monitoring and Testing (a) Monitoring: Well owners shall collect and have water samples analyzed for chloride concentration twice annually, in April and August and submitted to the Whatcom County Health Department. (b) Chloride Determinations for New Wells or Increased Pumping of Existing Wells: Applications for new wells or for greater than 20 percent increase in groundwater withdrawals in an existing well require a minimum 24- hour-duration pumping test at 100 percent of the proposed average daily demand, at the end of which a water sample will be collected for analysis of chloride concentration. Subdivisions using individual wells are required to test wells simultaneously, or alternatively have a licensed hydrogeologist evaluate well interference and water quality changes. Subdivision wells shall remain accessible for future testing in the event of subdivision expansion. (c) Restrictions on New Wells or Increased Pumping of Existing Wells: New wells cannot be permitted, and greater than 20 percent increases in pumping cannot be permitted if chloride concentrations measured at the end of the test specified in (b) above are greater than 100 mg/L. For systems expanding 20 percent or less within one year, the highest chloride determination within the past year in (a) above cannot be greater than 100 mg/L. (d) Limit on Water Use by Existing Wells: Increases (0-20 percent) in water use will not be permitted if either semi-annual analysis in the previous 12- month period indicates greater than 100 mq/L chloride concentration. If the semi-annual chloride determinations have not been submitted as required, then the pump testing requirement of (b) above shall apply. (e) Prior to 10 days before the pumping test all property owners within 1000 feet of the I location shall be notified by first class mail informing them of the test and providing contact information of the person responsible for the testing. P. 14 455 (2) Arsenic Monitoring and Testing in the unconsolidated aquifer (a) The following monitoring and testing is required unless the well is determined not to be located in the unconsolidated sandstone aquifer. A Washington State licensed Hydrogeologist must make the determination in a submitted report. (b) Arsenic Determinations for New Wells or Increased Pumping of Existing Wells: Applications for new wells or for greater than 20 percent increase in groundwater withdrawals in an existing well require a minimum 24- hour-duration pumping test at 100 percent of the proposed average daily demand, at the end of which a water sample will be collected for analysis of arsenic concentration. (c) Restrictions on New Wells or Increased Pumping of Existing Wells: New wells cannot be permitted, and greater than 20 percent increases in pumping cannot be permitted if arsenic concentrations measured at the end of the test specified in (b) above are -greater than 10 ug/L. (d) Limit on Water Use by Existing Wells: Increases (0-20 percent) in water use will not be . permitted if the most recent arsenic determination indicated greater than 10 ug/L arsenic concentration. If no arsenic concentration has been determined in the past 3 years, the pumping test requirement in (b) above shall apply. Systems expanding more than 20 percent in a 3-year period must retest for arsenic. (e) Prior to 10 days before the bumping test all property owners within 100 feet of the well location shall be notified by first class mail informing the of the test and providing contact information of the person responsible for the testing. 16.16.544 Variance Conditions Variances may be aranted to anv section of these reauirements by petition to the administering agency. Variance request must demonstrate that the project is consistent with the intent of these requirements; no health hazard would result from this action. and must be stamped by a licensed Washinaton state hydrogeologist. P. 15 456 WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Ken Mann, Chairperson David Stalheim, Secretary Date Date P. 16 457 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 2008-402 CLEARANCES Initial Date Date Received in Council Office Agenda Date Assigned to: Originator: RM 10128108 ' Roland Middleton FR1 E C \l�/ E � V E L j1/25/08 Nit Res/Introdu Dftqmmrffwd. J. ran gyp 1V 0 V`� 18 2008 W H ATC 0 M COUNTY COUNCIL 12/09/2008 Council Dept. Head: David Stalheim l� I l Prosecutor: Royce Buckingham Purchasing/Budget: Brad Bennett Executive: Pete Kremen TITLE OFDO UMENT: Ordinance to delete policy 2BB-7 from the Cherry Point Urban Growth Area of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan. ATTACHMENTS. (1) Proposed Ordinance (2) Planning Commission Findings (3) September 24, 2008 Staff Report SEPA review required? (X ) Yes ( ) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing? ( ) Yes (X) NO SEPA review completed? (X ) Yes ( ) NO Requested Date: SUMMARYSTATEMENT 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.) Delete policy 2BB-7 from the Cherry Point Urban Growth Area of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan. The policy reads: Work with other agencies and industrial owners at Cherry Point to add additional docks, as necessary, that can also serve upland users, provided that the use is consistent with sound environmental practices. This policy was inadvertently left in place when the new policy, 2BB-10, was adopted by Ordinance #99-079 effective December 2, 1999. Policy 2BB-7 is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Shoreline Management Program. COMMITTEE ACTION: COUNCIL ACTION: 11/25/2008: Forwarded to Council for approval 11/25/2008: Introduced 12/09/2008: Council forwarded to Concurrency 6-1 Crawford opposed Related County Contract #: Related File Numbers: Ordinance or Resolution Number: PDS File # CMP 2008-00007 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.uslcouncib tion C:\DOCUME-1\ADMINI-1\LOCALS—I\Temp\XPgrpwise\CP agenda_bill.doc 11-12-08 SPONSORED BY: PROPOSED BY: INTRODUCTION DATE: ORDINANCE # DELETE POLICY #2BB-7 OF THE CHERRY POINT URBAN GROWTH AREA OF THE WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHEREAS, Policy 2BB-7 was inadvertently left in place when the new policy, 2BB-10, was adopted by Ordinance #99-079 effective December 2, 1999; and WHEREAS, Policy 2BB-7 is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Shoreline Management Program; and WHEREAS, Legal notice of the Planning Commission hearing was published in the Bellingham Herald; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposal; and WHEREAS, The County Council has considered the Planning Commission's recommendations. The Council makes the following findings of fact and conclusions: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. On March 23, 1999, the Whatcom County Council initiated an amendment to "Revise the Comprehensive Plan to include the consideration of only one additional industrial multi -use pier to provide for economic development while preserving the environmentally sensitive shoreline and marine life at the Cherry Point Management Area" (Resolution 99-012). 2. A determination of non -significance was issued September 19, 2008 under the State Environmental Policy Act. 3. Notice of the public hearing was published in the Bellingham Herald on September 28, 2008. 4. The May 20, 1999 Staff Report for file #CMP99-00014 provides the background for - Comprehensive Plan Policy 2BB-10 and changes to the 1997 Shoreline Management Program. 5. Ordinance #99-079 adopted on December 2, 1999 added policy 2BB-10 and changes to the 1997 Shoreline Management Program. 6. The 2007 Shoreline Management Program approval by Department of Ecology on August 8, 2008 has similar language to the amended 1997 Shoreline Management Program. P. 1 459 7. Notice of the proposed change was received by the Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development on September 5, 2008 (CTED Material ID #13412). No comments were received. 8. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the subject amendment on October 9, 2008. CONCLUSIONS 1. The subject amendment complies with the approval criteria of WCC 20.10.080 for comprehensive plan amendments. 2. Comprehensive Plan Policy 2BB-07 is inconsistent with the more recent Comprehensive Plan Policy 21313-10. 3. Comprehensive Plan Policy 2BB-07 is inconsistent with the 2007 Shoreline Management Program. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Whatcom County Council that: Policy 2BB-7 is deleted from the Cherry Point Urban Growth Area of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan. ADOPTED this day of , 2008 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL ATTEST: WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Dana Brown -Davis, Council Clerk APPROVED as to form: Civil'Keputorosecutor P. 2 Carl Weimer, Chairperson () Approved () Denied Pete Kremen, Executive Date: 1 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL 2 Natural Resources Committee 3 4 November 25, 2008 5 6 Committee Chair Carl Weimer called the meeting to order at 9:37 a.m. in the Council 7 Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington. 8 9 Present: Absent: 10 Seth Fleetwood None 11 Bob Kelly 12 13 Also Present: 14 Sam Crawford 15 L. Ward Nelson 16 Barbara Brenner 17 18 19 20 COMMITTEE DISCUSSION 21 22 1. ORDINANCE TO DELETE POLICY 2BB-7 FROM THE CHERRY POINT URBAN 23 GROWTH AREA OF THE WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 24 (AB2008-402) 25 26 David Stalheim, Planning and Development Services Director, stated this is a policy 27 to make Comprehensive Plan consistent with the Shoreline Management Program. Don't 28 pass the ordinance tonight. Move it on to concurrent review in February. 29 30 Weimer moved to recommend to the full Council forwarding to concurrent review. 31 32 Kelly asked if it that means the County is committed to approving one more dock. 33 Stalheim stated the County is committed to a dock that has been permitted. It is the only 34 project at this point in time. The project has many permits, but not all. The project has 35 begun its permitting process. 36 37 Fleetwood asked if there is a condition that there not be any environmental harm. 38 Stalheim stated it is a permitted action in the Shoreline Management Program at this time. 39 There are several conditions and stipulations to the permit. The question about no 40 environmental harm is something that other agencies will determine. 41 42 Fleetwood asked if it's conceivable that the project could stop on that basis. 43 Stalheim stated he can't speculate on that. 44 45 Weimer stated it depends on the definition of no level of harm. 46 47 Stalheim stated he agrees. Any project probably causes some harm. It's a question 48 of whether or not it is consistent with the standards of the permitting agency. 49 50 Weimer stated the one pier that is in the permitting process has many conditions to 51 meet. This is an attempt to remove the language to allow more piers. 52 53 Motion carried unanimously. Ft)P- EED� 461 WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FINDINGS OF FACT & REASONS FOR ACTION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Amendments to the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan relating to Policy 2BB-7 of the Cherry Point Urban Growth Area WHEREAS, Policy 2BB-7 was inadvertently left in place when the new policy, 21313-10, was adopted by Ordinance #99-079 effective December 2, 1999; and WHEREAS, Policy 2BB-7 is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Shoreline Management Program; and WHEREAS, Legal notice was published in the Bellingham Herald; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposal; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission has evaluated the proposed amendments. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: THE PLANNING COMMISSION ENTERS THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT & REASONS FOR ACTION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: FINDINGS OF FACT & REASONS FOR ACTION 1. On March 23, 1999, the Whatcom County Council initiated an amendment to "Revise the Comprehensive Plan to include the consideration of only one additional industrial multi -use pier to provide for economic development while preserving the environmentally sensitive shoreline and marine life at the Cherry Point Management Area" (Resolution 99-012). 2. A determination of non -significance was issued September 19, 2008 under the State Environmental Policy Act. 3. Notice of the public hearing was published in the Bellingham Herald on September 28, 2008. 4. The May 20, 1999 Staff Report for file #CMP99-00014 provides the background for Comprehensive Plan Policy 2BB-10 and changes to the 1997 Shoreline Management Program. 5. Ordinance #99-079 adopted on December 2, 1999 added policy 21313-10 and changes to the 1997 Shoreline Management Program. 6. The 2007 Shoreline Management Program approval by Department of Ecology on August 8, 2008 has similar language to the amended 1997 Shoreline Management Program. P. 1 462 7. Notice of the proposed change was received by the Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development on September 5, 2008 (CTED Material ID # 13412). No comments were received. 8. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the subject amendment on October 9, 2008. CONCLUSIONS 1. The subject amendment complies with the approval criteria of WCC 20.10.080 for comprehensive plan amendments. 2. Comprehensive Plan Policy 2BB-07 is inconsistent with the more recent Comprehensive Plan Policy 2BB-10. 3. Comprehensive Plan Policy 2BB-07 is inconsistent with the 2007 Shoreline Management Program. RECOMMENDATION Based upon the above findings and conclusions, the Planning Commission recommends deletion of Policy 2BB-7 from the Cherry Point Urban Growth Area of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan. WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Ken Mann, Chairperson David Stalheim, Secretary Date Date Commissioners present at the October 9, 2008 meeting when the vote was taken on the subject amendment: Rabel Burdge, David Hunter, John Lesow, Ken Mann, Jean Melious, Geoff Menzies, and Ron Roosma. Vote: Ayes: 6, Nays: 0, Abstain: 1, Absent: 2. Motion carried to adopt the above amendments. P. 2 463 CMP2008-00007 September 24, 2008 Staff Report Planning and Development Services Staff Report September 24, 2008 I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION File # CMP2008-00007 File Name: Cherry Point Pier Policy Applicant: Whatcom County Council Summary of Request: Delete policy 2BB-7 from the Cherry Point Urban Growth Area Work with other agencies and industrial owners at Cherry Point to add additional docks, as necessary, that can also serve upland users, provided that the use is consistent with sound environmental practices. This policy was inadvertently left in place when the new policy, 21313-10, was adopted by Ordinance #99-079 effective December 2, 1999. Policy 2BB-7 is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Shoreline Management Program. Location: The text amendments apply to the shoreline area in the vicinity of Cherry Point. Comprehensive Plan Designation: The text amendment area is designated as a Major/Port Industrial Urban Growth Area (UGA). Zoning: The text amendment area is zoned Heavy Impact Industrial. Shoreline Program Designation: The text amendments area is designated as the Cherry Point Management Unit. SEPA: the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Official for Whatcom County issued a Determination of Non -Significance on September 19, 2008. Site Description: The area the text amendments relate to contains marine shoreline, industrial development, agricultural uses and wooded area. Description of Surrounding Area: Georgia Strait is to the west, Birch Bay is to the north, Lake Terrell, rural land, and Ferndale are to the east, and the Lummi Reservation is to the south. -1- M CMP2008-00007 September 24, 2008 Staff Report II. ANALYSIS OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT The factors that are to be considered in evaluating a proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment are set forth in WCC 20.10.080. WCC 20.10.080 states: In order to approve an initiated Comprehensive Plan amendment, the county shall find all of the following: (1) The amendment conforms to the requirements of GMA, is internally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, is consistent with the county- wide planning policies and is consistent with any interlocal planning agreements. (2) Further studies made or accepted by the department of planning and development services and planning commission indicate a need for the amendment or that changed conditions indicate a need for the amendment. (3) The public interest will be served by approving the amendment. In determining whether the public interest will be served, factors including but not limited to the following shall be considered: (a) The anticipated effect upon the rate or distribution of population growth, employment growth, development, and conversion of land as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. (b) The anticipated effect upon 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. (c) The suitability of the site to provide on -site wells and/or on -site sewage disposal, if applicable. (d) Anticipated impact upon critical areas. (e) Anticipated impact upon designated agricultural, forest and mineral resource lands. (4) The amendment does not include nor facilitate illegal spot zoning. Review of the requirements (1) The amendment conforms to the requirements of GMA, is internally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, is consistent with the county- wide planning policies and is consistent with any interlocal planning agreements. -2- 465 CMP2008-00007 September 24, 2008 Staff Report The proposed amendment is necessary to provide consistency with the other policies in the Cherry Point Urban Growth Area of the Comprehensive Plan and the Shoreline Management Program. (The policies of the Whatcom County Shoreline Management Program are considered to be part of the Comprehensive Plan under the provisions of the Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A.480)). Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan Policy 2BB-10 states: It is the policy of Whatcom County to limit the number of piers at Cherry Point by establishing a development moratorium. Notwithstanding the above, this moratorium shall not affect, no otherwise apply to, any proposed pier that Whatcom County approved under its Shoreline Management Program prior to adoption of the moratorium. The 1998 Amended Shoreline Management Program, WCC 23.100.210.21 (c) states: Consequently, it is the policy of Whatcom County to limit the number of piers at Cherry Point by establishing a development moratorium. The goal of the moratorium is to ensure that only one pier in addition to those in operation as of January 1, 1998, is constructed at the Cherry Point Management Unit. Notwithstanding the above, this moratorium shall not affect, nor otherwise apply to, any proposed pier that Whatcom County approved under its Shoreline Management Program prior to adoption of the moratorium. [The moratorium was established on December 2, 1999 by ordinance # 99-079] The 2007 Shoreline Management Program, WCC 23.100.17.A.1 (c) states: Development of the Cherry Point Major Port/Industrial Urban Growth Area will accommodate uses that require marine access for marine cargo transfer, including oil and other materials. For this reason, water - dependent terminal facilities are encouraged as the preferred use in the Cherry Point Management Area. Due to the environmental sensitivity of the area, it is the policy of Whatcom County to limit the number of piers to one (1) pier, in addition to those in operation or approved as of January 1, 1998. (2) Further studies made or accepted by the department of planning and development services and planning commission indicate a need for the amendment or that changed conditions indicate a need for the amendment. The inconsistency was found during the recent amendment of the Shoreline Management Program, indicating the need to amend the Comprehensive Plan. -3- n.. CMP2008-00007 September 24, 2008 Staff Report (3) The public interest will be served by approving the amendment. In determining whether the public interest will be served, factors including but not limited to the following shall be considered: (a) The anticipated effect upon the rate or distribution of population growth, employment growth, development, and conversion of land as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. (b) The anticipated effect upon 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. (c) The suitability of the site to provide on -site wells and/or on -site sewage disposal, if applicable. (d) Anticipated impact upon critical areas. (e) Anticipated impact upon designated agricultural, forest and mineral resource lands This amendment serves the public interest by providing consistency within the Comprehensive Plan and the Shoreline Management Program. The amendment has no effect upon the rate or distribution of population growth, employment growth, development, and conversion of land as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. Nor any anticipated effect upon 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. The amendment is not applicable to the suitability of the site to provide on -site wells and/or on -site sewage disposal. The amendment has no anticipated impact upon critical areas, nor any anticipated impact upon designated agricultural, forest and mineral resource lands. (4) The amendment does not include nor facilitate illegal spot zoning. No zoning designation changes are included in the amendment. The amendment does not effect the allowed and regulated uses under Title 20, the Whatcom County Zoning Code, or Title 23, the Whatcom County Shoreline Management Program. 467 CMP2008-00007 September 24, 2008 Staff Report III. PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND REASONS FOR ACTION 1. On March 23, 1999, the Whatcom County Council initiated an amendment to "Revise the Comprehensive Plan to include the consideration of only one additional industrial multi -use pier to provide for economic development while preserving the environmentally sensitive shoreline and marine life at the Cherry Point Management Area" (Resolution 99-012). 2. A determination of non -significance was issued September 19, 2008 under the State Environmental Policy Act. 3. Notice of the public hearing was published in the Bellingham Herald on September 28, 2008. 4. The May 20, 1999 Staff Report for file #CMP99-00014 provides the background for Comprehensive Plan Policy 2BB-10 and changes to the 1997 Shoreline Management Program. 5. Ordinance #99-079 adopted on December 2, 1999 added policy 2BB-10 and changes to the 1997 Shoreline Management Program. 6. The 2007 Shoreline Management Program approval by Department of Ecology on August 8, 2008 has similar language to the amended 1997 Shoreline Management Program. 7. Notice of the proposed change was received by the Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development on September 5, 2008 (CTED Material ID #13412). No comments were received. IV. PROPOSED CONCLUSIONS 1. Comprehensive Plan Policy 2BB-07 is inconsistent with the more recent Comprehensive Plan Policy 2BB-10. 2. Comprehensive Plan Policy 2BB-07 is inconsistent with the amended 1997 Shoreine Management Program. 3. Comprehensive Plan Policy 2BB-07 is inconsistent with the pending 2007 Shoreline Management Program. V. RECOMMENDATION Based upon the above findings and conclusions, staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the proposed amendments. Specifically, we recommend the following text deletion from the Cherry Point Urban Growth Area of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan: Policy 2BB-07: Werk with ether-ageneiesand i steal eviners at Cherry Pain users,to add additional deeks, as neeessar-y, that ean also serve upland -5- M CMP2008-00007 September 24, 2008 Staff Report VI. ATTACHMENTS 1. Application #CMP2007-00015 submitted on December 29, 2006 2. May 20, 1999 Staff Report for file #CMP99-00014. 3. Ordinance #99-079 adopted on December 2, 1999. 4. Section of the pending 2007 Shoreline Management Program WCC 23.100.17 Cherry Point Mangement Area s m WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 2008-448 CLEARANCES Initial Date Date Received in Council O cce Agenda Date Assigned to: Originator: Gary Davis / � Planning Committee; C9�' u u L_ _ D � V E D 2 / 9 / 2008 Introduction Division Head: 0 C T ! { 4 2008 4 5-061%� WHATCOM COUNTYCOUNCIL i 13 2009 Public Hearing Dept. Head: David Stalheim Prosecutor: S", D D-a Purchasing/Budget: .�� Execut e- Pete Kre �p �0—� �- 08 TITLE O DOCUMENT: Ordinance Adopting Amendments to the Birch Bay Community Plan related to Transportation Facilities ATTACHMENTS: (1) Memorandum to County Council (2) Proposed Ordinance SEPA review required? ( x ) Yes ( ) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing? ( x ) Yes ( ) NO SEPA review completed? ( x ) Yes ( ) NO Requested Date: SUHMARYSTATEIMIENT 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.) Amend the Birch Bay Community Plan to amend Chapter 11 - Transportation, and Chapter 2 - Summary, and add Appendix A - Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study; related to transportation facilities. COMMITTEE ACTION: COUNCIL ACTION: 12/09/2008: Approved to forward to a public 12/09/2008: Introduced hearing. Must have concurrent review. Public 1/13/2009: Council forwarded to Concurrency hearing at first meeting in January. Approval 7-0 in February Related County Contract #: Related File Numbers: Ordinance or Resolution Number: CMP2007-00008 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.us/council. 470 10-7-08 SPONSORED BY: PROPOSED BY: INTRODUCTION DATE: ORDINANCE # AMENDING BIRCH BAY COMMUNITY PLAN CHAPTER 11 - TRANSPORTATION, AND CHAPTER 2 — SUMMARY, AND ADDING APPENDIX A — BIRCH BAY TRANSPORTATION PLANNING STUDY, RELATED TO TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES WHEREAS, The Washington State Legislature, through RCW 36.70A.080(2) states that a county comprehensive plan may include subarea plans that are consistent with the comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, Legal notice was published in the Bellingham Herald; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposal; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission has evaluated the proposed amendments. WHEREAS, The County Council has considered the Planning Commission's recommendations. The Council makes the following findings of fact and conclusions: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Whatcom County Council adopted the Birch Bay Community Plan on September 28, 2004 (Ord. 2004-047). 2. RCW 36.70A.080(2) states that a county comprehensive plan may include subarea plans that are consistent with the comprehensive plan. 3. The Birch Bay UGA is a rapidly growing area and an updated plan for transportation facilities to serve future growth in the area is in the public interest. 4. Countywide Planning Policy A.4 states, "Citizen comments and viewpoints shall be incorporated into the decision -making process in development of draft plans and regulations. Consideration of citizen comments shall be evident in the decision making process." 5. County staff, in conjunction with the project consultant, held public open house meetings on June 12, 2007 and December 11, 2007, and made information on the planning process P. 1 471 available to the public via a web site, brochures, and a set of display boards that were posted at various locations. 6. County staff and the project consultant presented the draft Chapter 11 amendments at the July 23, 2008 meeting of the Birch Bay Steering Committee and invited public comment. 7. Countywide Planning Policy EA states, "The county shall assure that there are plans to provide appropriate levels of urban facilities and services within non -city Urban Growth Areas..." 8. A determination of non -significance (DNS) was issued under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) on August 12, 2008. 9. Notice of the Planning Commission hearing for the subject amendment was published in the Bellingham Herald on August 3, 2008. 10. The Planning Commission held a public hearing relating to the subject amendment on August 14, 2008. CONCLUSION The proposed amendments are consistent with the goals and policies of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan and serve the public interest. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Whatcom County Council that: Section 1. Birch Bay Community Plan, Chapter 11 — Transportation; and Chapter 2 - Summary, are amended as shown on Exhibit A. Section 2. Adjudication of invalidity of any of the sections, clauses, or provisions of this ordinance shall not affect or impair the validity of the ordinance as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so declared to be invalid. ADOPTED this day of , 2008 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL ATTEST: WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Dana Brown -Davis, Council Clerk P. 2 Carl Weimer, Chairperson 472 APPROVED as to form: () Approved () Denied Civi e osecutor P. 3 Pete Kremen, Executive Date: 473 MINUTES FROM THE COUNCIL'S JANUARY 13, 2009, PUBLIC HEARING 2. ORDINANCE ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE BIRCH BAY COMMUNITY PLAN RELATED TO TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES (AB2008-448) Fleetwood opened public hearing. Doralee Booth, 8180 Birch Bay Drive, stated she thanks Gary Davis and Transpo Services for work on this plan. She is pleased with the results. They listened and worked with the community. Pat Alesse, 4825 Alderson Road, stated he isn't pleased with the plan. The County isn't the right tool to work on Birch Bay. He worries that people will be spread all over the county, and people won't be able to afford to pay for their services. Fleetwood closed public hearing. Caskey-Schreiber moved to accept the amendments and forward to the concurrency meeting. Brenner asked if any of the planned transportation improvements are ready for bids. Abart stated nothing out there can be ready for a bid in a short amount of time, except maybe Birch Point Drive. Motion carried unanimously. 474 WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FINDINGS OF FACT & REASONS FOR ACTION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS BIRCH BAY COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENTS — TRANSPORTATION WHEREAS, The Washington State Legislature, through RCW 36.70A.080(2) states that a county comprehensive plan may include subarea plans that are consistent with the comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, Legal notice was published in the Bellingham Herald; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission held public hearings on the proposal; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission has evaluated the proposed amendments. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: THE PLANNING COMMISSION ENTERS THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT & REASONS FOR ACTION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: FINDINGS OF FACT AND REASONS FOR ACTION 1. The Whatcom County Council adopted the Birch Bay Community Plan on September 28, 2004 (Ord. 2004-047). 2. RCW 36.70A.080(2) states that a county comprehensive plan may include subarea plans that are consistent with the comprehensive plan. 3. The Birch Bay UGA is a rapidly growing area and an updated plan for transportation facilities to serve future growth in the area is in the public interest. 4. Countywide Planning Policy A.4 states, "Citizen comments and viewpoints shall be incorporated into the decision -making process in development of draft plans and regulations. Consideration of citizen comments shall be evident in the decision making process." 5. County staff, in conjunction with the project consultant, held public open house meetings on June 12, 2007 and December 11, 2007, and made information on the planning process available to the public via a web site, brochures, and a set of display boards that were posted at various locations. 6. County staff and the project consultant presented the draft Chapter 11 amendments at the July 23, 2008 meeting of the Birch Bay Steering Committee and invited public comment. Planning/Zoning Amendments/Zoning 2007ZON2007-00002 UR Text Change/Zon200700002Findings.doc P. 1 475 7. Countywide Planning Policy EA states, "The county shall assure that there are plans to provide appropriate levels of urban facilities and services within non -city Urban Growth Areas..." 8. A determination of non -significance (DNS) was issued under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) on August 12, 2008. 9. Notice of the Planning Commission hearing for the subject amendment was published in the Bellingham Herald on August 3, 2008. 10. The Planning Commission held a public hearing relating to the subject amendment on August 14, 2008. CONCLUSION The subject amendments are consistent with the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan and serve the public interest. RECOMMENDATION Based upon the above findings and conclusions, the Planning Commission recommends approval of the amendments to the Official Whatcom County Zoning Ordinance shown in Exhibit A. WHATCOM/COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION —Tel. �_, Chairperson David Stalheim, Secretary 0 4 /0,? Date D— rkrz c0-06 Date Commissioners present at the October 9, 2008 meeting when the vote was taken on the subject amendment: Rabel Burdge, David Hunter, John Lesow, Kenneth Mann, Jean Melious, Geoff Menzies, and Ron Roosma. Vote: Ayes: 7, Nays: 0, Abstain: 0, Absent: 2. Motion carried to approve the proposed amendments to the Birch Bay Community Plan. Planning/Zoning Amendments/Zoning 2007ZON2007-00002 UR Text Change/Zon200700002Findings.doc P. 2 476 WHATCOM COUNTY Planning & Development Services 3�0A M °O& 5280 Northwest Drive a Bellingham, WA 98226-9097 360-676-6907, TTY 800-833-6384 �g3yINGC0 360-738-2525 Fax MEMORANDUM David Stalheim Director J.E. "Sam" Ryan Assistant Director TO: Whatcom County Planning Commission THROUGH: David Stalheim, Director FROM: Wain Harrison, Long Range Planning Supervisor Gary Davis, AICP, Senior Planner, Transportation-4,p DATE: October 8, 2008 SUBJECT: Ordinance to amend Birch Bay Community Plan The proposed amendments to the Birch Bay Community Plan are the result of a transportation planning study conducted by The Transpo Group with extensive involvement of the Birch Bay community. The proposed new transportation chapter plans transportation facilities to serve planned growth in the Birch Bay Urban Growth Area. The Planning Commission has recommended approval of the amendments shown as Exhibit A in the proposed ordinance. These amendments consist of a revised Chapter 11 — Transportation, and a corresponding revision to Chapter 2 — Summary, which includes excerpts from other chapters in the plan. The study document upon which the chapter is based is proposed to be adopted as an Appendix to the community plan. The requested action for the Community Plan amendments is to forward the item to concurrent review. Because the Birch Bay Community Plan is a subset of the Comprehensive Plan, the ordinance adopting those amendments must be considered during the annual concurrent review of proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments. Please contact Mike Donahue at extension 50608 or Gary Davis at extension 50246 if you have questions concerning these amendments. 477 EXHIBIT A Birch Bay Community Plan Amendments to Chapter 11 -- Transportation Amendments to Chapter 2 -- Summary Appendix A — Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study Chapter 11 TRANSPORTATION Introduction In 2007 Whatcom County and its consultant, Transpo Group, worked with Birch Bay residents to develop a transportation planning study of the Birch Bay area, including transportation facilities within the Community Plan boundary as well as facilities outside the boundary connecting Birch Bay with I-5 and Blaine. That study, which is `attached to the Community Plan as Appendix A, proposes measures intended to ensure,the transportation system effectively serves Birch Bay residents into the future. This chapter is based on the policies and projects proposed in the study as a result of public participation and thorough analysis of expected future travel demands,:. Existing Transportation System Roadway System and Traffic Controls The transportation system in and around the Birch.Bay area consists of various transportation facilities, including state highways; collector routes, local streets, transit services, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities. This inventory covers the street system, traffic controls, traffic volumes, traffic operations, traffic safety, transit service, and non - motorized facilities (see Fire 11-1� . Birch Bay Community Plan 479 0 %e m �- Deleted: Figure 11-2 2007 PM Peak ---------------------------------------------------- Hour Two -Way Traffic Volumes Page Break State Highways Interstate 5 (1-5) is the north -south interstate freeway serving Washington State. It connects to Canada within the City of Blaine. I-5 is classified as a Highway of Statewide Significance (HSS), meaning that local concurrency programs will not be applied. Within the Birch Bay Subarea, 1-5 runs diagonally from the northwest (in Blaine) to the southeast near the City of Femdale. I-5 has four travel lanes within the study area and a posted speed limit of 70 mph. Interchanges within the study area are located at Grandview Road (SR 548) and Birch Bay-Lynden Road. An interchange also serves the Birch Bay Subarea at exit 274 in the south part of the City of Blaine. SR 548 is a state Highway of Regional Significance (HRS) within the •Birch'Bay Subarea. It is comprised of two segments — Blaine Road and Grandview Road. Blaine Road (SR 548) serves major north -south travel flows between the City of Blaine and the industrial areas south of Grandview Road;, At its north end it connects with Interstate 5 at an interchange in the south part of the City of Blaine (exit 274). It has two travel lanes and,a posted:speed limit of 45 mph. The roadway has several small hills due to the rolling terrain. Its lanes are relatively narrow and there is little or no shoulder area. Deleted: also has limited shoulders Grandview Road (SR 548) serves as SR '548 east of Blaine Road. It is an east - west, two-lane roadway which connects $he south part of the Birch Pay; rban - Deleted: the developments in Growth Area with an interchange with Interstate 5 and with an altemative route to Deleted: subarea Femdale and Bellin2hain via Kickerville Road. The lanes are typically between 10 feet and 12 feet wide, andAhe posted speed limit is 50 mph. County Arterial land Collector Roads Whatcom County owns and maintains a variety of arterial and collector roads in the Birch Bay:area. These roads generally function to provide access between communities, or to connect residential neighborhoods with community centers and facilities. These are two- lane roads;.with posted speed limits ranging from 25 to 50 mph. Local Access Roads The remaining routes are local access roads. These streets serve local abutting land uses and neighborhood traffic. They generally have two travel lanes and 25-mph speed limits. Birch Bay Community Plan 11-3 • Traffic Volumes Daily and PM peak hour traffic volumes were collected from a variety of sources including Whatcom County, Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), and Whatcom Council of Governments (WCOG). These traffic volumes were supplemented with existing PM peak hour turning movement counts conducted for the plan update in 2006 and 2007. The existing PM peak hour volumes are shown in Figure 4. Traffic Operations Traffic operations for an intersection can be described alphabetically witth'a.range, of levels of service (LOS). LOS A indicates free -flowing traffic and LOS F indicatirig extreme congestion and long vehicle delays. Whatcom Coun 's Comprehensive Plan establishes evel :of service standards for roadwa , - Deleted: we following segments for purposes of transportation concurrency evaluation (See Table 11-1). Under state law, the county cannot approve any development that would.generate enough traffic to cause the level of service on county arterials and collectors to fall below the adopted standards. Deleted: 2 Table 11 jWhatcom County Level of Service Standards (Concurrency)_ Level of Service Arterial Location Maximum V/Cl ratio Standard Outside Urban Growth Area.. 0.75 C Urban Growth Areas not associated 0.80 C with cities (includes Birch Bay UGA) Urban Growth Areas associated with 0.90 D cities 1. Volume -to -capacity State,highwayshave a separate standard that is set by WSDOT and the Regional Transportation Planning Organization. Highways of Statewide Significance (HSS) within urban areas, such as sections of I-5, have a LOS threshold of LOS D. In rural areas, the HSS LOS is set at LOS-C. The LOS for Highways of Regional Significance (HRS), such as Blaine Road (SR 548), is set at the LOS adopted by the local metropolitan planning organization (MPO). The MPO for Whatcom County is the Whatcom Council of Governments (WCOG). WCOG and Whatcom County both indicate that the LOS standard for HRS within urban areas is set at LOS D. Outside of urban areas, the HRS LOS standard is LOS C. Birch Bay Community Plan 114 SM 44 I o Whatcom County establishes similar levels of service for intersection operations, for purposes of traffic impact analyses beyond concurrency evaluations. The Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study uses levels of service based on intersection operations during weekday afternoon peak traffic conditions. The level of service is measured in terms of expected delay at the most congested motion at the intersection. Table 11-_ and - Deleted: 3 Figure 11-3 summarizeEthe existing weekday PM peak -hour LOS at study intersections._ - Deleted: 5 J Birch Bay Community Plan 11-6 M TRANSPORTATION Table 11-2 2007 Weekday PM Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service Deleted: 3 UrIntersection or 2007 Intersection Rural Control' LOS' Delay3 WM4 -5 NB Ramps / Birch Bay-Lynden Road Rural AWSC C 21.6 - -5 SB Ramps / Birch Bay-Lynden Road Rural TWSC D .. 33.9 SB -5 NB Ramps / Grandview Road (SR 548) Urban TWSC F 75.2 NB -5 SB Ramps / Grandview Road (SR 548) Urban TWSC D;, 3j.4.,:1:_ SB Blaine Road (SR 548) / Drayton Harbor Road Urban TWSC B .'13.6 EB Blaine Road (SR 548) / Loomis Trail Road Urban TWSC A $.6' WB Blaine Road (SR 548) / Lincoln Road Urban TWSC A 1 10.0 EB Blaine Road (SR 548) / Anderson Road Urban TWSC A•. > 9.7 EB Blaine Road (SR 548) / Birch Bay-Lynden Road Urban` AWSC- C 19.7 - Blaine Road (SR 548) / Alderson Road Urban TWSC B 11.2 EB Blaine Road (SR 548) / Bay Road Rural.. AWSC A 8.3 - Blaine Road (SR 548) / Grandview Road (SR 48) :-Rural TWSC E 38.0 SB Semiahmoo Parkway / Drayton Harbor Road- Urban AWSC A 7.6 - Shintaffer Road / Semiahmoo Parkway Lincoln Road) Urban TWSC B 13.1 SB Shintaffer Road / Anderson Road Urban TWSC A 9.2 WB Shintaffer Road / Birch Bay Drive; Urban TWSC B 10.2 SB arborview Road / Lincoln Road Urban TWSC B 12.9 EBL arborview Road / Anderson Road Urban TWSC B 11.3 EB arborview Road !Birch Bay-Lynden Road Urban AWSC -q 16. - arborview Road / Birch Bay Drive Urban AWSC A - Birch Bay Drive I Alderson Road Urban AWSC A 7.8 - Birch Bay Drive / Jackson Road Urban TWSC A 9.2 WBL Jackson Road / Grandview Road Rural AWSC A 7.6 - ckerville Road / Loomis Trail Road Rural TWSC A 8.7 NB ckerville Road / Birch Bay-Lynden Road Rural TWSC C 17.4 SB ckerville Road / Bay Road Rural TWSC B 10.6 NB ckerville Road / Grandview Road (SR 548)1 Rural TWSC C 23.4 NB Portal Way / Loomis Trail Road Rural TWSC A 8.4 EB Birch Bay Community Plan 11-7 Deleted: 48.9 Formatted Table Deleted: E Deleted: B Deleted: 12.7 MOR Portal Way / Birch Bay-Lynden Road Rural AWSC E 35.4 - ortal Way / Grandview Road (SR 548) Urban Signal B 13.3 0.54 Vista Drive / Grandview Road (SR 548) Urban AWSC C 19.1 - alley View Road / Birch Bay-Lynden Road Rural TWSC B 11.7 SB 1. Signal = Traffic Signal; AWSC = All -Way Stop Control; TWSC = Two -Way Stop Control. 2. Level of service, based on 2000 Highway Capacity Manual methodology.'Shaded cells indicate intersections exceeding Whatcom County LOS standard: LOS D in urban locations (within city limits or UGA) & LOS C in rural locations (non-UGA). 3. Average delay in seconds per vehicle. r 4. Worst movement reported for unsignalized intersections. Birch Bay Community Plan 11-8 M 2 CL m As shown in Table 11 -,2 , all but fouL study intersections are currently operating at the - Deleted: 3 respective LOS standard or better during the weekday PM peak hour. The exceptions are: Deleted: ive Deleted: L The pcatioc� exceeding the urban LOS standard CLO S D)_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Deleted: s ■ I-5 NB Ramps / Grandview Road (SR 548) — operating at LOS F Deleted: <p>Harborview Road /Birch i , _ - - - - - - - _ ' f - Bay-Lynden Road - operating at LOS E.Locations exceeding the rural LOS standard (LOS C) _ _ _ _ _ _ ■ I-5 SB Ramps / Birch Bay Lynden Road — operating at LOS D ■ Blaine Road (SR 548) / Grandview Road (SR 548) — operating at LOSE ■ Portal Way / Birch Bay-Lynden Road — operating at LOS E Birch Bay-Lynden Road carries the highest traffic volumes in the area, contributing to the level of service deficiencies observed in existing conditions. The high traffic volumes during peak hours limit the gaps available for side street.traffic to turn onto Birch Bay- Lynden Road. Birch Bay Community Plan 11-10 Transit and Public Transportation The public transportation agency in the Birch Bay area is Whatcom Transportation Authority (WTA). WTA offers several services for local residents and visitors to make trips throughout the county. Typical fixed route service is available in the Birch Bay area, although its frequencies do not necessarily provide for regular commuting. The following types of transit service are available in Birch Bay: ■ Fixed route service (Routes 55, 70X) ■ Dial -a -Ride, or Flex service ■ Paratransit Fixed Route Service WTA's fixed route service includes Route 70X, which is an -express service between Birch Bay and Bellingham. The route has one stop in the Birch Bay area, at Birch Bay-Lynden Road and I-5 to serve Birch Bay Square. Route 70X makes. four -round trips per day on weekdays between 6:00 AM and approximately 7:00 PM. Saturday service for Route 70X is provided by Route 55, which is the other fixed route service. Route 55 serves as a connector route between Blaine, Birch Bay, Ferndale, and the Bellis Fair mall in Bellingham. This route makes`three round trips per day, in addition to making "flex" deviations along the route -for previousty requested stops by individual users. Route 55 runs between 8:40 AM and approximately 4:00 PM on weekdays, and between 8:40 n Saturdays. See Figure 11-4 for a map of these routes. AM and approximately 6:00- : Io Dial-a-Ride Service: WTA's Dial -a -Ride service is provided for users in the Birch Bay and Blaine areas. This service provides local service in the area, and also connects to Route 70X. According to the WTA Six -Year -Strategic Service Plan, Dial -a -Ride service during the middle of the day will serve as Route 551 a local service route. When Route 70X is in the area, the Dial-a- Rid'e'service will.Icontinue to provide connections to the fixed route service. The average monthly_ ridership in 2006 for the Dial -a -Ride service was 606 passengers. Paratransit Service WTA's paratransit service is provided for those users who are not able to use the traditional fixed route services. These users are typically people with disabilities or seniors. The federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) provides standards for paratransit, which includes a policy that passenger capacity constraints are not allowed. WTA strives to meet the demand of all eligible individuals. Birch Bay Community Plan M• wiz m Pedestrian and Bicycle Systems A well connected non -motorized transportation system encourages healthy recreational activities, reduces vehicle travel demand, and enhances safety within the community. The projects included in Table 11 Xinclude pedestrian and bicycle facilities as part of the _ _ _ identified roadway improvements. In many cases, the proposed improvements include the addition or enhancement of roadway shoulders to accommodate non -motorized transportation within Birch Bay. Included in these projects is the Birch Bad Pedestrian Facility proiect. The pedestrian system within Birch Bay is comprised of sidewalks, walkways, trails, and roadway shoulders. Within the UGAs, the County desires to have roadways improved to urban standards, which could include, sidewalks or other es of pedestrian _walkway facilities. pedestrian facilities should be located along streets that provide access and- connectivity to the commercial businesses, residential areas, parks, schools; public buildings, and transit stops within the Birch Bay UGA: Enhanced roadway shoulders outside the UGA will improve safety for pedestrian travel inthose areas. Within Birch Bay, the bicycle system is comprised of mostly roadways. Many of the roadways within the study area have deficient roadway shoulders or are without shoulders altogether. The major improvements forbicycle travel will be the addition or enhancement of roadway shoulders. An important component of the bicycle system is completion of the Coast Millennium Trail through Birch Bay, providing a bicycling link from the Canadian border to Bellingham and farther south. -A portion of the trail has been completed south of Semiahmoo Parkway. There are several proposed non -motorized facilities throughout the County, a few of which are in the Birch Bay study -area. Proposed non -motorized facilities in the study area include: ■ Bicycle lane along Semiahmoo Parkway ■ Off -road trail that would connect to a bicycle lane along Birch Bay Drive ■ : Off --road trail to continue south of the Birch Bay Drive bicycle lane ■ Bicycle lane along Birch Bay-Lynden Road ■ Bicycle "lane along Portal Way ■ Portion of the Coast Millennium Trail that begins near Alderson Road and Birch Bay Drive and continues south toward Ferndale ■ Bicycle lane along Birch Bay Drive Birch Bay Community Plan 11-13 Deleted: 4 Deleted: s Deleted: Sidewalks . - - Formatted: Bullets and Numbering 491 492 Travel Forecasts The Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study used the Whatcom Council of Governments' regional travel demand model and the population and employment figures from this Community Plan to predict vehicular travel patterns in 2027. The study analyzed and compared alternatives with and wit4out the capacity improvements proposed in the study. The analysis indicated that the most critical areas for congestion in the future would be along Birch Bay-Lynden Road between I-5 interchange and Harborview Road and along Grandview Road (SR 548) between the I-5 interchange and Vista Drive., It was found that improving traffic operations at these locations consequently reduces the traffic using the I- 5/south Blaine interchange (exit 274), thus resolving capacity issues along Blaine Road (SR 548) and Drayton Harbor Road that would be expected withoutthese improvements. Birch Bay Community Plan 11-15 493 TRANSPORTATION Transportation Vision, Goals and Policies Vision Statement East -west traffic movement between Birch Bay and I-5, that has been a problem for years, has improved significantly. Birch Bay - Lynden Road and Grandview Road, have been widened by providing adequate shoulders and center left -turn lanes. Blaine Road also functions -as a north - south collector/distributor road taking the traffic load off Birch­Bay,Drive, leaving it for local access traffic and for bicycles- and pedestrians. A number of pay parking lots have appeared east of Birch'_Bay. Drive, camouflaged and tucked away behind commercial facilities with their storefronts facing Birch Bay Drive. Bus service has -improved considerably, enabling workers to travel to out -of -the -area job locatlon' in Semiahmoo, Blaine, BP and Bellingham. Pedestrian acid bicycle trails have become an integral part of all major road improvements:. For example, along the trail, bicyclists can now travel, in their own right-of`way from the Canadian border to Bellingham and further south. Birch Bay Drive, which used to function as a north -south arterial road, now has resemblance to a beach - front promenade, integrating the people oriented development on the east side of the Drive with the water. oriented activities on the west side Goals and Policies " Public Participation ; f A. Encourage,and solicit public participation in all transportation -related decisions to help ensure-dW planning and implementation have public support. B..Provide programs and forums to help the public and stakeholders understand 'transportation issues, requirements, planning concepts, and funding programs. 1. Agency Coordination A. Encourage interlocal agreements with Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) and local agencies to coordinate development review programs and mitigation. B. Coordinate with Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) to improve interchange intersections and other key intersections. Birch Bay Community Plan 11-17 495 C. Coordinate updates to the Birch Bay Community Plan's transportation chapter with - Deleted: subarea Transportation the State Highway Systems Plan (Wdshington-State Department of Transportation- - ' (WSDOT)), Whatcom Transportation Plan (Whatcom Council of Governments (WCOG)), City of Blaine, and the Whatcom Transit Authority (WTA). 2. Land Use, Development Review, and Standards A. Review County land use policies and implementing regulations, standards, and incentives to insure they supportencourage, and maximize alternative .; - Deleted: and transportation modes such as bicycling, walking, transit, and transportation demand programs. B. Require development of circulation roads within the Birch.B:ay UGA commercial area. C. For purposes of transportation concurrency evaluation, maintain a level of service (LOS) C or better (volume / capacity ratio of,0.80 or less) on road segments within the Birch Bay UGA and LOS C or better (0.75 or less) on. road segments outside the UGA. D. Convert roadways within the designated UGAs from rural standards to urban standards while being sensitive to the character of the area. E. Roadway standards should include context sensitive design elements to be flexible with the character and topography of the area (separated pathways in lieu of sidewalks where appropriate). 3. Streets and Highways A. Maintain a.level of service (LOS) C or better for intersections outside the UGA and LOS D for state highway intersections and intersections within UGA boundaries. Deleted: Reduce and set annual B $6i a reduced year-round speed limit on Birch Bay Drive Dff 20 or 25_ miles per - - -- - - - Deleted: to Deleted: once the Lincoln Road and C. Require urban street standards on roadways serving urban development within Birch Bay Connector projects areeompletea. UGA boundaries. D. Discourage commuter through traffic on Birch Bay Drive. E. Provide safer and more efficient travel to Birch Bay-Lynden Road, City of Blaine, City of Ferndale, and I-5. Birch Bay Community Plan 11-18 M 4. Pedestrians and Bicycles A. Improve non -motorized connections to other local and regional destinations. B. Provide streets and arterials that maximize pedestrian and bicycle use. C. Whenever possible, separate vehicle traffic from pedestrian and bicycle modes. D. Design and construct arterials and collector roadways to support safe use by pedestrians and bicyclists. E. Ensure that new non -motorized facilities meet Americans with Disabilities Act requirements (ADA ) re q--- -- - - - ------=------------- 5. Public Transportation and Transportation Demand, Management Deleted: and that existing facilities A. Commit to alternative transportation b workin closely Deleted: other p y g rely with WTA and _major _ _ . �' em to ers to establish ark & ride lots and implement van pools and car ool Deleted: programs P Y P p P p �--_-���. B. Encourage enhanced service/frequency to the Birch Bay subarea 6. Environmental Considerations A. - Require road standards that reduce the amount of impervious surface and that treat stormwater on site with abbIronnate low impact develonment technioues while providing for safe and:efficierit-:operations of the transportation facilities_ B. tncouraee flexible road design standards that encourage native veeetation retention. 7.. Program Financing and Implementation Deleted: Encourage Deleted: to improve storm water runoff Formatted: Not Highlight Formatted: Not Highlight Deleted:. Formatted: Bullets and Numbering Comment [S11: Per WDFW comment letter A. Tie transportation funding priority to concurrency and facility adequacy_ B. Continue to partner with Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), Whatcom Council of Governments (WCOG), and Whatcom Transit Authority (WTA), and other local agencies to fund improvement projects and programs that serve the Birch Bay subarea. Deleted: ¶ •- -------------------------------------------------------------- Birch Bay Community Plan 11-19 497 Transportation Systems Plan The transportation systems plan proposed in the Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study provides a long-range strategy for the Birch Bay UGA to address current and forecast transportation issues and needs. Transportation system improvements are required to accommodate the projected growth in population and employment within the Birch Bay UGA. The transportation systems plan is based upon analyses of the existing transportation system, forecasts of future travel demands, anticipated availability of funding resources, and the desire of the Birch Bay community to create an efficient transportation system that puts a priority on community livability. The Plan builds on the countywide policies and standards, while shaping transportation goals and vision for the Birch Bay. subarea... The transportation systems plan primarily focuses on streets and highway improvements because they serve most of the travel needs for the subarea. The streets and highways serve general traffic, freight, transit, ridesharing, pedestrians, and bicyclists. Therefore, the Plan also provides the framework for other travel modes in. -the community, including. pedestrian, bicycle, and transit modes. Formatted: Not Highlight Birch Bay Community Plan 11-20 M Transportation Improvement Projects Based on an evaluation of existing and forecast traffic volumes, traffic operations, safety, and circulation needs, a recommended list of transportation improvement projects and programs were defined. The project list is organized into the following categories: ■ Intersection Projects ■ New Roadway and Major Widening or Reconstruction Projects ■ Minor Widening and Reconstruction Projects ■ State Route Projects ■ Other Mode Figure 11-7 and Table I I% enti each of the projects and shows where the projects are Deleted: 6 - - - - - - - Deleted: 4 located. Table 11 ; also provides a brief description of eachprojecf includin e project limits. The table identifies projects that are currently part of the County's,Transportation Deleted: 4 Improvement Program (TIP). This highlights the projects that are currently identified for planning, design, or construction. A project identification number is provided for each project that is referenced in Figure 11-7 Deleted: 6 Planning level cost estimates are also included for each project. The cost estimates were prepared based on typical per unit costs, functional classification, and level of improvement. The cost estimates include allowances for right-of-way acquisition based on generalized needs to meet the County's adopted roadway standards. Estimated costs for several improvements on state routes were developed jointly with Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). A relative priority (high, medium, and low) was established for each project. The priority reflects the relative need for the projects to enhance the Birch Bay subarea transportation system and provides guidance in implementing the respective improvements. State Route Projects I-5 provides the primary regional connection to the Birch Bay subarea. To the north, I-5 connects the Birch Bay subarea to the U.S./Canada border. To the south, I-5 connects to Bellingham and the central Puget Sound region. SR 548 also provides for regional travel from the,Birch'Bay subarea to I-5 from the north and east. The Washington State Highways Systems Plan (HSP) is the element of Washington's Transportation Plan that addresses the states highway system. The 2007-2026 HSP does not identify specific improvements within the Birch Bay subarea. The HSP calls for a Interstate Master Plan that would identify improvements to optimize capacity and safety on the interstate highway system. i r------------------------------------- '-------------------- I. Birch Bay Community Plan 11-21 Deleted: I-5 Interchanges - The Plan identifies improvements to the three interchanges serving the Birch Bay subarea. Improvements are needed to fix existing operational issues in the near term and to serve anticipated growth in the long term.¶ The 1-5/Blaine exit interchange (exit 276) (project 5-10) is identified as a high priority project in the Plan. Improvements at this interchange will help with traffic Dow and inspections at the border crossing. In addition, this project will support improvements being made to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection facilities at the I-5 Peace Arch border crossing. This project is fully funded by the federal government and is anticipated for construction in 2010.¶ n e01 m u 2 ism I is Irmo � � v" � mm o n q ,X I x Ix ,X %i I � I O C ° 9 E R oat x x x x x I j O q x Ix Ix x x x I I x x I .1. Ix x IX I I 'x X X :x I ;x I I I x I 0 io o o g to s o Ia Ic _. w � 0 LL d W a la I � a a a 10 B z a i a i a li z ° a F y z' z z° z° z' z zo Z. z° y zo x W I E E loi E Im _ E �m m — .5 E 2 III 3 u Imo; i.o c 0 E 3 c$ - �E c ,;NEB c m ma m .� Iq g m 3 u `o a zm - E m �- 0 9 1.2 cu � E. Ec Icy E�°3� C. o° = o, 8 cE Ee Ic Lea"@m ma -� lmnc G. ?m cc �E3�a ITS° 9 TP � E B o ` sm8mlo(L m IS m 210 S mm ma m` 35, 3 0 m I I Y =OC % rc Iz lz a = m M a: — S 10 Em 3 3 x a IU s I III � v gym, n m Q n � 500 ° I 'q� I� � 'n� I V I icf Na I I O � I c a? m i I j 0 m x Ix x x Ix X I X I :x x x x Ix x Ix x X Ix I x 'x Ix ix i x x x 1x o. I x ! i Ix x ix a d =E E iE E SI� I= 1 IJ Im Q to; a S $ 18 S S S H�Iqo 8 o ° m zO C C p p O O y } $ z° z !O iz z° z° z° Z. Iz z O z Iz m Iz O z O O z i lz 1 imse E E =6E is a' m8; oEu8 o�8'o °' I_=s800E 1s —E to �°t ♦E♦ EC ''.S a i0t E Et Et 12. Et E 'Et f @O E I£ Em IEi E_ s@ I Co 2.. Eo 2p 2 m s 12m oc 2` ?� I92 I2 `m o 2E to c° �,,,2N to c° ?@ Ion I?m o° �@ �_ L.2E sE log3 I3$ 8= ,mom `gamI;E .9 Iq E� IEE Eb Eg EE d rcm ,rcE ¢m rcn rcm rcm Ircm Ircm rcm ¢e I¢„°c Ism ICE Ic Imtt31 �Eo� o� y IE 'K io �� Irc i�tt o a c� mz �`u c� iOrc om I3o i.F �mD IW¢ iF 03 °° Iza m a Irc I u : z am Isd3 ° a°m g iaLL' a rso m� IwEr 'inm .E rci.' mrc c I�� Ircm Imrc It Im a' !SN Iirc (7m �m �K m(7 m ma �rc m mrc 2rc rc :m (7 I I 'm' m m''Irc rc Is Ic Ic m E. au � c7 m o $ a a' a Im Y Y E IN m u 6 PoSIOAroHd 6 O 501 w - c Q o til Im Im U <a o f < I oI D c m la U`m I I ,a mm U IV oas.oL o. oN I IIII` !a !m i€ o E l i E U m a U o la. `o I`o m -aI 7 W ja I I I m o a A `3 m Im c t o �at�� c s `► $� I i I =a _m m m so-s or 3 U I0 aria 3� io 13 i32 j I ac9 2' la is 1 i I j .5 c w I I R v M X x Ix iX x Ix 9 W LL 1 ! I i ! x x IX x I x x 1 I I I I I I I j ill-I ) x x Ix x ix i x IX Ix Ix Ix Z' IE ;E IE t E 1. !E ! IE E !� Im 'E I=m E JE - c m LL a F m z° o z o z I Izo z z' !o Iz !o iz ;z zo I ;z Iz Iz Izo jz z z z «` z z Izo z z° ;z° z z Izo izo Iz I Iz y I z zo z° z° ;. I Im I o jm v o - a - °-- I ! I I� IW w E I� �- IE'E - is �J Im m m IE 9 iE IW Im lw�55 iu I 3 to ;i° iu 3 9 - �E ° m o c Im` 13 ? I -a o 3 to Im to I.m Eon `c mT m n m0 cO mo _❑ m I=°' W Ic It I`m m i a Iwc i� lu E2 I� ,m oc Ig3 IE� I� g m w ¢, m a c E3 a EEC a IEo O Ic o - " I"r 'c m , Im IE� IE� om C Imp oy 3 m- lvm ;�= m m Im to IE jE o == -°� Ilmq �a I=� wm _ ;_ Imc I533 ,� Lm iu E 1.1� E ';8 cy Y� mE 3m 3m la" I` $c iE !a_c 2 Imp ;� io I;m0. ;_- m� �`,= m= ImE I� I? m3 O1m 1�3 a3 Imp I`o !.. � 2 m %n 2 d w 22 I2 1.9 m to is y !� '? m Im m I� m Im- 13 Im m E m IN 1-6 = 33 i�" 2_ H rn m rcE aE Ircm la E} IE} ;E3 Im IE Ec Ic9!c'-0 =-� EE I m` w I I I p n w I I I I ul J O ° U I to o m I@ �" I I 1`o I I- o 3 „ m p a mm - KK o mK Ta C ti I$ !@ Im `"m Y %� Im Ie IC 12t a« D3 mm Im¢ lc _ Im Im _ I= I_ S I_ - is � m> ti is IE to m Im x Im m E I� 1? = �� mm ! '¢ j �rc I ISo I� m I� rc a t O a � N� N N Ifq ix ,N N m ,m E i9 m laa T Im 3 c m $ 0 w a w m m � a m a m a Im IS Im !a •m as mm Ima m n '� gwo lag 1= m ;�_ x la !� � I� m A IWm Ima Wa � ma17c �m O" _� 7 j7 Imp Ira I� m m m m¢ m¢ !m o' mU m` O W N N !v/J til IN lw N If%) �fj �b IEb I� Iri/ If%1 �lil d O e o 300W iJ3H10 6 O o L 502 FE Ir tz Cd Ln 4- L) (V 0' L- CL 4- E 0 0- c 0 0 0- 503 Improvements to the I-5Birch Bay-Lynden Road interchange (projects S-11, S-12) are identified in the Plan as high and medium priorities respectively. Improvements to this interchange have been identified to meet near and long term needs. Project S-11 will improve operations in the near term by redesigning the ramp intersections with turn lanes and installing a traffic signal, when future traffic volumes warrant. Project S-12 will provide a complete reconstruction of the interchange. Improvements to the I-5/Grandview interchange (projects S-13, S-14) are also., identified for the near and long term needs. Similar to project S-11, project S-13 is a liiijhi priority and is identified to improve operations at the ramp intersections by adding turf► lanes` and installing a traffic signal when future traffic volumes warrant. Project.S44 is a medium priority and will provide a complete interchange reconstruction to meet long-range forecast needs. Blaine Road (SR 548) — Improvements are identified for Blaine Road both' north and south of Birch Bay-Lynden Road. North of Birch Bay-Lynden Road, the Plan calls for reconstructing Blaine Road, from I-5 to Birch Bay-Lynden Road (projects S-1, S-2). The improvement projects would add shoulders for non -motorized_ travel. Intersection improvements are identified at Drayton Harbor Road and Loomis Trail Road (projects S-5, S-6). These improvements include adding tum lanes and traffic signals or roundabouts when future traffic volumes warrant. The Plan also identifies the replacement of two bridges in this corridor, the California Creek bridge and the Dakota Creek bridge (projects S-8, S-9). South of Birch Bay-Lynden Road; the :Plan identifies reconstructing Blaine Road from Birch Bay-Lynden Road to: Grandview Road (projects S-3, S-4). The section of Blaine Road north of Bay Road is within the: Urban Growth Area for Birch Bay and as such would be reconstructed to WSDOT'sstandards, adding shoulders for non -motorized -travel. South_ of Bay Road, Blaine Road should be constructed per WSDOT's rural collector standards. Intersections improvements af.:Birch Bay-Lynden Road and Grandview Road are also identified in the Plan (projects S-15, S-7). A potential roundabout at the Blaine Road (SR 548)/Grandview Road (SR 548) intersection is currently being discussed by WSDOT as part of a developer funded improvement. Though the transportation planning stud Grandview Road (SR 548) — Two intersection improvements, in addition to those identified at the I-5 interchange and at Blaine Road (SR 548), are identified in the Plan. Improvements to the intersections of Grandview Road (SR 548) at Kickerville Road and at Vista Drive include the installation of turn lanes and roundabout or traffic signal when future traffic volumes warrant. The improvement at Vista Drive/Grandview Road (SR 548) is a high priority because it serves traffic to/from the Birch Bay UGA to I-5 via Bay Road. Birch Bay Community Plan 11-26 Deleted: or sidewalks Deleted: urban 504 However, the HSP does identify I-5 from Grandview Road to the City of Blaine as a "solution that requires further analysis" as the existing capacity will not be sufficient for future traffic volumes. Intersection Projects Improvements to intersections along County maintained arterials serving the Birch Bay subarea are needed to resolve existing and future deficiencies, primarily alng Birch Bay- ,Lynden Road. This roadway serves as the main east -west arterial, connecting the Birch Bay subarea to I-5 and the rest of the region. Intersection improvements along -this corridor will improve safety and operations by adding turn lanes at key locations and installing traffic signals or roundabouts when future traffic volumes warrant. The Plan identif es three high priority intersection improvements at Birch Bay-Lyndetf.Road at Portal Way, Birch Bay-Lynden Road at Harborview Road, and Birch Bay Drive at Harborview Road. New Roadways and Major Widening or Reconstruetion Projects Several new roadways and major widening projects are identified in the Plan to address existing deficiencies and support future growth. This category of projects includes upgrading and major widening of roadways to .County'standards to provide turn lanes at major access locations. Improvements to n_on-motori_z_e_----------- -d facilities, such as roadway - Deleted: ;mprove shoulders, are also identified. - Birch Bay-Lynden Road Widening — Birch Bay-Lynden Road serves as the primary east - west arterial, connecting Birch Bay to I-5. In addition to the intersection improvements identified above, the Plan calls; for widening the roadway to meet rural major collector standards from Portal Way to the UGAbboundary just east of Blaine Road (SR 548) and to urban principal arterial standards west to Harborview Road. These projects would improve facilities for non-motorized:travel by paving roadway shoulders and/or adding sidewalks or separated pathways. In addition; the project would include widening to accommodate turn lanes at major access locations. This will allow safer and easier access for left turning vehicles, along Birch Bay-Lynden Road. Lincoln Road Extension and Improvement — To complete an alternative east -west corridor north of Birch -Bay Lynden Road, an extension of Lincoln Road between Harborview Road and Blaine Road (SR 548) is planned. In addition to extending the roadway, "the project will improve Lincoln Road from Shintaffer Road to Blaine Road (SR 548) to urban minor arterial standards, including construction of two roundabouts at Harborview Road and Blaine Road. The project also includes a separated pathway for non - motorized travel. Birch Point Connector Road — A new connection between Birch Bay Drive and Lincoln Road is also a key new collector route serving the northern part of the Birch Bay UGA. - - - _ - Deleted: roadway When fully constructed this new roadway will provide improved mobility and an _ _ _ _ _ _ Deleted: and open Birch Bay Community Plan 11-27 505 alternative to Birch Bay Drive for east -west traffic to/from the residential growth anticipated in the Birch Bay and Blaine UGAs. The project includes realigning the segment of Shintaffer Road south of Lincoln Road, and constructing a new intersection at Lincoln Road Part of the road would be funded and constructed by a developer. The _ Deleted: two new intersections at remaining section will be a County project. - - - snintaffer Road and Lincoln Road Harborview Road — Improvements are identified for Harborview Road from Birch Bay Drive to Drayton Harbor Road. The section of Harborview Road from Birch Bay Drive to Birch Bay-Lynden Road would be improved to reflect the existi lgand future demands of Birch Bay traffic traveling to I-5 via Birch Bay-Lynden Road. The section of Harborview Road from Birch Bay-Lynden Road to Drayton Harbor Road would be improved to urban collector standards. Both of these projects would include improved facilities for non - motorized travel. Commercial Area Circulation Roads In addition to specific improvements identified above, the Plan calls for construction of new circulation roads within the planned Birch Bay UGA commercial area between Birch Bay-Lynden Road and Alderson Road. These new roadways.would provide improved access and circulations to future development anticipated for this area, as well as help maintain safety and operations of adjacent arterials;"collectors, and state highways. Minor Widening and Reconstruction Projects Improvements are also needed on other roadways serving the Birch Bay subarea. This category of projects includes minor widening of roadways to add shoulders and improve non -motorized facilities. Birch Bay Drive — With its`proximity to the waterfront, Birch Bay Drive serves as a primary non -motorized route within the Birch Bay UGA. Zhe Birch Bay Drive Pedestrian , ------------------------------------ bicyclists. The 2000 Birch Bay Economic Development Action Plan emphasized the need for improved pedestrian and bicycle facilities along Birch Bay Drive as part of the community's economic development strategy. A year round speed limit of 20 to 25 mph is recommende`4 ,_Specific changes to speed limit should be considered with community -------------------------- input. Loomis Trail Road — Loomis Trail Road serves as an east -west connector between Portal Way and Blaine Road, northeast of the Birch Bay UGA. The Plan identifies improvements to reconstruct Loomis Trail Road to rural major collector standards. The project includes paved shoulders for non -motorized users. Birch Bay Community Plan 11-28 Deleted: urban principal standards to Deleted: The Plan identifies Mimprovements to Birch Bay Drive from taffer Road to Point Whitehom Road. This project would improve Birch Bay Drive to urban minor arterial standards, including improved facilities for non -motorized travel. comment [S2]:beleted "to . min or urban arterial standards" Deleted: once the Lincoln Road and Birch Point Connector projects are constructed. 506 Maintenance and Operations Programs A systematic program for maintaining the existing and future transportation infrastructure is critical to a safe and efficient transportation system. Elements of a maintenance and operations program for the Birch Bay subarea should include a systematic evaluation of pavement conditions on arterial and local roadways, signage, sight distance (such as vegetation blocking sight lines), and impacts of parking on safety and operations. Other elements should include regular monitoring and servicing of traffic control devices, such as traffic signals and flashing beacons. In addition, the maintenance and operations program should include a periodic evaluation of speed limits on facilities based on functional classification, design, and current roadway conditions. The speed evaluation should consider elements such as "geometric design; actual travel speeds, intersection control, traffic safety, and possible -impacts on adjacent corridors or neighborhood streets. Birch Bay Community Plan 11-29 507 Chapter 2 SUMMARY BIRCH BAY COMMUNITY PLAN' Transportation system improvements are required to accommodate the projected growth in population and employment within the Birch Bay UGA. The transportation systems plan is based upon analyses of the existing transportation system, foreca4is'of future travel demands, and vision for the birch Bgy subarea. State Route Projects Deleted: Transportation Plan Concept. First and foremost, the transportation plan has been designed to support and implement the land use plan. Second, the transportation plan has been designed to provide two east -west arterials, connecting Birch Bay with Interstate Highway 5. The Northern east - west arterial connector is proposed to be along Birch Bay-Lynden Road. The southern east -west connector is proposed to run along Grandview Road. Blaine Road from Grandview Road on the south to the California Creek bridge to the north is the major north -south arterial, designed to take the traffic load off Birch Bay Drive. ¶ Formatted: Font: 12 pt, Bold, Underline J I-5 provides the primary regional connection to the Birch Bay subarea. To the north, I-5 connects the Birch Bay subarea to the U.S./Canada border. To the south, I-5 connects to Bellingham and the central Puget Sound region. SR 548 also provides for regional travel from the Birch Bay subarea to I-5 from the north and east. The Washington State Highways Systems Plan (HSP) is the element of Washington's Transportation Plan that addresses the states highway system. The 2007-2026 HSP does not identify specific improvements within the Birch Bay subarea. The HSP calls for a Interstate Master Plan Deleted: August Birch Bay Community Plan DRAFT AMENDMENTS§eptember 8. 2008 _ _ _ 1 that would identify improvements to optimize capacity and safety on the interstate highway system. Deleted: August Birch Bay Community Plan DRAFT AMENDMENTS,4eatember 8.2008 2 509 Improvements to the I-5Birch Bay-Lynden Road interchange (projects S-11, S-12) are identified in the Plan as high and medium priorities respectively. Improvements to this interchange have been identified to meet near and long term needs. Project S-I I will improve operations in the near term by redesigning the ramp intersections with tum lanes and installing a traffic signal, when future traffic volumes warrant. Project S-12 will provide a complete reconstruction of the interchange. Improvements to the I-5/Grandview interchange (projects S-13, S-14) are also identified for the near and long term needs. Similar to project S-11. project S-13 is a high priority and is identified to improve operations at the ramp intersections by adding turn lanes and.,: installing a traffic signal when future traffic volumes warrant. Project S-14 is a medium priority and will provide a complete interchange reconstruction to meet long range forecast needs. Blaine Road (SR 548) — Improvements are identified for Blaine Road both north and south of Birch Bay-_Lynden Road. North of Birch Bay-Lyriden Road, the Plan calls for S-8 S-9 . Grandview Road (SR 548) — Two intersection improvements, in addition to those identified at the I-5 interchange and at Blaine Road (SR 548), are identified in the Plan. Improvements to the intersections of Grandview Road (SR 548) at Kickerville Road and at Vista Drive include the installation of tum lanes and roundabout or traffic signal when future traffic volumes warrant. The improvement at Vista Drive/Grandview Road (SR 548) is a high priority because it serves traffic to/from the Birch Bay UGA to I-5 via Bay Road. Deleted: Augusr Birch Bay Community Plan DRAFT AMENDMENTS jeeptemher 8. 2008 510 However, the HSP does identify I-5 from Grandview Road to the City of Blaine as a "solution that requires further analysis" as the existing cpacity will not be sufficient for future traffic volumes. Intersection Proiects New Roadways and Maior Widening or Reconstruction Proiects Several new roadways and major widening projeets are identified in the Plan to address snouiaers, are also wentinea. Birch Bay-Lynden Road Wideuim —Birch Bay-Lvnden Road serves as the primary east - west arterial, connecting Birch Bay to I-5. In addition to the intersection improvements identified above, the Plan calls for widening the roadway to meet rural major collector Harborview Road and Blaine Road (SR 548) is planned. In addition to extending the roadway, the project will improve Lincoln Road from Shintaffer Road to Blaine Road (SR 548) to urban minor arterial standards, including construction of two roundabouts at Harborview Road and Blaine Road. The project also includes a separated pathway for non - motorized travel. Birch Point Connector Road — A new connection between Birch Bay Drive and Lincoln Road is also a key new collector route serving the northern part of the Birch Bay UGA. When fully constructed, this new roadway will provide improved mobility and an Deleted: August Birch Bay Community Plan DRAFT AMENDMENTSL4eptember 8.2008 511 alternative to Birch Bay Drive for east -west traffic to/from the residential growth anticipated in the Birch Bay and Blaine UGAs. The project includes realigning the segment of Shintaffer Road south of Lincoln Road, and constructing a new intersection at Lincoln Road. Part of the road would be funded and constructed by a developer. The remaining section will be a County project. Harborview Road — Improvements are identified for Harborview Road from Birch Bay motorized travel. Commercial Area Circulation Roads In addition to specific improvements identified above, the Plan calls for construction of new circulation roads within the planned Birch Bav UGA commercial area between Birch Minor Widening and Reconstruction Projects Improvements are also needed on other roadways serving the Birch Bay subarea. This category of proiects includes minor widening of roadways to add shoulders and improve non -motorized facilities. Birch Bay Drive — With its proximity to the waterfront, Birch Bay Drive serves as a primary non-motorized'"route within the Birch Bay UGA. The Birch Bay Drive Pedestrian Facilitypart of the Birch Bay Shoreline Enhancement Project, is designed and identified in the coup 's six ear Trans ortation Improvement Program. This project would improve the Birch Bay Drive roadway6 provide separate facilities for pedestrians and bicyclists. The 2000 Birch Bay Economic Development Action Plan emphasized the need for improved pedestrian and bicycle facilities along Birch Bay Drive as part of the community's economic development strategy. A year round speed limit of 20 to 25 mph is recommended. Specific changes to speed limit should be considered with community input. Loomis Trail Road — Loomis Trail Road serves as an east -west connector between Portal Way and Blaine Road, northeast of the Birch Bay UGA. The Plan identifies improvements to reconstruct Loomis Trail Road to rural major collector standards. The project includes paved shoulders for non -motorized users. Birch Bay Community Plan DRAFT AMENDMENTS &egmber 8. 2008 _ _ _ Comment [S11: Deleted "to minor urban arterial standards" Deleted: August 512 Maintenance and Operations Proarams :- Formatted: Font: 14 pt, Bold, Italic, --- - -- ---- -------- -- — No underline FFo7atted: Left, Indent: Left: 0 pt, djut space between Latin and text A systematic program am for maintaining the existing and future transportation infrastructure y p g g p is critical to a safe and efficient transportation system. Elements of a maintenance and operations program for the Birch Bay subarea should include a systematic evaluation of Deleted: The proposed transportation plan, as shown in Figure 2-5, is based on the following vision, goals and policies, principles and assumptions.¶¶ Meets the transportation vision statement.¶ pavement conditions on arterial and local roadways, signanage, sight distance (such as vegetation blocking sight lines), and impacts of parking on safety and operations. Other r elements should include regular monitoring and servicing of traffic control devices, such as traffic signals and flashing beacons. Meets the transportation goals and In addition, the maintenance and eva program operations should include a eriodic:luation p p p Policies.¶ Meets the Growth Management Act goals of serving the needs of the land use plan.¶ Commits to level of service "D as the acceptable level of service.¶ Establishes transportation concurrency requirements.¶ of speed limits on facilities based on functional classification, design; and current roadway conditions. The speed evaluation should consider elements such as geometric design, r actual travel speeds, intersection control, traffic safety, and possible impacts on adjacent corridors or neighborhood streets. 6. Requires developer paid on -site transportation improvements and ofF¶ -� site impact mitigation.¶ • • • • • ¶ - - The proposed transportation plan calls for the retention of State Highway 548 designation on Grandview Road and Blaine Road. Further, the proposed ` transportation plan calls for the designation of Birch Bay - Lynden Road, Harborview Road, and Lincoln Road to the Blaine Road as arterial roads. Other . roads shown on the proposed transportation plan, such as Birch Bay . Drive, Jackson Road, Bay Road, Alderson Road, Shintaffer Road, Kickerville Road and others are collector roads.¶ Proposed Roadway Improvements. The transportation plan also proposes that two new routes be constructed. The first is the construction of a cut-off road from Birch Point Road to just west of the Lincoln Road and Shintaffer Road intersection. The second is the construction of a combined auto, pedestrian, and bicycle road west from Blaine Road toward, but not connecting with Birch Bay Drive in the vicinity of . the existing golf course. A bicycle/ pedestrian access is proposed to connect this route to Birch Bay Drive. The transportation plan further proposes a series of existing roadway improvements and the installation of a number of traffic signals. The specific transportation improvements are listed below. Page Break ¶ ,..r 1 Deleted: August Birch Bay Community Plan DRAFT AMENDMENTSSentember 8, 2008 513 Page 6: [1] Deleted Staff 8/7/2008 7:36:00 AM The proposed transportation plan, as shown in Figure 2-5, is based on the following vision, goals and policies, principles and assumptions. Meets the transportation vision statement. Meets the transportation goals and policies. Meets the Growth Management Act goals of serving the needs of the land use plan. Commits to level of service "D" as the acceptable level of service. Establishes transportation concurrency requirements. 6. Requires developer paid on -site transportation improvements and off - site impact mitigation. The proposed transportation plan calls for the retention of State Highway 548 designation on Grandview Road and Blaine Road. Further, the proposed transportation plan calls for the designation of Birch Bay - Lynden Road, Harborview Road, and Lincoln Road to the Blaine Road as arterial roads. Other roads shown on the proposed transportation plan, such as Birch Bay Drive, Jackson Road, Bay Road, Alderson Road, Shintaffer Road, Kickerville Road and others are collector roads. Proposed Roadway Improvements. The transportation plan also proposes that two new routes be constructed. The first is the construction of a cut-off road from Birch Point Road to just west of the Lincoln Road and Shintaffer Road intersection. The second is the construction of a combined auto, pedestrian, and bicycle road west from Blaine Road toward, but not connecting with Birch Bay Drive in the vicinity of the existing golf course. A bicycle/ pedestrian access is proposed to connect this route to Birch Bay Drive. The transportation plan further proposes a series of existing roadway improvements and the installation of a number of traffic signals. The specific transportation improvements are listed below. Figure 2-5 Transportation Plan Grandview Road. Widen Grandview Road from Pt. Whitehorn Road to Blaine Road to two lanes with paved shoulders to accommodate bicycles. Provide left turn pockets at Jackson Road. Widen Grandview Road to four lanes from Blaine Road to Interstate 5. Provide left turn lanes at the intersection at 514 Blaine Road and at Kickerville Road. Provide a traffic signal at the intersection of Grandview Road and Blaine Road. Blaine Road. Widen Blaine Road to four lanes from Grandview Road to Lincoln Road. Provide a two-way left turn lane (in the middle) through the commercial and multi -family residential area at Blaine Road and Alderson Road. Provide left turn lanes at the intersections of Blaine Road and Alderson Road and Blaine Road and Arnie Road. Provide left turn lanes and a traffic signal at the intersection of Blaine Road and Birch Bay - Lynden Road. Provide left turn lanes and a traffic signal at the intersection of Blaine Road and Lincoln Road. Improve the Blaine Road bridge, crossing California Creek. Birch Bay - Lynden Road. Widen Birch Bay - Lynden Road to four lanes from Harborview Road to Kickerville Road. Widen shoulders along Birch Bay - Lynden Road from Kickerville Road to Interstate 5 to accommodate bicycles. Provide left turn lanes at the intersections of Birch Bay-Lynden Road with Kickerville Road, Blaine Road and Harborview Road. Provide a two-way left turn lane (in the middle) from Harborview Road to Blaine Road. Provide traffic signals at the intersections of Birch Bay - Lynden Road with Harborview Road and Blaine Road. Provide bicycle lanes and pedestrian walkways along Birch Bay - Lynden Road from Harborview Road to Blaine Road. Lincoln Road. Finish constructing the gap in Lincoln Road between Harborview Road and Blaine Road. Widen Lincoln Road with adequate shoulders from Shintaffer Road to Blaine Road. Provide left turn lanes along Lincoln Road at Shintaffer Road, Harborview Road, and at Blaine Road. Provide a traffic signal at the intersection of Lincoln Road and Blaine Road. Lincoln Road is proposed to be a limited access corridor with a pedestrian/ bicycle trail and a vegetated buffer separating the road from future development. Birch Point Road. Widen Birch Point Road by providing adequate shoulders from Shintaffer Road to middle of section 22 where Birch Point Road turns sharply to the south. Construct a new two lane roadway .section with wide shoulders beginning in the middle of section 22 and nuLning north to and connecting with Semiahmoo Drive. This section of the road should be built concurrently with the buildout of the surrounding residential area. Build a cut-off road from Birch Point Road, east of the entrance to Birch Bay Village and connecting with Lincoln Road west of Shintaffer Road. As indicated in the above paragraph, install a traffic signal at the intersection of Lincoln Road and Shintaffer Road if traffic volumes warrant such installation. Harborview Road. Widen Harborview Road from Birch Bay Drive to Drayton Harbor Road by providing adequate shoulders for bicycles. Widen the section of Harborview Road to three lanes (two-way left turn in the middle) from Birch Bay Drive to Lincoln Road. Build left turn lanes along Harborview Road at 515 the intersections with Birch Bay Drive, Birch Bay - Lynden Road, and Lincoln Road. Kickerville Road. Widen Kickerville Road from Loomis Trail Road to Grandview Road by providing adequate shoulders. Install left turn lanes along Kickerville Road at the intersections with Birch Bay - Lynden Road and at Grandview Road. Commercial Area Access Road. Construct a new road, west from Blaine Road and in the vicinity of the golf course, terminating in a cul-de-sac east of Birch Bay Drive at a parking lot. The roadway should accommodate two auto lanes, two dedicated bicycle lanes and two pedestrian walkways connecting to Birch Point Road. Birch Bay Drive. Reconstruct Birch Bay Drive by constructing a berm on the waterside of the Drive in accordance with the analysis being done by the Department of Ecology. On top of the berm, construct a combined pedestrian and bicycle paths. Keep the Birch Bay Drive roadway as a two auto -lane facility. Prohibit on -street parking and provide intermittent off-street parking lots on east side of Birch Bay Drive. Public Transportation. Restore public transportation service to the Birch Bay area. 516 r BIRCH BAY COMMUNITY PLAN - APPENDIX A BIRCH BAY TRANSPORTATION PLANNING STUDY Prepared for: Whatcom County January 2009 Prepared by: Transpo Group, Inc. 11730 118"' Avenue NE, Suite 600 Kirkland, WA 98034-7120 Phone: 425.821.3665 Fax: 425.825.8434 www.transpogroup.com © 2009 Transpo Group 517 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study January 2009 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION...................................................................................1 Purpose........................................................................................................................................1 Planning Study Organization...................................................................................................2 StudyArea...................................................................................................................................2 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS.........................................................4 EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM INVENTORY................................7 Roadway System and Traffic Controls................................................................................... 7 Transit and Public Transportation........................................................................................19 Non -motorized Facilities........................................................................................................22 TRAVEL FORECASTS & ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION ...........................24 Travel Demand Forecasting Model.......................................................................................24 Existingand Forecast Land Use............................................................................................24 Baseline Transportation Improvements and Analysis........................................................25 AlternativesAnalysis...............................................................................................................26 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS .......29 Streetsand Highways..............................................................................................................29 Public Transportation and Transportation Demand Management..................................38 Pedestrian and Bicycle Systems.............................................................................................38 PROJECT COST SUMMARY..................................................................41 ATTACHMENT A: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION SUMMARIES ATTACHMENT B: LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS ATTACHMENT C: FORECAST LAND USE METHODOLOGY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Transpo Group Page i 518 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Stud January 2009 Table of Contents (Continued) Figures Figure1. Study Area......................................................................................................3 Figure 2. Study Background and Process................................................................... 6 Figure 3. Existing Roadway System & Traffic Controls .......................................... 8 Figure 4. 2007 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes......................................................13 Figure 5. 2007 Weekday PM Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service...............16 Figure6. Transit Routes..............................................................................................21 Figure 7. Available Roadway Shoulders....................................................................23 Figure 8. 2007 and 2027 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes....................................28 Figure 9. Birch Bay Area Transportation Improvement Projects .........................34 Figure 10. Birch Bay Area Non -Motorized Transportation System Plan..............40 Tables Table 1. Whatcom County Level of Service Standards (Concurrency) Table 2. 2007 Weekday PM Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service Table 3. Birch Bay Collision Locations: Roadways Table 4. Birch Bay Collision Locations: Intersections Table 5. Existing Transit Ridership for WTA Routes 55 and 70X Table 6. Whatcom County Road Standards for Shoulder Width Table 7. Existing and Forecast Land Use Table 8. 2027 Baseline Transportation Improvements Table 9. 2027 Model Scenarios Evaluated Table 10. Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study Projects and Programs Table 11. 20-Year Project Cost Summary Table 12. Project Relative Priority Transpo Group 14 15 18 19 20 22 25 25 26 31 41 42 Page ii 519 Birch Bay Transportation Planni Introduction 2009 The Birch Bay area of Whatcom County is located in the northwest corner of Washington State, approximately 21 miles from the county seat of Bellingham and approximately 6 miles south of the Canadian border. Birch Bay is not an incorporated city, and its Urban Growth Area (UGA) remains under the jurisdiction of Whatcom County. The Birch Bay UGA is directly adjacent to the City of Blaine and its UGA. The Birch Bay UGA is centered on Birch Bay, a half-moon shaped bay off of the northern Puget Sound. The UGA extends south toward Grandview Road and north to the Blaine city limits and the city's UGA along Lincoln Road. The easternmost edge of the Birch Bay UGA lies just west of Kickerville Road. Interstate 5 (I-5) runs about 2.5 miles west of the UGA boundary. Blaine Road, also known as SR 548, is a state highway that runs north -south through Birch Bay. The Birch Bay area is illustrated in Figure 1. The 2000 U.S. Census reported that the population in the Birch Bay Census Designated Place (CDP) is 4,960 people, and the population of the City of Blaine was 3,770 people. Each of these population estimates was notably larger than was reported in the 1990 U.S. Census: when the Birch Bay area had 2,656 people and the City of Blaine had a population of 2,489. Between 1990 and 2000 the Birch Bay population grew by almost 90 percent and the City of Blaine grew by over 50 percent. Another significant Birch Bay fact reported in the 2000 U.S. Census was that over 50 percent of the housing units were for seasonal, recreational, or occasional use.' This statistic is an indicator of a community in which there are more housing units than the population estimates would suggest are necessary. Purpose The Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study provides a link between Whatcom County's Comprehensive Plan, the Birch Bay Community Plan, and the transportation facilities and services needed to support growth over the next 20 years. The Transportation Planning Study focuses on safety, capacity, and operational improvements on state highways, arterials, and collectors serving the Birch Bay area. The Planning Study also identifies pedestrian, bicycle, and transit programs to help meet the overall transportation needs of the community. The Transportation Planning Study is a key component to the Birch Bay Community Plan. It provides the County and the Birch Bay community with a guide for transportation system improvements to meet existing and future travel needs. It also integrates the community's priorities for transportation improvements with those of Whatcom County and the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). 1 U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 Summary File 1, Matrices P1, P3, P4, P8, P9, P12, P13, P,17, P18, P19, P20, P23, P27, P28, P33, PCTS, PCT8, PCT11, PCT15, H1, H3, H4, H5, H11, and H12. Transpo Group Page 1 520 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study January 2009 Planning Study Organization The Transportation Planning Study was developed in a series of tasks to meet the requirements of the GMA. The Planning Study is organized as follows: • Goals and Policies • Existing Transportation System Inventory • Travel Forecasts • Transportation Systems Plan • Financial Plan and Implementation Strategies Study Area The Study Area for the Transportation Planning Study includes the Birch Bay UGA, the Blaine UGA, portions of the City of Blaine, and adjacent unincorporated Whatcom County. This area comprises approximately 40 square miles. The Birch Bay UGA has been defined by Whatcom County, and the Blaine UGA has been defined by both the County and the City of Blaine. Figure 1 shows the study area for the 2008 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study. As noted above, the Study Area extends beyond the Birch Bay UGA boundary. This larger area accounts for the transportation system serving the Birch Bay UGA, extending to I-5 and to the City of Blaine and its UGA. Transpo Group Page 2 521 522 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study January 2009 Public Participation Process Public participation is a key element of the planning process. Whatcom County developed an outreach strategy to gather input from stakeholders, interested parties, neighboring agencies, and the public on the study. The strategy involved several components to obtain input from members of the community, both at key decision points and throughout the planning process. The goal of the outreach process was to develop a planning study that reflects the priorities of the community. The public participation process used multiple methods for engaging the community including the following components: ■ Open houses ■ Project Web page ■ Brochure ■ Traveling display Two open houses were held to inform the community about the Study effort, including the purpose of the Transportation Planning Study, and the reasons for updating the Community Plan. Figure 2 illustrates the linear progression of the planning study process. The first open house, held in June 2007, provided an opportunity for the public to view the results of the existing conditions analysis, provide feedback on their transportation concerns, and learn more about the potential types of improvements that may be considered in Birch Bay. The comments received helped guide the County as it moved forward with developing a list of proposed transportation improvement projects to address these issues. The second open house occurred in December 2007. Attendees were able to learn about the future condition of the transportation system in Birch Bay, given the expected changes in land use and population growth. Potential improvement projects that may be used to address transportation issues were also presented at this meeting. Appendix A provides summaries of the two open houses including comments received. In addition to the two open house events, Whatcom County also hosted a project Web page about the Study, to provide up-to-date project information to a wide audience. The Web page included details about upcoming public events, team contact information, and the project timeline. Whatcom County also developed and circulated a brochure and traveling display about the Study at locations throughout the Birch Bay and Blaine communities in order to reach those that were unable to attend an open house event, or who do not have internet access. The display and brochure provided information about the potential improvement projects that are being considered for the Birch Bay area, and ways to make a comment or get involved with the Study process. As a result of these outreach efforts, five primary themes were identified, based on the following community feedback (public participation summaries found in Appendix A): East -west connections and access to Interstate-5 should be improved to support traffic circulation and provide for more reliable emergency vehicle access and evacuation routes. Transpo Group Page 4 523 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study January 2009 ■ Speed limits on Birch Bay Drive should be maintained at 20-25 miles per hour year- round, not just during seasonal times. ■ Existing roads should be widened to provide for adequate shoulders to improve safety for non -motorized users and allow for a safe place to pull off the road in an emergency without blocking traffic. ■ A network of safe bicycle and pedestrian paths to encourage non -motorized travel throughout the Birch Bay community should be incorporated into the Study, along with road improvements. ■ The public transportation network should be improved to serve a broader area and increased frequency is also desired. Transpo Group Page 5 524 I-b j �o `Ch�Q�� 'Cm� tea. �,`m o o� �m 4mc. by ll� '01 C4 CL E CL c c 4Z- .2 CL 4w o 0 4-0 w - IA u (a 91 w N o mc 3, E 0 0 Z 0 0 Imj w lJ -e• 0 a CL CL IM z 525 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study January 2009 Existing Transportation System Inventory The transportation system in and around the Birch Bay area consists of various transportation facilities, including state highways, collector routes, local streets, transit services, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Information on existing facilities was assembled from various sources. The inventory covers the street system, traffic controls, traffic volumes, traffic operations, traffic safety, transit service, and non -motorized facilities. y Roadway System and Traffic Controls Street Inventory The following summarizes the existing conditions of roadways serving Birch Bay and surrounding area as of March 2008. State Highways Interstate 5 (I-5) is the north -south interstate freeway serving Washington State. It connects to Canada within the City of Blaine. I-5 is classified as a Highway of Statewide Significance (HSS). Within Birch Bay, I-5 runs diagonally from the northwest (in Blaine) to the southeast near the City of Ferndale. I-5 has four travel lanes within the study area and a posted speed limit of 70 mph. Interchanges within the study area are located at Grandview Road (SR 548) and Birch Bay-Lynden Road. An interchange also serves the Birch Bay area at exit 274 in the south part of the City of Blaine. SR 548 is a state Highway of Regional Significance (HRS) within the Birch Bay Area. It is comprised of two segments — Blaine Road and Grandview Road. Blaine Road (SR 548) serves major north -south travel flows between the City of Blaine and the industrial areas south of Grandview Road. At its north end it connects with Interstate 5 at an interchange in the south part of the City of Blaine (exit 274). It has two travel lanes and a posted speed limit of 45 mph. The roadway has several small hills due to the rolling terrain. Its lanes are relatively narrow and there is little or no shoulder area. Grandview Road (SR 548) serves as SR 548 east of Blaine Road. It is an east -west, two-lane roadway which connects the south part of the Birch Bay Urban Growth Area with an interchange with Interstate 5 and with an alternative route to Ferndale and Bellingham via Kickerville Road. The lanes are typically between 10 feet and 12 feet wide, and the posted speed limit is 50 mph. Grandview Road has wider shoulders as compared to other roadways in the study area. Transpo Group Page 7 526 Oil 3llI�L3N�IN K 4 a m Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study January 2009 County Arterials and Collectors Birch Bay-Lynden Road is the primary east -west road, connecting Birch Bay with I-5. It has two lanes between ten and thirteen feet wide. Generally the minor side streets are stop controlled. However, major streets (Harborview Road, Blaine Road, Portal Way, east I-5 ramps) are all -way stop controlled. Some sections of the roadway have paved shoulders, between three and seven feet in width. There are also nine foot wide gravel shoulders along some sections, while other portions of the roadway have little or no shoulders. The posted speed limit along this road is 50 mph between Blaine Road (SR 548) and I-5. To the west the road connects to Harborview Road and to the east to Guide Meridian Road (SR 539). West of Blaine Road the posted speed limit is 40 mph. Birch Bay Drive is a two lane rural major collector that ties in to Point Whitehorn Road to the south and to Birch Point Road to the north. It provides connections to the Birch Bay Village and Semiahmoo areas. All -way stop signs control traffic flows at major street crossings. The roadway typically has ten foot lanes and four foot wide paved shoulders. The posted speed limit is 20 mph between May 5 and September 15 and 35 mph the remainder of the year. It provides access to developments and activities along the Birch Bay waterfront. Birch Bay Drive experiences significant pedestrian use due to its proximity to the waterfront and the adjacent commercial businesses. The 2000 Birch Bay Economic Development Action Plan emphasized the need for improved pedestrian and bicycle facilities along Birch Bay Drive as part of the community's economic development strategy. Birch Point Road is a major collector that connects to Semiahmoo Drive to the west and Shintaffer Road to the east. It serves as an extension of Birch Bay Drive and provides connections to and from the Birch Bay Village development. The roadway has two travel lanes. Lane widths are typically 10 to 11 feet in width; a section of the road near Birch Bay Village has narrower travel lanes. Some portions of the roadway have gravel shoulders, ranging between three feet and eight feet wide, and the other portions have paved shoulders ranging between four and six feet wide. The posted speed limit is 30 mph and 45 mph. Semiahmoo Drive links Birch Point Road to the south and Drayton Harbor Road and Semiahmoo Parkway to the north. It is a two lane collector with travel lanes typically 10 feet wide. The posted speed limit is 45 mph. Lincoln Road is a two lane collector that connects to the west with Semiahmoo Parkway and to the east with Harborview Road. Lincoln Road has a missing segment between Harborview Road and Blaine Road. Travel lanes (combined with paved shoulders) along this road range between nine and seventeen feet in width. There is not striped delineation between the travel lanes and paved shoulders. The posted speed limit is 35 mph. Along most sections of the roadway there no shoulders, with a small section between the Blaine City Limits and Shintaffer Road having gravel shoulders. Lincoln Road forms the boundary between the Blaine and Birch Bay UGAs. Shintaffer Road is classified as a major collector between Birch Bay Drive and Lincoln Road in the Birch Bay UGA; north of Lincoln Road, in the Blaine UGA, it is classified as a local street. It has two lanes of travel ranging between nine and thirteen feet in width. There are narrow gravel shoulders (1 to 2 feet wide) on both sides, about one to two feet wide. The posted speed limit on this roadway is 35 mph. It connects Drayton Harbor Road to the north with Birch Bay Drive to the south. Transpo Group Page 9 528 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study January 2009 Harborview Road is a two lane major collector roadway with eleven foot lanes along the majority of the roadway and seventeen foot lanes (combined with paved shoulders) near Drayton Harbor Road. There is not striped delineation between the travel lanes and paved shoulders. Along sections of the roadway there are paved shoulders up to five feet in width. There are also gravel shoulders along other sections ranging between four and six feet wide, while other portions of the roadway have no shoulders. To the north it connects with Drayton Harbor Road and to the south it connects to Birch Bay Drive. The posted speed limit along this road is 40 mph. Drayton Harbor Road is classified as a city arterial within the Blaine city limits, as a rural minor collector between the Blaine city limits and Harborview Road, and as a rural major collector from Harborview Road to Blaine Road (SR 548). It has two travel lanes between ten and eleven feet wide with primarily unpaved gravel shoulders ranging between three and six feet wide. The speed limit is 25 mph west of Harborview Road and 45 mph between Harborview Road and Blaine Road. Grandview Road (west of Blaine Road (SR 548)) is a two lane roadway with ten to twelve foot wide travel lanes. There are gravel shoulders on both sides, ranging between three and eight feet in width. It connects to Point Whitehorn Road and local development west of Blaine Road, then to I-5 via SR 548 (Grandview Road). The posted speed limit along this road is 35 mph. Point Whitehorn Road has two lanes of travel that are approximately ten feet in width. Three-foot wide gravel shoulders are on both sides of the roadway and the posted speed limit is 35 mph. This street connects Birch Bay Drive to the north with Grandview Road to the south. Kickerville Road is a two lane roadway with travel lanes that vary between ten and eleven feet wide. Generally the road has five foot gravel shoulders on both sides. To the north it connects with Loomis Trail Road and to the south it connects to Bay Road. Kickerville Road continues on as a major collector to Rainbow Road. The posted speed limit along this road is 35 mph north of Grandview Road and 45 mph south of Grandview. Bay Road is classified as a major collector between Kickerville Road and Blaine Road and a minor collector between Kickerville Road and Vista Drive. This roadway has two lanes of travel ranging between eight and eleven feet in width. Most of the shoulders are gravel and range from two feet to five feet in width. The section of road west of Jackson Road (which is currently classified as a local street) has three-foot wide paved shoulders. The posted speed limit on this roadway is 35 mph west of Blaine Road, 50 mph between Blaine Road and Valley View Road, and 45 mph east of Valley View. It connects Blaine Road (SR 548) to the west with Vista Drive and Bruce Road to the east. Jackson Road is a collector that has two lanes of travel ranging between nine and fifteen feet in width. Some portions of the roadway have gravel shoulders, ranging between two and three feet in width, and the other portions have paved shoulders ranging between four and seven feet wide. The posted speed limit on this roadway is 40 mph north of Grandview Road and 35 mph south of Grandview. It connects Birch Bay Drive to the north with Grandview Road and Henry Road to the south. Alderson Road is a two lane rural minor collector with eleven foot lanes and a posted speed limit of 35 mph. Along most sections of the roadway there are paved four -foot shoulders, with a small section near Birch Bay Drive having little to no shoulders. To the east it Transpo Group Page 10 529 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study January 2009 connects with the Blaine Road (SR 548) and to the west it connects to Birch Bay Drive. It provides local east -west connectivity in the center part of the Birch Bay UGA. Loomis Trail Road is a two-lane collector. It connects Blaine Road (SR 548) with Portal Way. It has 10 to 11 foot travel lanes and shoulders ranging in width from 0 to 6 feet. Its posted speed limit is 35 mph. Vista Drive serves as an extension of Bay Road between Bruce Road and Grandview Road. It has limited gravel shoulders and a posted speed limit of 45 mph. Other rural minor collectors in the study area include Olson Road and Bruce Road/Custer School Road. Loca/Access Roads The remaining routes are local access roads. These streets serve local abutting land uses and neighborhood traffic. They provide access between residential or business areas and the arterials. They generally have two travel lanes and 25-mph speed limits. Traffic Volumes Daily and PM peak hour traffic volumes were collected from a variety of sources including Whatcom County, Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), and Whatcom Council of Governments (WCOG). These traffic volumes were supplemented with existing PM peak hour turning movement counts conducted for the study update in 2006 and 2007. The existing PM peak hour volumes are shown in Figure 4. North -South Roadways I-5 is a north -south roadway with high PM peak hour volumes, particularly in the Birch Bay Area. According to WSDOT, weekday PM peak hour volumes (in both directions) range from approximately 2,200 to 2,700 vehicles per hour (vph). Northbound traffic accounts for approximately 50 to 70 percent of the traffic on I-5 during the PM peak hour. Northbound volumes during the PM peak hour are approximately 1,400 vph. Blaine Road (SR 548) is another north -south roadway with relatively significant PM peak hour volumes. A primary reason for the high volumes is that Blaine Road connects to I-5 and to the City of Blaine. The northern portion of Blaine Road between Birch Bay-Lynden Road and Drayton Harbor Road has a two-way PM peak hour traffic volume of 245 vph. North of Drayton Harbor Road the volumes increase to 635 vph showing the influence of travel from the Semiahmoo area of the City of Blaine. The southern portion of Blaine Road has a PM peak hour traffic volume of 230 vph. The Blaine Road corridor, within the study area, has a two-way PM peak hour traffic volume of 435 vph, 57 percent in the northbound direction and 43 percent southbound in the southbound direction. Portal Way is a roadway that runs parallel to I-5. Portal Way's intersections with east -west arterials experience relatively high traffic volumes. For example, the intersection of Portal Way and Birch Bay-Lynden Road has an entering PM peak hour volume of 1,150 vph. Between Loomis Trail Road and Grandview Road, the Portal Way corridor has a two-way PM peak hour traffic volume of 200 vph, 65 percent traveling in the northbound and 35 percent traveling in the southbound direction. Transpo Group Page 1 1 530 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study January 2009 Harborview Road runs north -south between Birch Bay Drive and Drayton Harbor Road. PM peak hour volumes range from 385 vph on the northern portion of the road to 700 vph south of Birch Bay-Lynden Road. Most of the vehicles on this southern section are southbound (58 percent) during the PM peak hour reflecting traffic accessing Birch Bay Drive. High traffic volumes in this location contribute to a decreased intersection level of service (LOS), as discussed below in the Traffic Operations section. Birch Bay Drive is a north -south roadway that follows the edge of the Birch Bay waterfront. The highest traffic volumes on Birch Bay Drive are found just south of Harborview Drive, with 410 vph. Just north of Alderson Road, the two-way PM peak hour volumes decrease to less than 200 vph. South of Alderson Road the volumes decline to less than 50 vph during the PM peak hour. Most other north -south roads in the study area have total two-way volumes of 150 vph or less. East-West Roadways Birch Bay-Lynden Road and Grandview Road (SR 548) provide access to and from the Birch Bay area from I-5. Therefore, they carry the highest traffic volumes (except for I-5) within the study area. Birch Bay-Lynden Road between Harborview Road and 1-5 has between 705 and 920 vph in the PM peak hour. In general, westbound traffic volumes represent approximately 60 percent of the total traffic during the PM peak hour. Grandview Road connects the Birch Bay area to I-5 south of Birch Bay-Lynden Road. Between Blaine Road and I-5 the two-way volumes range from 690 to 1,250 vph. Westbound traffic in the corridor represents only 20 to 40 percent of the total PM peak hour traffic. West of Blaine Road, the volumes in the corridor are significantly lower, ranging from less than 100 vph to up to 200 vph. The notable directional split of PM peak hour traffic along Grandview Road is directly related to the proximity to the Cherry Point Refinery, located south of the roadway. The majority of this traffic is oriented eastbound towards I-5. A third major east -west route is Bay Road. This roadway is classified as a major and minor rural collector. It carries between 145 and 175 vph between Blaine Road and Kickerville Road during the PM peak hour. Bay Road is an alternative connector to I-5. In general, westbound traffic volumes represents over 60 percent of the total traffic during the PM peak hour. Transpo Group Page 12 531 532 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study January 2009 Traffic Operations Traffic operations for an intersection can be described alphabetically with a range of levels of service (LOS). LOS A indicates free -flowing traffic and LOS F indicating extreme congestion and long vehicle delays. Whatcom County's Comprehensive Plan establishes the following level of service standards for roadway segments for purposes of transportation concurrency evaluation (see Table 1). Under state law, the county cannot approve any development that would generate enough traffic to cause the level of service on county arterials and collectors to fall below the adopted standards. Table 1. Whatcom County Level of Service Standards (Concurrency) Arterial Location Maximum V/C1 ratio Level of Service Standard Outside Urban Growth Area except Primary Routes 0.75 C Inside County Urban Growth Area (Birch Bay UGA) 0.80 C Inside City Urban Growth Area (Blaine UGA) 0.90 D 1. Volume -to -capacity State highways have a separate standard that is set by WSDOT and the Regional Transportation Planning Organization (RTPO). Highways of Statewide Significance (HSS) within urban areas, such as sections of I-5, have a LOS threshold of LOS D. In rural areas, the HSS LOS is set at LOS C (per state law, HSS are not subject to local concurrency requirements). The LOS for Highways of Regional Significance (HRS), such as Blaine Road (SR 548), is set at the LOS adopted by the local metropolitan planning organization (MPO). The MPO/RTPO for Whatcom County is the Whatcom Council of Governments (WCOG). Currently the LOS standard for HRS within urban areas is set at LOS D. Outside of urban areas, the HRS LOS standard is LOS C. WSDOT and WCOG plan to continue to discuss the LOS standards for state highways of regional significance and their application to local agency concurrency programs. SEPA is typically used to review impacts within the immediate and nearby vicinity, such as vehicular access points, frontage right-of-way improvements and nearby intersections or roadways. SEPA uses the "significant adverse environmental impact" standard as the threshold for triggering mitigation. SEPA can be based on level of service standards different than concurrency. Evaluating traffic operations at intersections provides a nationally recognized and locally accepted method of measuring traffic flow and congestion. Traffic operations analyses were conducted at the study area intersections to evaluate the current traffic characteristics of the existing roadway system. Individual intersection levels of service (LOS) were calculated at the study area intersections. The LOS analysis methodology was based on procedures identified in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2000), and was evaluated using Synchro v.6.0. Level of Service (LOS) is measured in total vehicle delay on the worst movement for unsignalized intersections. Appendix B summarizes the HCM level of service definitions. Table 2 summarizes the existing weekday PM peak hour LOS at study intersections. The detailed LOS worksheets are included in Appendix C. Transpo Group Page 14 533 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Stud January 2009 Table 2. 2007 Weekday PM Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service Urban or Intersection 2007 Intersection Rural Control] LOS2 Delay3 WM+ 1-5 NB Ramps / Birch Bay-Lynden Road Rural AWSC C 21.6 - 1-5 SB Ramps / Birch Bay-Lynden Road Rural TWSC D 33.9 SB 1-5 NB Ramps / Grandview Road (SR 548) Urban TWSC F 75.2 NB 1-5 SB Ramps / Grandview Road (SR 548) Urban TWSC D 31.4 SB Blaine Road (SR 548) / Drayton Harbor Road Urban TWSC B 13.6 EB Blaine Road (SR 548) / Loomis Trail Road Urban TWSC A 8.6 WB Blaine Road (SR 548) / Lincoln Road Urban TWSC A 10.0 EB Blaine Road (SR 548) / Anderson Road Urban TWSC A 9.7 EB Blaine Road (SR 548) / Birch Bay-Lynden Road Urban AWSC C 19.7 - Blaine Road (SR 548) / Alderson Road Urban TWSC B 11.2 EB Blaine Road (SR 548) / Bay Road Rural AWSC A 8.3 - Blaine Road (SR 548) / Grandview Road (SR 548) Rural TWSC E 38.0 SB Semiahmoo Parkway / Drayton Harbor Road Urban AWSC A 7.6 - Shintaffer Road / Semiahmoo Parkway (Lincoln Road) Urban TWSC B 13.1 SB Shintaffer Road / Anderson Road Urban TWSC A 9.2 WB Shintaffer Road / Birch Bay Drive Urban TWSC B 10.2 SB Harborview Road / Lincoln Road Urban TWSC B 12.9 EBL Harborview Road / Anderson Road Urban TWSC B 11.3 EB Harborview Road / Birch Bay-Lynden Road Urban AWSC C 16.0 - Harborview Road / Birch Bay Drive Urban AWSC A 9.2 - Birch Bay Drive / Alderson Road Urban AWSC A 7.6 - Birch Bay Drive / Jackson Road Urban TWSC A 9.2 WBL Jackson Road / Grandview Road Rural AWSC A 7.6 - Kickerville Road / Loomis Trail Road Rural TWSC A 8.7 NB Kickerville Road / Birch Bay-Lynden Road Rural TWSC C 17.4 SB Kickerville Road / Bay Road Rural TWSC B 10.6 NB Kickerville Road / Grandview Road (SR 548) Rural TWSC C 23.4 NB Portal Way / Loomis Trail Road Rural TWSC A 8.4 EB Portal Way / Birch Bay-Lynden Road Rural AWSC E 35.4 - Portal Way / Grandview Road (SR 548) Urban Signal B 13.3 0.54 Vista Drive / Grandview Road (SR 548) Urban AWSC C 19.1 - Valley View Road / Birch Bay-Lynden Road Rural TWSC B 11.7 SB 1 . Signal = Traffic Signal; AWSC = All -Way Stop Control; TWSC = Two -Way Stop Control. 2. Level of service, based on 2000 Highway Capacity Manual methodology. Shaded cells indicate intersections exceeding Whatcom County LOS standard: LOS D in urban locations (within city limits or UGA) & LOS C in rural locations (non-UGA). 3. Average delay in seconds per vehicle. 4. Worst movement reported for unsignalized intersections. Transpo Group Page 15 534 535 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study January 2009 As shown in Table 2, all but four study intersections are currently operating at the respective LOS standard or better during the weekday PM peak hour. The exceptions are: The location exceeding the urban LOS standard (LOS D): ■ I-5 NB Ramps / Grandview Road (SR 548) — operating at LOS F Locations exceeding the rural LOS standard (LOS C): ■ I-5 SB Ramps / Birch Bay Lynden Road — operating at LOS D ■ Blaine Road (SR 548) / Grandview Road (SR 548) — operating at LOS E ■ Portal Way / Birch Bay-Lynden Road— operating at LOS E Birch Bay-Lynden Road carries the highest traffic volumes in the area, contributing to the level of service deficiencies observed in existing conditions. The high traffic volumes during peak hours limit the gaps available for side street traffic to turn onto Birch Bay-Lynden Road. Traffic Safety Whatcom County provided traffic collision data for the roadways in the Birch Bay study area. This area has several notable traffic collision locations. Based on reported collision data between January 1, 2003, and December 31, 2005, there were a total of 213 collisions within the greater Birch Bay study area. Most of the collisions involved single vehicles running off the road or hitting fixed objects. There were three collisions involving bicycles and two involving pedestrians. There were three fatality collisions which resulted in four fatalities within the study area during this three year period. This section further describes the locations and types of collisions. There were many types of collisions in the Birch Bay area; however single vehicle/fixed object collisions were the majority. Another common collision type is multi-vehicle/rear-end collisions. This type of collision was more than 10 percent of total collisions. Both of these collision types had contributing circumstances of "exceeding reasonable safe speed." Over the three years of data collection, there were three traffic collisions that resulted in fatalities, approximately 1 percent of total collisions within the county. A collision in 2005 on Birch Bay Drive between Cottonwood Drive and Beachway Drive resulted in two fatalities. A collision in 2004 on Alderson Road, west of Blaine Road had one fatality, as did a collision on Kickerville Road, south of Arnie Road in 2005. Of the remaining 210 traffic collisions, there were 71 incidents that resulted in injuries and 139 collisions without injuries. The Birch Bay area includes a segment of Grandview Road (SR 548) classified by WSDOT as a high accident location (HAL); this segment of approximately 1,500 feet is located near the Kickerville Road intersection. HAT •s are typically evaluated to identify if there are particular issues that can be improved to reduce collisions. Based on the data available for the 2008 Study update, no accidents were reported within this HAL segment between 2003 and 2005. Transpo Group Page 17 536 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study January 2009 Roadway Segment Analysis Within the January 2003 and December 2005 time period, the section of roadway with the highest number of traffic collisions was Birch Bay-Lynden Road between Blaine Road (SR 548) and Kickerville Road; this section had nine collisions. The next highest number of collisions was on Birch Bay-Lynden Road between Valley View Road and Custer School Road, with eight collisions. Three other roadway sections also had eight collisions: Birch Bay-Lynden Road from Kickerville Road to Pierce Road; Birch Bay-Lynden Road from Harborview Road to Blaine Road (SR 548); and on Bay Road between Blaine Road (SR 548) and Bruce Road. Birch Bay-Lynden Road has two intersections with a deficient level of service,.which indicate high levels of peak hour traffic volumes (these intersections are at Portal Way and Harborview Road). Table 3 summarizes these roadway segments with collision locations. There were three pedestrian -related collisions within the January 2003-to-December 2005 time period. There were no fatalities, but each collision involved a vehicle hitting a pedestrian. Two of these incidents were on Birch Bay Drive: one took place approximately 480 feet northeast of the intersection with Jackson Road, and one occurred approximately 680 feet northwest of the intersection with Harborview Road. The third pedestrian -related collision on a roadway in the Birch Bay area was on Birch Bay-Lynden Road, approximately 160 feet west of the intersection with Blaine Road (SR 548). Table 3. Birch Bay Collision Locations: Roadways Primary Collision Number of Collisions Roadway Limits Type 2003 to 2005 Birch Bay-Lynden Road Blaine Road (SR 548) to Kickerville Road Fixed Object 9 Birch Bay-Lynden Road Valley View Road to Custer School Road Fixed Object Birch Bay-Lynden Road Kickerville Road to Percie Road Fixed Object Birch Bay-Lynden Road Harborview Road to Blaine Road (SR 548) Fixed Object Bay Road Blaine Road (SR 548) to Bruce Road Entering Driveway Source: Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Intersection Analysis The intersection in the Birch Bay area with the most traffic collisions between 2003 and 2005 is at Birch Bay-Lynden Road and Custer School Road, with seven collisions. This intersection is located just east of I-5. The majority of the accidents at this intersection involved traffic entering from the side street. The intersection with the next highest number of collisions is Birch Bay-Lynden Road and Portal Way with five collisions during three years. This intersection is located just west of I-5. It has relatively high traffic volumes, and operates at LOS E, indicating peak hour congestion and delays. Rear -end accidents were the primary type of collision. Table 4 lists these intersections. There were no pedestrian or bicycle related collisions at intersections in the Birch Bay area during the 2003 to 2005 time period. Transpo Group Page 18 537 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study Table 4. Birch Bay Collision Locations: Intersections January 2009 Number of Collisions Intersection Primary Collision Type 2003-2005 Birch Bay-Lynden Road / Custer School Road Entering at Angle 7 Birch Bay-Lynden Road / Portal Way Rear End 5 Source: Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Transit and Public Transportation The public transportation agency in the Birch Bay area is Whatcom Transportation Authority (WIA). WTA offers several services for local residents and visitors to make trips throughout the county. Typical fixed route service is available in the Birch Bay area, although its frequencies do not necessarily provide for regular commuting. WTA fills this gap with other services such as Rideshare or Dial -a -Ride. This section describes the existing transit service in Birch Bay, including transit routes, stops, ridership, and the County's ridesharing program. The following types of transit service are available in Birch Bay: ■ Fixed route service (Routes 55, 70X) ■ Dial -a -Ride, or Flex service ■ Paratransit ■ Rideshare, including vanpools Fixed Route Service WTA's fixed route service includes Route 70X, which is an express service between Birch Bay and Bellingham. The route has two stops in the Birch Bay area (at Birch Bay-Lynden Road and I-5 to serve Birch Bay Square and Grandview Road and I-5 to serve the Grandview Industrial Park). Route 70X makes four round trips per day on weekdays between 6:00 AM and approximately 7:00 PM. Saturday service for Route 70X is provided by Route 55, which is the other fixed route service. Route 55 serves as a connector route between Blaine, Birch Bay, Ferndale, and the Bellis Fair mall in Bellingham. This route makes three round trips per day, in addition to making "flex" deviations along the route for previously requested stops by individual users. Route 55 runs between 8:40 AM and approximately 4:00 PM on weekdays, and between 8:40 AM and approximately 6:00 PM on Saturdays. See Figure 6 for a map of these routes. WTA tracks the ridership on these two fixed routes. Ridership on Route 55 is tracked at each bus stop and also by travel direction. Recent average monthly ridership data (March to June 2007) show that northbound ridership to Birch Bay includes 30 passengers boarding and 158 passengers alighting. Southbound ridership to Bellingham includes 183 passengers boarding and 23 passengers alighting. This pattern reflects the attractions of jobs and major commercial land uses in Bellingham. The average monthly ridership on Route 70X includes 536 southbound passengers that are boarding, and no southbound passengers that are alighting (Southbound passengers who Transpo Group Page 19 538 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study January 2009 board in Blaine do not typically alight in Birch Bay). For northbound passengers, there are 158 boarding and 480 alighting. The details of both routes' ridership are outlined in Table 5. Table 5. Existing Transit Ridership for WTA Routes 55 and 70X 2007 Average Monthly Ridership, Route On Off Route SS Northbound (to Birch Bay/Blaine) 30 158 Southbound (to Bellingham) 183 23 Total 213 181 Route 70X Northbound (to Blaine) 158 480 Southbound (to Bellingham) 536 0 Total 694 480 1. 2007 (March to June) WrA average monthly ridership Dial -a -Ride Service WTA's Dial -a -Ride service is provided for users in the Birch Bay and Blaine areas. This service provides local service in the area, and also connects to Route 70X. According to the WTA Six -Year Strategic Service Plan, Dial -a -Ride service during the middle of the day will serve as Route 55, a local service route. When Route 70X is in the area, the Dial -a -Ride service will continue to provide connections to the fixed route service. The average monthly ridership in 2006 for the Dial -a -Ride service was 606 passengers. Paratransit Service WTA's paratransit service is provided for those users who are not able to use the traditional fixed route services. These users are typically people with disabilities or seniors. The federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) provides standards for paratransit, which includes a policy that passenger capacity constraints are not allowed. WTA strives to meet the demand of all eligible individuals. Transpo Group Page 20 539 ��R�� A:34ct "sP Kt yp�� 'ram• �� �;i-���.,��.t.�.1.I S'{�. �.u1 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study January 2009 Rideshare Service WTA's Rideshare program is intended for those users who are not served well by the fixed route service, or desire a more flexible commuting option. There are area employers in the general study area that must comply with the State's Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) program. WTA assists by providing employer outreach programs. Non -motorized Facilities Birch Bay's existing transportation system includes relatively limited facilities for pedestrians and bicyclists. In the areas where sidewalks or bicycle lanes are not available, pedestrians must use the roadway shoulders and bicyclists use the shoulders or ride in the main travel lanes. Figure 7 illustrates where paved and unpaved shoulders exist on all classes of streets within the Birch Bay Urban Growth Area (UGA). According to Whatcom County road standards, newly constructed rural arterials and major collectors should have eight foot shoulders and a drainage ditch. Neighborhood collectors should have 6 foot shoulders and a drainage ditch. Local roads should have a four foot gravel shoulder and drainage ditch. Table 6. Whatcom County Road Standards for Shoulder Width Arterial Classification Shoulder Width, Rural Principal and Minor Arterials 8 Rural Major Collectors 8 Rural Minor Collectors 6 Neighborhood Collectors 6 Local Streets 4 1 . Measured in feet. Source: Whatcom County Road Standards (2004) The most significant roadway that has substantial shoulders is Grandview Road (SR 548) between Blaine Road and I-5. This state highway has paved shoulders that are at least six feet wide on both sides of the street. Another major east -west roadway with paved shoulders is Birch Bay-Lynden Road between Harborview Road and Blaine Road (SR 548). Few north - south roadways include shoulders that are at least six feet wide. One that does is on Harborview Road between Anderson Road and Drayton Harbor Road. A large portion of Semiahmoo Drive also has six foot wide unpaved shoulders. Transpo Group Page 22 541 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study January 2009 Travel Forecasts & Alternatives Evaluation Travel Demand Forecasting Model A travel demand forecasting model was used to assist in defining future transportation needs. The Whatcom Council of Governments (WCOG) travel demand forecasting model was used as.a basis for developing the Birch Bay area travel demand forecasting model. The WCOG model is hosted on an EMME/2 software platform and is calibrated to a 2005 base year. The model forecasts weekday PM peak hour traffic volumes based on the 2027 land use forecasts. The WCOG travel demand forecasting model divides the Whatcom County into Transportation Analysis Zones (TAZs) which are relatively similar areas in terms of land use and travel characteristics. The TAZs contain the land use data from which the traffic using the transportation system is generated. The land use data is summarized for the Birch Bay area in Appendix B. The original WCOG model represented the Birch Bay area by 30 TAZs. These TAZs were further refined as part of this study into 116 TAZs to provide more detail in evaluating travel demands along specific corridors and intersections. The zones external to Birch Bay area were not changed. The transportation network represents the local area road system within the model. The WCOG model, being a strategic planning model, includes all arterial and collector streets in addition to the state highways. In the Birch Bay area, collector roads and some local streets were included to more accurately represent travel patterns. Each roadway is divided into segments based on the location of key intersections and major driveways. Road segments are coded by functional classification, number of lanes, speed, and capacity. Trip tables represent the travel among the traffic analysis zones and are estimated from the land uses. Trip generation equations are used to convert land use into travel demand. Trips are generated for different purposes including work, college, school, recreation, shopping, and others. Trip distribution is the other basic tool for developing trip tables. Trips are distributed using a gravity model that allocates zone -to -zone interchanges based on travel time and distances. The model assignment results were compared to actual traffic counts and travel patterns to calibrate and validate the model to base year conditions. The calibration/validation process involves refuting and reviewing the model to better represent existing conditions. The Birch Bay area model was calibrated for the PM peak hour (using recent counts) within generally accepted standards for transportation models and thus provides a basis for developing and evaluating future travel demands. Existing and Forecast Land Use Land use and socioeconomic data were used to develop traffic forecasts for the study area. The WCOG model provided the basis for developing the base year (2005) and forecast year (2027) land use. The land use data and forecasting methodology are documented in . Appendix C. Table 7 summarizes the 2005 and 2027 total number of dwelling units and employees for the Birch Bay UGA and City of Blaine with UGA. Transpo Group Page 24 543 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study January 2009 Table 7. Existing and Forecast Land Use Land Use Type and Area 2005 2027 Percentlncrease Households, Birch Bay UGA City of Blaine with UGA 4,087 1,900 7,629 6,089 87% 220% Total 5,987 13,718 129% Emn/ovment� Birch Bay UGA 593 1,100 86% City of Blaine with UGA 2,876 4,888 70% Total 3,470 5,988 73% Source: Transpo Group 2007 1 . Households measured in number of dwelling units. 2. EmDlovment measured in number of emDlovees. Within the study area, the number of households is forecast to grow by approximately 7,700 dwelling units, an almost 130 percent increase from 2005 to 2027. The largest numbers of new dwelling units are expected to be built in the City of Blaine and its UGA. Approximately 4,200 new dwelling units are estimated to be constructed by 2027. Existing and forecast employment within the study area are also summarized in Table 8. The total number of employees for the study area is forecasted to increase by 73 percent, from 3,470 to 5,988 employees. Most of the employment growth will occur in the City of Blaine and its UGA, approximately 2,000 new employees. The employment in the Birch Bay area is forecast to nearly double by 2027, an increase of over 500 new employees. Baseline Transportation Improvements and Analysis City, County, and state transportation improvements projects likely to be funded and built by 2027 were reviewed and included as appropriate in the future baseline model. The improvements were defined based on the City of Blaine and Whatcom County Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and the WSDOT Highway Systems Plan. In the Birch Bay area the planned improvements included the Lincoln Road extension and widening between Shintaffer Road and Blaine Road (SR 548). A new connector road between Birch Point Road and Lincoln Road at Shintaffer Road also was assumed completed by 2027. Table 8 provides a description of the major baseline transportation improvements included in the model. Table 8. 2027 Baseline Transportation Improvements Roadway Project Limits Project Description Shintaffer Road and Blaine Widen between Shintaffer Road and Morningside Drive Lincoln Road Road (SR 548) and construct the extension from Morningside Drive to Blaine Road (SR 548) Birch Point Connector Birch Point Road and Construct a road connection between Birch Point Road Lincoln Road and Lincoln Road at Shintaffer Road Transpo Group Page 25 544 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study January 2009 Traffic volume growth in the Birch Bay area between 2005 and 2027 was approximately 90 percent in the PM peak hour causing relatively high growth percentages along the study area corridors. Figure 8 illustrates the growth in traffic volumes between 2005 and 2027. The increase in traffic volumes during the PM peak hour is a direct result of the increase in residential land uses particularly along Semiahmoo Drive thus causing more home -based - work trips which occur during the peak periods. This large percent increase in traffic volumes is still well below the capacity for most of the roadways within the study area. Traffic volumes exceeded capacities along Birch Bay-Lynden Road and Grandview Road (SR 548). The large increase in traffic volumes (approximately 60 percent) is expected to degrade the traffic operations of I-5/Birch Bay-Lynden Road and the I-5/Grandview Road (SR 548) interchanges below county and regional level of service standards. Volumes exceeding capacity are also observed along Blaine Road (SR 548) and Drayton Harbor Road. These result from traffic shifting from the I-5/Birch Bay-Lynden Road interchange and the I-5/Grandview Road (SR 548) interchange to I-5/south Blaine interchange (exit 274). Much of this traffic is generated by the planned households along Semiahmoo Drive and within the Blaine UGA. The analysis of the baseline scenario indicated that the most critical areas for congestion in the future would be along Birch Bay-Lynden Road between I-5 interchange and Harborview Road and along Grandview Road (SR 548) between the I-5 interchange and Vista Drive. It was found that improving traffic operations at these locations consequently reduces the traffic using the I-5/south Blaine interchange (exit 274), thus resolving capacity issues along Blaine Road (SR 548) and Drayton Harbor Road observed under the baseline scenario. Alternatives Analysis The evaluation of the baseline travel forecasts indicated a need for additional east -west capacity and circulation options within the Birch Bay area. Options to address these issues ranged from adding more capacity to Birch Bay-Lynden Road and Grandview Road to extending Lincoln Road. These alternative roadway improvements were evaluated using the County's travel demand model. Separate model scenarios were created for each alternative to evaluate the shifts in traffic due to the proposed roadway improvement project or group of projects. The alternative analysis used the 2027 baseline model as a starting point. The alternatives analysis included an evaluation of the scenarios listed in Table 9. Table 9. 2027 Model Scenarios Evaluated Scenario Scenario Description Birch Bay-Lynden Road Improvement . Add turn lanes at the intersections with the 1-5 ramps. Scenarios • Widen Birch Bay to five lanes between Harborview Road and Portal Way. Grandview Road (SR 548) • Add turn lanes at the intersections with the 1-5 ramps. Improvement Scenarios • Widen Grandview Road (SR 548) to five lanes between Vista Drive and 1-5. Transpo Group Page 26 545 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study January 2009 • Alternatives analysis was performed with capacity improvements assumed at the Birch Bay Lynden Road and Grandview Road (SR 548). These improvements assume the addition of turn lanes at the I-5 interchange intersections with Birch Bay-Lynden Road and Grandview Road (SR 548). Capacity improvements were also evaluated along Birch Bay-Lynden Road between Portal Way and I-5 and for Grandview Road (SR 548) between Vista Drive and I-5. In addition, a two-way left turn (TWLT) lane was evaluated along Birch Bay-Lynden Road between Portal Way and Harborview Road. The purpose of the TWLT lane is to alleviate friction issues between through traffic and local traffic. Traffic volumes for the baseline scenario are illustrated in Figure 8. The alternatives analyses illustrate the need for increased capacities along Birch Bay-Lynden Road and Grandview Road (SR 548) west of I-5. These corridors need to be widened to accommodate the traffic generated by the new residential developments during the peak periods. The transportation system recommendations are illustrated in more detail in the following section. Transpo Group Page 27 546 X X 0 v 0 c0 0 Ci 0 O o_ 1-mmm N N O t 8f R% c ti N Imou Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study January 2009 Transportation System Improvement Recommendations The transportation system improvement recommendations provide a long-range strategy for the Birch Bay UGA to address current and forecast transportation issues and needs. Transportation system improvements are required to accommodate the projected growth in population and employment within the Birch Bay UGA. The transportation system improvement recommendations are based upon analyses of the existing transportation system, forecasts of future travel demands, anticipated availability of funding resources, and the desire of the Birch Bay community to create an efficient transportation system that puts a priority on community livability. The Study builds on the countywide policies and standards, while shaping transportation goals and vision for the Birch Bay area. The transportation systems plan primarily focuses on streets and highway improvements because they serve most of the travel needs for the area. The streets and highways serve general traffic, freight, transit, ridesharing, pedestrians, and bicyclists. Therefore, the Study also provides the framework for other travel modes in the community, including pedestrian, bicycle, and transit modes. Streets and Highways Streets and highways serving Birch Bay provide the basic transportation system for the Birch Bay UGA and surrounding areas. They also serve other travel modes including pedestrians, bicycles, and transit. The street and highway section identifies the functional roadway system and improvement projects and programs needed to maintain and expand the transportation system. Roadway Functional Classification Roadway functional classification provides a hierarchy of roadways. These classifications provide a guide for future development of the Birch Bay area's roadway system. Arterial roadways serve higher traffic volumes and may have limited access points while local roadways provide neighborhood circulation and local access. Collectors are a classification between arterial and local access roads, typically connecting residential neighborhoods with community centers and facilities. Functional classifications for roadways in Whatcom County are based on the Federal Function Classification map, which was last updated in 2004. Because Birch Bay is not considered an urban area based on federal criteria, the arterials and collectors in the area are designated as rural rather than urban on the federal map. However, for purposes of determining appropriate road design standards, Whatcom County Public Works applies urban standards to collectors and arterials within the Birch Bay Urban Growth areas. This acknowledges and supports the need for urban -level improvements (curb, gutter, and sidewalk) within an area designated for urban densities. In addition to the rural -urban designations, further changes in the functional classification of some roadways are needed to support future demand for local circulation and regional access to the Birch Bay area as the area transitions from rural to urban designations and densities. Transpo Group Page 29 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study Transportation Improvement Projects January 2009 Based on an evaluation of existing and forecast traffic volumes, traffic operations, safety, and circulation needs, a recommended list of transportation improvement projects and programs were defined. The project list is organized into the following categories: ■ Intersection Projects ■ New Roadway and Major Widening or Reconstruction Projects ■ Minor Widening and Reconstruction Projects ■ State Route Projects ■ Other Mode Figure 9 and Table 10 identify each of the projects and their locations. Table 10 also provides a brief description of each project including the project limits. The table identifies projects that are currently part of the County's Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). This highlights the projects that are currently identified for planning, design, or construction. A project identification number is provided for each project that is referenced in Figure 9. Planning level cost estimates are also included for each project. The cost estimates were prepared based on typical per unit costs, functional classification, and level of improvement. The cost estimates include allowances for right-of-way acquisition based on generalized needs to meet the County's adopted roadway standards. Estimated costs for several improvements on state routes were developed jointly with Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). A relative priority (high, medium, and low) was established for each project. The priority reflects the relative need for the projects to enhance the Birch Bay area transportation system and provides guidance in implementing the respective improvements. State Route Projects I-5 provides the primary regional connection to the Birch Bay area. To the north, I-5 connects the Birch Bay area to the U.S./Canada border. To the south, I-5 connects to Bellingham and the central Puget Sound region. SR 548 also provides for regional travel from the Birch Bay area to I-5 from the north and east. The Washington State Highways Systems Plan (HSP) is the element of Washington's Transportation Plan that addresses the state highway system. The 2007-2026 HSP does not identify specific improvements within the study area. The HSP calls for an Interstate Master Plan that would identify improvements to optimize capacity and safety on the interstate highway system. I-5 Interchanges — The Study identifies improvements to two interchanges serving the Birch Bay area. Improvements are needed to fix existing operational issues in the near term and to serve anticipated growth in the long term. Transpo Group Page 30 549 I- E o ga w $ = o Eaa m V 3 1 9 o`mm m 3 lua o m Ev9 I �2 yN i� J IE i. € g I� o j Q ` U IX I .X �X iX p0 qq d' c m I A. x a X IX �x X X :X X X X m IC L Ix L xx Ix L !x I I W x �IL u 'o I to I to3 I IS QQ S o QQ IS — E O � m� W m C IL z° I �o E c m E $ E E '� Ic E e �m t IEa � 9 w P ts m O Si E= �° "3 �nm E� ;m� m _ c �3 L Ica a E 2 .c' c �o m 9 n Ti Syy Iq �p o = �',a� Ec = a2 In.$Ti' mm fw IL a'm o Tim 'Ei= mm oc E- 'u .Q `' — Imo° mc$cE °�I� TU ip IE i' '" m3oz�� 2i� :r,E `s �g=o 2 o� Igo "2��f1"'Bo IEO ? E !_ 9 c9 �E • cc�E' oc�=13W o� u.w=_ U.S �= Em 3 E"_�=m iU°o ¢m3mlo aoa E c E E T� a i m m la E �Ti I � < am ° o m Imm ` IS — dmaS mrc jmm Imo m 3 3 m Im lY a rc .m '•2 rc I I I� ffi Ig m im lap rcE m _ m m e m m a` � m w = GAS m K m K .12 I I b i 550 ! I I I I I I E V : wE�_� ICE I ! `�6� m9a Im I I j o�m cog m I I I I p is m X X X X IX X X X X X X X :X X X X X q� U C � N I I IL UPX I X X I I X I X X IX IX n I I X ! I IX X o la a I a I€ 'w Im I FiF IS Io to o EE u'» Iw iw w ;» N» & to q Iw I I I 2 Z Ili lZ z Z 2 2 = 2 IZ b is 12 L a m a IW 'W 4 - 9 - Ss _ Ic _ _ �a W _ W Ic Ls _1= — p _ E I— iE I> IE iG Iw o a Wm e Im 3$ pi _m, Mg IE .gg i.. 'E tj mt _ =.8- o ! o'o h'o m o g ! Z s to o IE.I.o 2 , m 18-EE 12 0 8-EE o o IS o 2 2 112 1�-0 IE 18 Eo IQ O 8a Z $°sEE J o iE ;m 1-2 ! I- co o o 12T og I'o I-° 2p - 2m 2n s- 'Ti 1° Iery ° S. 2E I-. 2m 12c - o 9c o °c ° 20 lJ b 8 333 0 IE $ l°c 9c _66 m� m '9 lag c Ima 0� oa wm mm ;2e os 12_ I¢ HE 5� ;24 2@ e E g E E °° E o 09 (E ,; !� B . E E Irc N a u z u 00 a: E d H ¢ m s m _a a m l� m lam' m — n God w C m a' m Irc ei �. �° �aa im E m to m E E _° a g I� o �� as Bg r� E o'g m c� lA z s is E o $ is s ° ; om 'sue a;a a.a mA rc Iq� B rc Ira g mm i =¢ i¢ m� m .€.E o o mrc �rc Ism a°m I=y c7m aoc� m Ima° mK ;m 2C mc� I I I I I I I I Ig c m I Igo 4 ,8 3 13 la Irc io la I I ' ie m !m I Im I� 13 3 i3 I Im I~ L 18 p I I 13 m O im to Io a y a g la { 'm g x Ix I' IS J IE Im` It vl 8 S I s0 6 g d lam I i ! Q a 551 I m m i`om d 0 o S'°E c ° m� E IU �iU E c a a IE Am I I 1 ImD €vm m— o 0 ¢�=ga' to icon Im m cEUcl� 000m� I i I I I i I � l l j i x x a i I I I i I I - 0 9 Z X x Ix (x I I x Ix i � I i 1 m m e c S c 1 i �x x x j x �x x IL j I � ax U x x x Ix I ix x Ix ix I jx I ix �x x x x I m m Iv o, iE m I= �o E i; � I I o a x x la I2 Im I� x v �� o, x la a ':� x a '� Im E i Ix Iv I°i x a i u 01 o o . o le io �? i< !z Io I„'- IQ I� a loo Q Q m LL m F a w z° Z I Iz z° I z° I I° iz I I Iz° z° iz° j j Iz° I I I° ;z I ° z I I Iz° I IO Iz I I 1 jz I z z° i c = y z° z° ! Iz° z° z° I Iz ;z z iz° Iz° z° �z° iz I y iz Iz z° iz I IL IL a I= - E .� t - m lo.o -E m iE m e mD y.E o m0 m� Im- Iv E ' IE - I3 '� lic 3 3 E 3 i'2c .a c0 rvN c0 mN Ism i-m° it 13 �w I� iA I j� �-3°o 3 ° -�c �3 I Nm c0 F jB I� iE jE IEc om m !�dm�a3 im= _t m E _ me it E'E° :g% EE .o '$cm p'3 E Im jac @c 3„ -m -.L !ts �c imc �'m I- - I� io my @� lu -1O ;.cm E`O c- �m 2 m 2 v 2 -° Icm i2 lm m ` I m hm iN -> > cm IVm a i¢- 8 m lb EN m i Iv iU UaE _a J p e I ! a a c m �� m m Ira a in m im m �= 1= _ me m !E is ig is i= _ _ m'5 U Ic iw 3 O T ;m m IZ E. m :a s m q - m A Ie lO I� a 10 -6 U d iY _I'El m m iA m j I� g is Ic 13 iq I� �� a !r? a y 2 2 Im N m C J 'y c a .m a m m y m I la a 10 ° s B IL � I— Ic is 3 3 v F m m d ¢ 1 w ;a t m m m F.!m Im InB Im K I imB m x Im AB !m ¢ Ism m U IAa m m` O �" m i7 s c9 h Is U i� ;`7 IL e¢ SS :a 'imm i(D m Al c9 -� a m _ LL I I I I O O � a m a Q 300W N31410 LLO a 552 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study January 2009 Improvements to the I-5/Birch Bay-Lynden Road interchange (projects S-11, S-12) are identified in the Study as high and medium priorities respectively. Improvements to this interchange have been identified to meet near and long term needs. Project S-11 will improve operations in the near term by redesigning the ramp intersections with turn lanes and installing a traffic signal, when future traffic volumes warrant. Project S-12 will provide a complete reconstruction of the interchange. Improvements to the I-5/Grandview interchange (projects S-13, S-14) are also identified for the near and long term needs. Similar to project S-11, project S-13 is a high priority and is identified to improve operations at the ramp intersections by adding turn lanes and installing a traffic signal when future traffic volumes warrant. Project S-14 is a medium priority and will provide a complete interchange reconstruction to meet long-range forecast needs. Blaine Road (SR 548) — Improvements are identified for Blaine Road both north and south of Birch Bay-Lynden Road. North of Birch Bay-Lynden Road, the Study calls for reconstructing Blaine Road, from I-5 to Birch Bay-Lynden Road (projects S-1, S-2). The improvement projects would add shoulders for non -motorized travel. Intersection improvements are identified at Drayton Harbor Road and Loomis Trail Road (projects S-5, S-6). These improvements include adding turn lanes and traffic signals or roundabouts when future traffic volumes warrant. The Study also identifies the replacement of two bridges in this corridor, the California Creek bridge and the Dakota Creek bridge (projects S-8, S-9). South of Birch Bay-Lynden Road, the Study identifies reconstructing Blaine Road from Birch Bay-Lynden Road to Grandview Road (projects S-3, S-4). The section of Blaine Road north of Bay Road is within the Urban Growth Area for Birch Bay and as such would be reconstructed to WSDOT's standards, adding shoulders for non -motorized travel. South of Bay Road, Blaine Road should be constructed per WSDOT's rural collector standards. Intersections improvements at Birch Bay-Lynden Road and Grandview Road are also identified in the Study (projects S-15, S-7). A potential roundabout at the Blaine Road (SR 548)/Grandview Road (SR 548) intersection is currently being discussed by WSDOT as part of a developer funded improvement. Though the transportation planning study does not identify the intersection of Blaine Road and Alderson Road as falling below LOS standards within the study period, planned intensive land uses at the intersection may require intersection improvements as mitigation under SEPA at the time of development. Grandview Road (SR 548) — Two intersection improvements, in addition to those identified at the I-5 interchange and at Blaine Road (SR 548), are identified in the Study. Improvements to the intersections of Grandview Road (SR 548) at Kickerville Road and at Vista Drive include the installation of turn lanes and roundabout or traffic signal when future traffic volumes warrant. The improvement at Vista Drive/Grandview Road (SR 548) is a high priority because it serves traffic to/from the Birch Bay UGA to I-5 via Bay Road. However, the HSP does identify I-5 from Grandview Road to the City of Blaine as a "solution that requires further analysis" as the existing capacity will not be sufficient for future traffic volumes. Intersection Projects Improvements to intersections along County maintained arterials serving the Birch Bay area are needed to resolve existing and future deficiencies, primarily along Birch Bay-Lynden Road. This roadway serves as the main east -west arterial, connecting the Birch Bay area to I- Transpo Group Page 35 554 Birch Bay Transportation Planning January 2009 5 and the rest of the region. Intersection improvements along this corridor will improve safety and operations by adding turn lanes at key locations and installing traffic signals or roundabouts when future traffic volumes warrant. The Study identifies three high priority intersection improvements at Birch Bay-Lynden Road at Portal Way, Birch Bay-Lynden Road at Harborview Road, and Birch Bay Drive at Harborview Road. New Roadways and Major Widening or Reconstruction Projects Several new roadways and major widening projects are identified in the Study to address existing deficiencies and support future growth. This category of projects includes upgrading and major widening of roadways to County standards to provide turn lanes at major access locations. Improvements to non -motorized facilities, such as roadway shoulders, are also identified. Birch Bay-Lynden Road Widening — Birch Bay-Lynden Road serves as the primary east - west arterial, connecting Birch Bay to I-5. In addition to the intersection improvements identified above, the Study calls for widening the roadway to meet rural major collector standards from Portal Way to the UGA boundary just east of Blaine Road (SR 548) and to urban principal arterial standards west to Harborview Road. These projects would improve facilities for non -motorized travel by paving roadway shoulders and/or adding sidewalks or separated pathways. In addition, the project would include widening to accommodate turn lanes at major access locations. This will allow safer and easier access for left turning vehicles along Birch Bay-Lynden Road. Lincoln Road Extension and Improvement — To complete an alternative east -west corridor north of Birch -Bay Lynden Road, an extension of Lincoln Road between Harborview Road and Blaine Road (SR 548) is planned and funded for construction. In addition to extending the roadway, the project will improve Lincoln Road from Shintaffer Road to Blaine Road (SR 548) to urban minor arterial standards, including construction of two roundabouts at Harborview Road and Blaine Road. The project also includes a separated pathway for non -motorized travel. Birch Point Connector Road — A new connection between Birch Bay Drive and Lincoln Road is also a key new collector route serving the northern part of the Birch Bay UGA. When fully constructed, this new roadway will provide improved mobility and an alternative to Birch Bay Drive for east -west traffic to/from the residential growth anticipated in the Birch Bay and Blaine UGAs. The project includes realigning the segment of Shintaffer Road south of Lincoln Road and constructing a new intersection at Lincoln Road. Part of the road is being funded and constructed by a developer. The remaining section will be a County project. Harborview Road — Improvements are identified for Harborview Road from Birch Bay Drive to Drayton Harbor Road. The section of Harborview Road from Birch Bay Drive to Birch Bay-Lynden Road would be improved to reflect the existing and future demands of Birch Bay traffic traveling to I-5 via Birch Bay-Lynden Road. The section of Harborview Road from Birch Bay-Lynden Road to Drayton Harbor Road would be improved to urban collector standards. Both of these projects would include improve facilities for non - motorized travel. Transpo Group Page 36 555 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study January 2009 Commercial Area Circulation Roads In addition to specific improvements identified above, the Study calls for construction of new circulation roads within the planned Birch Bay UGA commercial area between Birch Bay-Lynden Road and Alderson Road. These new roadways would provide improved access and circulations to future development anticipated for this area, as well as help maintain safety and operations of adjacent arterials, collectors, and state highways. Minor Widening and Reconstruction Projects Improvements are also needed on other roadways serving the Birch Bay area. This category of projects includes minor widening of roadways to add shoulders and improve non - motorized facilities. Birch Bay Drive — With its proximity to the waterfront, Birch Bay Drive serves as a primary non -motorized route within the Birch Bay UGA. The Birch Bay Drive Pedestrian Facility, part of the Birch Bay Shoreline Enhancement Project, is designed and identified in the County's six -year Transportation Improvement Program. This project would improve Birch Bay Drive roadway and provide separate facilities for pedestrians and bicyclists. The 2000 Birch Bay Economic Development Action Plan emphasized the need for improved pedestrian and bicycle facilities along Birch Bay Drive as part of the community's economic development strategy. A year round speed limit of 20 to 25 mph is recommended. Specific changes to speed limit should be considered with community input. Loomis Trail Road — Loomis Trail Road serves as an east -west connector between Portal Way and Blaine Road, northeast of the Birch Bay UGA. The Study identifies improvements to reconstruct Loomis Trail Road to rural major collector standards. The project includes paved shoulders for non -motorized users. Maintenance and Operations Programs A systematic program for maintaining the existing and future transportation infrastructure is critical to a safe and efficient transportation system. Elements of a maintenance and operations program for the Birch Bay area should include a systematic evaluation of pavement conditions on arterial and local roadways, signage, sight distance (such as vegetation blocking sight lines), and impacts of parking on safety and operations. Other elements should include regular monitoring and servicing of traffic control devices, such as traffic signals and flashing beacons. In addition, the maintenance and operations program should include a periodic evaluation of speed limits on facilities based on functional classification, design, and current roadway conditions. The speed evaluation should consider elements such as geometric design, actual travel speeds, intersection control, traffic safety, and possible impacts on adjacent corridors or neighborhood streets. Transpo Group Page 37 556 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study January 2009 Public Transportation and Transportation Demand Management Public transit and travel demand management (TDM) programs are important components in an integrated and comprehensive transportation system. These programs build on regional programs with refinements to reflect the specific needs of the Birch Bay area. Public Transit The Study identifies two transit related improvements. A new park & ride lot is identified for a location serving Birch Bay, Semiahmoo, and the City of Blaine. No specific site is identified for the park & ride, however potential locations along the Harborview, Birch Bay- Lynden Road, or Grandview Road corridors should be evaluated. A study is recommended to evaluate future transit demand and a potential future park & ride lot location. In addition, the Study identifies increased fixed route transit service between Birch Bay and the destinations of Blaine, Ferndale, and Bellingham as a future need. Transportation Demand Management Program In addition to improving the transit system, reducing travel demand through transportation demand management (TDM) strategies can supplement other efforts in reducing peak hour congestion within the Birch Bay UGA. TDM programs consist of measures for reducing peak hour single occupancy vehicle travel that are primarily focused on larger employers. The Washington Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Law (RCW 70.94.521) requires TDM performance targets for employers with over 100 employees. Currently there are no affected worksites within the Birch Bay area. Whatcom County has a draft CTR plan that is scheduled for adoption in 2008. The study supports TDM strategies in the County's UGAs. These strategies focus on the integration of land use and transportation planning, as well as encouraging non -motorized travel. Pedestrian and Bicycle Systems A well connected non -motorized transportation system encourages healthy recreational activities, reduces vehicle travel demand, and enhances safety within the community. The projects included in Table 10 included pedestrian and bicycle facilities as part of the identified roadway improvements. In many cases, the proposed improvements include the addition or enhancement of roadway shoulders to accommodate non -motorized transportation within the Birch Bay. Included in these projects is the Birch Bay Drive Pedestrian Facility project. The pedestrian system within the Birch Bay area is comprised of sidewalks, walkways, trails, and roadway shoulders. Within the UGAs, the County desires to have roadways improved to urban standards, which could include sidewalks or other types of pedestrian walkway facilities. Pedestrian facilities should be located along streets that provide access and connectivity to the commercial businesses, residential areas, parks, schools, public buildings, and transit stops within the Birch Bay UGA. Enhanced roadway shoulders outside the UGA will improve safety for pedestrian travel in those areas. Transpo Group Page 38 557 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study January 2009 Within the Birch Bay area, the bicycle system is comprised of mostly roadways. Many of the roadways within the study area have deficient roadway shoulders or are without shoulders altogether. The major improvements for bicycle travel will be the addition or enhancement of roadway shoulders. An important component of the bicycle system is completion of the Coast Millennium Trail through Birch Bay, providing a bicycling link from the Canadian border to Bellingham and farther south. A portion of the trail has been completed south of Semiahmoo Parkway. There are several proposed non -motorized facilities throughout the County, a few of which are in the Birch Bay area. Proposed non -motorized facilities in the study area include: ■ Bicycle lane along Semiahmoo Parkway ■ Off -road trail that would connect to a bicycle lane along Birch Bay Drive ■ Off -road trail to continue south of the Birch Bay Drive bicycle lane ■ Bicycle lane along Birch Bay-Lynden Road ■ Bicycle lane along Portal Way ■ Portion of the Coast Millennium Trail that begins near Alderson Road and Birch Bay Drive and continues south toward Ferndale ■ Bicycle lane along Birch Bay Drive Transpo Group Page 39 558 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study January 2009 Project Cost Summary Table 10 summarizes the list of improvement projects and programs. Planning level cost estimates are included for each project and program item. In addition to Whatcom County projects, the improvement program includes projects that are under the jurisdiction or lead of WSDOT. Table 11 provides a summary of the project cost estimates, by jurisdiction and improvement category. Table 11. 20-Year Project Cost Summary Improvement Category Costs Capital Improvements Birch Bay Area State Highway Improvements $63,400,000 Birch Bay Area County Arterial Improvements $85,350,000 Subtotal $748,750,000 State Highway Improvement Cost per Year $3,170,000 County Arterial Improvement Cost per Year $4,267,500 County Pro.. ra Maintenance and operations (Overlays) Cost per Year] $160,000 Maintenance and operations (Overlays) 20-Year Cost $3,200,000 County Cost Subtotal $88, 550, 000 County Cost per Year $4,427,500 Total Project Cost $151,950,000 Total Project Costs per Year $7,597,500 1. Based on Birch Bay Incorporation Feasibility Study, March 2008 Over $150 million will be needed to fully fund the Birch Bay area's indentified needs through 2027. Over 95 percent of the County related costs will be needed in the form of capital improvements to upgrade the County arterial system serving the Birch Bay area. The Study also identifies over $3 million for maintenance and operations. An average of over $7.5 million per year would be required to fully fund the Birch Bay area's transportation needs by 2027. Approximately 43 percent of the $148.75 million in capital transportation improvements is needed for improvements to state routes. Of the $63.4 million in state route improvements, approximately $7 million is needed for near term interchange improvements at I-5. The I-5 interchange improvements include signal and channelization improvements at the ramp intersections at Grandview Road and Birch Bay-Lynden Road. Long term needs at these locations call for the reconstruction of the interchanges themselves. The remaining $56.5 million in state highway improvements would be on along SR 548 with a significant portion of the costs associated with the Dakota Creek bridge replacement project, estimated at $13 million. The highest cost for arterial improvements includes the Lincoln Road extension and improvement. This project accounts for over 10 percent of the non -state highway arterial improvements. Transpo Group Page 41 560 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study January 2009 It is anticipated that existing funding sources will fall short of funding all of the improvement project needs identified in Table 10. Projects were prioritized to identify those projects that should be implemented first with the limited funding available. Table 12 summarizes the project costs by project type and relative priority. The prioritization process considered the following: • Project cost • Project benefit • Implementation complexity • Project need Table 12. Project Relative Priority Project Type High Medium Low Total Intersection $9,000,000 $3,000,000 $0 $12,000,000 Major Road $14,500,000 $11,000,000 $5,800,000 $31,300,000 Minor Road $6,200,000 $16,300,006 $19,550,000 $42,050,000 State Route $24,400,000 $39,000,000 $0 $63,400,000 Total $54,100,000 $69,300,000 $25,350,000 $148,750,000 1 . Table does not include projects for major reconstruction of 1-5 interchanges at Birch Bay-Lynden Road and Grandview Road. 2. Table does not include transit service oroiects. Of the projects categorized as high priority, approximately 45 percent are on state routes. This is consistent with the importance of state facilities to the Birch Bay area. Of the remaining high priorities, new roadways and major road widening/reconstruction projects make up the next largest share with approximately 27 percent or high priority projects. Intersection projects are the third largest share, approximately 17 percent, and minor widening/reconstruction projects are the smallest share of high priority projects at approximately 11 percent. Although intersection projects are a relatively minor share of all high priority projects, they may provide the most value per dollar expended. Three of the four of intersection projects identified are categorized as a high priority. Transpo Group Page 42 561 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study January 2009 ATTACHMENT A PUBLIC PARTICIPATION SUMMARIES 562 t_0M c0 June 2007 — Birch Bay Subarea Plan Update Open House Summary and format Whatcom County hosted an open house in Birch Bay at the Birch Bay Bible Community Church from 6:00 p.m. — 8:00 p.m. on June 12, 2007. The purpose of the open house was to solicit comments from the public regarding their transportation concerns and potential improvement projects for the Birch Bay Urban Growth Area (UGA). Attendees were able to learn about the results of a recent existing conditions analysis, areas where growth is anticipated, previously identified and anticipated transportation issues, and types of transportation improvements that may be proposed. Display boards were placed at stations around the room to provide information to the attendees. Additionally, Whatcom County invited and provided a station for the Birch Bay Steering Committee. Attendees were asked to share their feedback, both written and verbal, on the information presented to them as well as suggest potential improvements to address specific issues. A brief presentation was given at 6:45 pm to provide an overview of the purpose and need for the Birch Bay Subarea Plan update and the study objectives. The project team was available before and after the presentation to answer questions and talk with attendees about transportation issues in their community. Summary of comments Seventy-nine (79) people attended the open house. Thirty-one (31) people filled out a comment form and twenty-eight (28) comments were left on the flip charts. The consultants and staff also recorded comments from attendees. There were four main themes that were noted from the comments: • A large number of comments suggested that Lincoln Road between Harborview Road and Blaine Road should be connected. Many of these comments also recommended extending Lincoln Road to Portal Way, via Loomis Trail Road; an Final - Birch Bay Subarea Plan Update Open House Summary 9/9/2008 Page 1 of 6 563 additional interchange with 1-5 could be constructed to improve regional connections. Many comments expressed the need for additional access to 1-5 from Birch Bay, including an overpass for vehicles to cross the railroad tracks without having to wait for the train to pass. Emergency vehicles also need direct access to and from 1-5 without having to wait at the train crossing. Commenters explained that it is difficult for drivers and emergency vehicles to access 1-5 from Birch Bay due to the limited number of access routes, narrow roads, congestion and delays at the railroad crossing. Another frequently submitted comment was that vehicles drive at high rates of speed along Birch Bay Drive and that the speed limit should be maintained at 20- 25 mph year round. Other people suggested a number of other improvements along Birch Bay Drive. Their suggestions included constructing bike and pedestrian paths, widening shoulders, and building seawalls or berms for erosion control. A significant number of comments also suggested the need to widen a number of roads within Birch Bay. • A significant number of the comments suggested the need for bike and pedestrian improvements in the area. Other comments focused on the need for additional public transportation. An attendee provided the project team with two suggestions via written letters for transportation improvements: Ditch restoration is needed throughout the Birch Bay community. The community provided results from a successful ditch restoration project in Sonoma County, California. Community members believe that this improvement would slow down run-off, eliminate standing pools of water, prevent children from playing in the ditches, eliminate soil bank erosion, discourage use of the ditches as dumping grounds for debris, prevent vehicles from going into the ditches, and reduce ditch maintenance. Construct a causeway across Drayton Harbor connecting Cherry Street to Shintaffer Road. The community believes that this improvement would improve the economic prosperity of downtown Blaine, eliminate the railroad crossing that can currently block access for fire and EMT units, cost less than the Lincoln extension, is in conjunction with the Drayton Harbor Road improvement, can redirect commuter traffic off of Birch Point Road from Birch Bay Village, Bay Ridge, Birch Bay View, and Semiahmoo, and provide an economic boost during the Olympics for Birch Bay and Blaine due to enhanced accessibility from both North and South 1-5. Draft - Birch Bay Subarea Plan Update Open House Summary 6/12/07 Page 2 of 6 564 Additional comments by location Additional comments from the open house are summarized below. They are organized by the location that they refer to (the number in parentheses indicates the frequency of the question or comment). General Comments • Display Board at public meeting illustrating six foot shoulders is incorrect. (2) • Widen roads and shoulders. (2) • City of Blaine, City of Ferndale, Birch Bay Steering Committee, and Whatcom County all need to work together rather than compete. • Need to establish emergency evacuation route out of Birch Bay. • The planners for the current construction between Birch Bay Village and 1-5 have done a terrible job. Do not have this same agency in charge of future transportation improvements. • "rhe project team seems to be unaware that the Birch Bay community is a resort and retirement community primarily. And summer is the most populous time of year. Many of the year round residents are no longer employed. • Infill prediction maps need to be modified to reconcile them with wetland maps. • Plan for the future. Widen roads now that will need to be 4 lanes in 20-30 years. Public and Non -Motorized Transportation • Increase public transportation in Birch Bay. (4) • Improve all existing shoulders in Birch Bay for pedestrians and bikers. (4) • Add bike and pedestrian paths in Birch Bay. • Add bike and pedestrian paths on at least one north/south and east/west route in Birch Bay. • Add sidewalks and a trail network in Birch Bay near the beaches and businesses. • Cherry point refinery would like WTA to provide service to their location. If WTA cannot accommodate, they may look into private service provider. 1-5 Access • Additional 1-5 access. Birch Bay-Lynden Road can't handle the current traffic volumes. (6) • If additional access to 1-5 from Birch Bay is constructed it needs to include an overpass at the railroad crossing that allow vehicles direct access to 1-5. (5) • Overpass at the railroad crossing that allows emergency vehicles to cross the railroad tracks without waiting for the train to pass. (4) • Many of the residents in Birch Bay work at St. Joseph's Hospital in Bellingham and are on -call for emergency response. Birch Bay needs better access to 1-5 in case of emergency. (3) • Additional 1-5 access, preferable at Loomis Trail. Birch Bay-Lynden Road can't handle the increase in traffic due to all the development taking place in the Birch Bay UGA. Draft - Birch Bay Subarea Plan Update Open House Summary 6/12/07 Page 3 of 6 565 • Complete the road that allows the Birch Bay Village access to 1-5 without going on Birch Bay Drive. • Finish construction on Birch Point Drive extension that will connect to Semiahmoo Parkway. This route is important to travel from Birch Bay Village to Cost Cutter in Blaine, and to access 1-5. Birch Bay Drive • "fhe speed limit should be decreased to 20-25 mph year round on Birch Bay Drive due to vehicles moving at high speeds. (8) • Birch Bay Drive to SR 548 is too narrow. (2) • Don't initiate any transportation improvement projects along Birch Bay Drive, including trails and berms. It would only encourage people to use the private beaches. (2) • Add bike and pedestrian paths along Birch Bay Drive. (2) • Birch Bay Drive can not be closed down to one lane during construction. Existing roads must remain open during construction. • Widen Birch Bay Drive to four lanes. • Do not eliminate access to Birch Bay Drive. • Birch Bay Drive needs transportation improvements. • The speed limit on Birch Bay Drive should either be limited to 10 mph or it should be widened. • Bike paths are needed on roads within Birch Bay and between Birch Bay and Blaine. • Construct a seawall along Birch Bay Drive. • Construct six foot shoulders along Birch Bay Drive. • The presentation did not address current and future construction on Birch Bay Drive. Many of us are from Birch Bay Village and are very concerned about this and want more information. Birch Bay-Lynden Road • Intersection of Birch Bay-Lynden Road and Portal Way is very congested. (3) • Widen Birch Bay-Lynden Road between Harborview Road and 1-5. (3) • Intersection of Birch Bay-Lynden Road and Blaine Road is dangerous and congested. • Birch Bay-Lynden Road is dangerous and congested. • Intersection of Birch Bay-Lynden Road and Portal Way needs to have an overpass over the railroad crossing that allows provides direct access to 1-5. Emergency vehicles need better access to/from Birch Bay. . • Delays at Portal Way and Birch Bay-Lynden Road due to railroad crossing. Whatcom County should work with BNSF to see if they can run their trains at off- peak traffic hours to accommodate commuters. • Add a roundabout at the intersection of Harborview Road and Birch Bay-Lynden Road and at the intersection of Blaine Road and Birch Bay-Lynden Road. Draft - Birch Bay Subarea Plan Update Open House Summary 6/12/07 Page 4 of 6 566 • Transportation improvements at Peace Arch Outlet Stores will create congestion at the intersection of Portal Way and Birch Bay-Lynden Road. Additionally this intersection has a railroad crossing which also creates additional congestion. Lincoln Road • Continuation of Lincoln Road between Harborview Road and Blaine Road. (10) • Extend Lincoln Road to Portal Way and add additional access to 1-5. (5) • Lincoln Road needs wide shoulders. Currently there are no shoulders and this roadway is unsafe. (3) • Add bike and pedestrian paths along Lincoln Road. (2) • SR 548 between Lincoln and Birch Bay-Lynden Road. • Widen Lincoln Road. Drayton Harbor Road • Make improvements along Drayton Harbor Road in order to alleviate traffic volumes on Lincoln Road. • Drayton Harbor Road needs to be improved. Blaine Road • Widen Blaine Road. (2) • The section of Blaine Road between Drayton Harbor Road and Peace Portal Drive is too narrow. (2) • Blaine Road has high levels of congestion and no shoulders. Portal Way • Roundabout at intersection of SR 548 and Portal Way. • Congestion issues at the intersection of SR 548 and Portal Way. During the peak morning hours the queue backs up over one mile. A traffic signal needs to be installed at this intersection rather than a four way stop or a roundabout. Anderson Road Six foot shoulders should be constructed on Anderson Road. Widen Anderson Road between Shintaffer Road and Blaine Road and add bike and pedestrian paths. Harborview Road • Six foot shoulders are needed on Harborview Road. • Six foot shoulders on Harborview Road do not exist as your map indicates. Birch Point Road • The section of Birch Point Road between Selder Road and Birch Bay Drive experiences severe congestion and vehicles traveling at high rates of speed. • Steep grade being constructed on Birch Point Road will be dangerous in winter when roads are icy. Draft - Birch Bay Subarea Plan Update Open House Summary 6/12/07 Page 5 of 6 567 • It needs to be determined what effect construction on Birch Point Road will have on existing flood conditions and lakes in Birch Bay Village. Bay Point Road • Close Bay Point Road to the public and allow access exclusively to land owners. Add beach parking and bike and pedestrian paths. Jackson Road • Jackson Road is too narrow. (2) Other Locations • Construct extension from Selder Road to Semiahmoo Parkway. • Construct a causeway between Cherry Street in Blaine and Shintaffer Road in Birch Bay. • New road needs to be built parallel to Birch Bay Drive between Birch Bay-Lynden Road and Alderson Road. • Construct a roadway parallel to Blaine Road and Birch Bay Drive. Birch Bay is in need of an alternative way to drive around the bay. Draft - Birch Bay Subarea Plan Update Open House Summary 6/12/07 Page 6 of 6 December 2007 —Birch Bay Subarea Plan Update Open House Summary Purpose and format Whatcom County hosted an open house in Birch Bay at the Birch Bay Bible Community Church from 6:00 p.m. — 8:00 p.m. on December 11, 2007. The purpose of the open house was to solicit feedback from the public on the list of proposed transportation improvement projects being considered for the Birch Bay Urban Growth Area (UGA). Attendees were able to learn about the current condition of the transportation system in Birch Bay, areas where growth is anticipated, transportation issues that have already been identified by the community, and the potential improvement projects that may be used to address transportation issues. Display boards were placed at stations around the room to provide information to the attendees. Attendees were asked to share their feedback, both written and verbal, on the information presented to them as well as provide feedback on the list of proposed improvement projects for the Birch Bay area. A brief presentation was given at 6:45 pm to provide an overview of the existing and future traffic conditions in the Birch Bay area and to review the list of proposed improvement projects and funding strategies to address transportation issues in the community. The project team was available before and after the presentation to answer questions and talk with attendees. Summary of comments Forty-two (42) people attended the open house. Eight (8) people filled out a comment form and fifteen (15) comments were left on the flip charts that were displayed around the room. The project team also recorded comments from attendees. There were two primary themes noted from the comments: • The majority of the comments received focused on the need for a network of bike and pedestrian paths throughout the community. Final - Birch Bay Subarea Plan Update Open House Summary 9/9/2008 Page 1 of 3 569 • Many of the comments also suggested the need for improved public transportation to serve a larger area and run more frequently. Two attendees provided the project team with suggestions via written letters regarding transportation issues in the area: • The Blaine Municipal Airport is an important component of the community and should not be closed. • 1) Priority should not be given to the widening of Grandview Road from Lincoln Road to Point Whitehorn Road. 2) Capital investment to make downtown Birch Bay a countywide and regional attractor through implementation of the Design Guidelines efforts of the Steering Committee in 2006 and early 2007. Additional comments by theme Additional comments from the open house are summarized below. They are organized by theme (the number in parentheses indicates the frequency of the question or comment). General Comments • Many roads in the Birch Bay and Blaine area have striping that is barely visible. Repaint the areas that have faded. (2) • Road side ditches are dangerous and need to be improved. (2) • Use Birch Bay tax dollars for improvements in Birch Bay. • Implement moratorium on growth if roads and other transportation infrastructure can not be in place. • Prioritize transportation improvements along bus routes. • Access to and from Birch Bay is restricted if a train is stopped on the tracks. • Improve the existing transportation infrastructure so that it can support larger commercial area. • The UGA does not include critical surrounding areas that are related to the forecasted growth and transportation challenges. • Need east/west road from Birch Bay Drive to Blaine Road about midway between Birch Bay-Lynden Road and Alderson Road. • Need north/south road from Birch Bay-Lynden Drive to Alderson Road between Birch Bay Drive and Blaine Road. Public and Non -Motorized Transportation • Add bike and pedestrian paths in Birch Bay. (8) • Increase public transportation in Birch Bay. (3) • Improve shoulders in Birch Bay for pedestrians and bikers. (2) Speed Limit • The speed limit in Birch Bay Village should be lowered year round. (2) Draft - Birch Bay Subarea Plan Update Open House Summary 12/11/07 Page 2 of 3 570 • Radar speed signs would be a good investment for Birch Bay Drive. Water Quality • Preserve the water quality in the bay by treating storm water runoff. (3) Draft - Birch Bay Subarea Plan Update Open House Summary 12/11/07 Page 3 of 3 571 • The Birch Bay Subarea Transportation Plan, originally adopted in September 2004, is being updated in 2008 to include a list of recommended transportation improvement projects and policies to improve safety and address the growth anticipated in the Birch Bay area over the next 20 years • The County is identifying and evaluating roadway, non -motorized, and transit options and developing an updated plan that incorporates community priorities and addresses funding and implementation strategies • Input from commuters, residents, recreational users and businesses is important to help identify and establish the community's priorities when addressing the transportation needs in the subarea • The Birch Bay Subarea Transportation Plan update is being developed in parallel with the County's current efforts to develop a transportation concurrency management program and transportation impact fee program A Birch Bay Subarea Transportation Plan Update Study Area UGA = Urban Growth Area For more information about these and other county planning efforts, visit the County Planning and Development Services Web site at: http://www.co.whatcom.wa.us/pds/planning/index.jsp Bay Subarea T"ran`spoitaon�fan�rY pdate Tirgehne 'x Birch77 . ... Spring 2007 December 2007 s • Looked at a snapshot of the transportation system in Birch Bay today • Hosted a second public open house to gather feedback on the • Gathered data on existing land uses, safety problems, traffic potential improvement projects and the community's priorities circulation and congestion Winter 2008 June 2007 Continue to gather public feedback • Hosted a public open house to gather community concerns and Finalize the list of potential improvement projects ' identify local transportation issues Consider project costs, priorities, implementation strategies and funding options Summer/Fall 2007 Draft the Birch Bay Subarea Transportation Plan Update • Looked at what the transportation system may look like in the future Spring 2008 • Gathered data on household and employment growth, potential safety impacts, and future traffic patterns Work with the Birch Bay community and the Whatcom County . • Identified potential improvement projects to address these concerns, Council to review and revise the draft plan including non -motorized and transit opportunities Finalize and adopt the updated Birch Bay Subarea Transportation Plan `i 572 Whatcom County Planning and Development Services Web site http://www.co.whatcom.wa.us/pds%planWng<ndex jsp John Everett Transportation Planner Planning and Development Services 5280 Northwest Drive Bellingham, WA 98226 360-676-6901 JEvereff@comhatcomma.us 573 Whatcom County has identified issues that need to be addressed in the Birch Bay and Blaine Urban Growth Areas (UGA), based on population and economic growth projections, traffic and safety data, and feedback from the local community. Residential growth Collisions and traffic delays • Approximately 7,800 households are expected to be • Safety issues have been identified on parts of Birch added in the Birch Bay UGA, City of Blaine, and the Bay Drive, Birch Bay-Lynden Road, Bay Road, Portal Blaine UGA by the year 2027. Way and Grandview Road. Employment growth • Approximately 2,500 employees are expected to be added in the Birch Bay UGA, City of Blaine, and the Blaine UGA by the year 2027. • Intersections that are currently congested within or near the Birch Bay UGA during afternoon peak hours traffic include the intersections of Birch Bay-Lynden Road with Harborview Road, Portal Way, Interstate-5 and Valley View Road, and the intersection of Birch Bay Drive and Harborview Road. Whatcom County has identified 43 potential improvement projects through the plan update process in addition to the 8 transportation projects that were already included in the original 2004 Birch Bay Subarea Transportation Plan. These improvement projects will foster development of the future transportation network for the Birch Bay area, and support a balance of motorized and non -motorized transportation facilities as well as expanded transit service needs. The community's priorities will need to be established, as it will not be realistic for the county, neighboring cities or the Washington State Department of Transportation, who will be responsible for implementing these projects, to fully fund and construct all of these improvements in the short term. _.._ ......'.- M11NIi1{Y�KafKi� pw,.y.,.. +.. ... �..• 1i � _, { Rb .soi co..f.rw UiMi x. � "AL ` .y 16e+. �!• rf.+TAwl iYwlL i •• . .Y NNt J i \� gYw'rl. �r1 ObYP ^`— A. —.� .,G ,._.. �` •1.p�.e..o+.s�.+o�+w LOG1 I I I (_ j I i � t i i Improvement Project Locations 574 r .,+ J 0 ,•: .;s4�rdp'+#a ., % K - ,. -, =^; ,,;,Fy;g, '} 154. - " /1e�Nva 4 f hIF[ol 'eLOoel afeJeikbp��.�?... h a vrl,�y 1 s ogp alw. f...�.. r '�':�.� �> � ,._ - ._.,... �.,...,�d-vGY'+�n;',"�.?:�att��...s_ i3:.1:����2 �).-. rF, .h .- I.1s Birch Bay. Lynden Road l PddallWay Cmstrud mmam—,imp—rnmrls to lnd,de hum lanes and install traffic signal when, werni—d. High S3,W0000 1-2 Birth Bay Lyndon Road I IGcS le Road d mrimica lme secton lmpovemanta to include m,d,bout or install rum lanes end traffic signal. when warranted. Medium S3,000,000 1-3 Birth Bay-Lynden Read l Harbonxw Road Cars— intarsadimrmpovemem,Wmdutlstumlanesa di—Illramcsrgnalwhenwiummitd. Hgh S3A00,000 14 Birth Bey Dme/Harbarvew Road Impove/redesign the ill arsaIll- wild, turn lance, and install traffic Signal whom wdnanted. Hgh S3A00,000 R-1 Birch Bay-Lynden Road Waining Widen to rural major collecmr standards including turn lanes or major access locations and paved shoulders for --motorized [rips. Hgh $1,500,000 R-2 Birch Bay-Lyndeh Read Wdening Widen to urban principal arlenal ,tandem, induding Nm lanes and non -motorized facilities. Hgh S1,800.000 R-3 Birch Point Connector Road Construct new None connection at urban standard, including non-molarizetl facilities and new intersection with garnish— On— High S2.000.000 Y qJe 1.0.1a Road EtlanWn and improvement Reconstruct existing matl and construct 2-lame urban arterial to Blaine Road with nmm.maanzed anhancern— including construction Hgh S9,000p00 of mundabauts at intersections with Blaine Road and Ham—ew Road. R-5 West Blame LIGn CO —tar Road Construct new 2-lane mad to urban standard, between Birch Point Road entl Semiehmmo Drive to serve future urban development Law S4,800,000 R8 HMborwew Road Impmve roadway to urban principal arterial smntlar JS Including non-mondzetl facilldr,- Hgh 5200.000 RI Hersomew Road Impmve roadway to major call-kir standards including non-motorizetl faahuc,. Lae S1,000,000 R84 Podal Way/Dakob Crack Bidge C500 Bridge replacement or rehabilitate structure Medium S5.000,000 R9 Commu.ud-a drouLation mad, Loral circulation urban mad(,) as pan of future development. Medium 56.000.000 M-1' Birch Bay Drive Impmve madway, m urban minor animal —cards including non -motorized facilities. Hgh S5,000,000 M-2 Bmh Bay Dr. Improve to urban minor arterial Standards including non -motored facilities. Medum SL800.0W M3' G-riview Roatl Impmve to rural collector road standards with paved shoultlers for non-molori ed Level. Law S3.000.000 M4 Birch Ber-Lynden Road Improve W rural major collector,tantlad, including pavetl shoultlers far non•motonzetl travel. Medium S5,000,000 M-Se Doltish Harbor Road Recam—ct. repair matl slope and pavement end upgrade madway. Medium 51,Soo 000 Mae Drafted Hadar Read Impmve to tonal collector standards with shoultlers for non-molnumal travel. Medium $1,800,i100 M1 ParblWay Reemstrud to major collector standards including paved shoulders for non -motorized travel. Law S3,M0 M8 Pw.l Way Reconstruct W rural collector,tandands including paved shoulders far non-momriied travel Mecum 51,200,,100 M8 Palal Wsy Reconstruct to major collector standards Including paved shoulders for non -motorized [ravel. Law 51,eooAm M-10 Birch Poml Road Reconstruct to urban minor arterial slantlartls indutling non-motorizetl facilities Lars, S3.000.000 M-11 KldenXeRoad Recrostrucl to rural collector sandards including paved shoulders for non-molarizetl travel, Low S2,400.0W M-12 pckervlle Road Reconstruct to rural collector stantlatls including pevetl shoulders for non -motorized travel. Law $650,000 M-13 Jarbon Real ReconsWd m rural collector standard, Including paved shoulders for non -motorized travel, [rev $1,200,000 M-14 Looms Tall Road Reconstruct to rural collector Standards including paved shoulders for non -motorized travel. Hgh S1,200,000 M 15 Samlahmto Drive Recomimct to rural collector,tandard, including paved shoultlers for non -motorized travel. Loa S2.000,000 M-16 ShnlaOer Road Reconstruct to rural collector standard, including paved shoulders for non -motorized travel Loa Smoot) M-17 Veto Orive Reconstruct to rural collector,tandams Including paved shoulders for non -motorized travel. Metlwm $i.MO,000 M-18 Say Road Reconstruct to rural collectorstandard, including paved shoulde rs for non -motorized travel. Metlium S2,600.000 M-19 Alderman Road Reconstruct to rural collector standards Including paved shoulders for non -motorized travel. Metlium 5600.000 S-1 Blaine Road (SR 549) Reconstruct and widen to add tum lanes and shouldersfnon-motorizetl facilities at urban slantlartls (W9DOT sandards), Hgh 58,000,000 S-2 Blaine Road (SR 548) Reconstruct and widen to add turn lanes and ,h,ulderernon-motormeal facilities at urban standards (WS00T Standards). Hgh S5,000,000 S3 Blaine Read (SR 548) Reconstruct and witlen ta add rum lanes and non -motorized facilities to meet urban standards (WS00T standards). Metlwm ST.W.000 S-4 BIM. Road (SR $48) Reconstruct to rural collector standard a(WSOOT the ndards), including replacement of culvert at Terrell Creek. Medium $4,000,000 S•5 Welne Road (SR 549)/Dayton Harder Road Imprevelrea-gn the Intorsecton with turn lanes and Imt,ll unit, signal when warranted. Hgh i2.0110.000 S8 Beira Ross (SR 548) 1—mh Tail Road Imix—fredasign the Intersection with hum lane, and Install traffic signal when warranted. Me". i2,mDAOO 8.1 BYiea Road (SR 548) I Gandvew Road Improve/ mdasign (ho interse cli-. and Install traffic signal with rum Ian as whan wonarnad or a roundabout f-lay Rph 92.000.000 " Blaine Road (Bar 50) l Cahrome reek Bridge Replacemenl Bridge replacement or rehabilitate —,ham Medium $6.SDOADu S-9 Blame Ross (SR 54911 Oakola Creek Bridge Replacement Britlge replacement or rehabilitae sWcare Metlwm S13.=A00 S10 ISI Bsine eel lNeacrange Reconnection Rabuild 1-5 Exit 276(Blain, Interchange) Hgh SHAN..u00 S-11 On aid 00 amps of $l Bird, ft Lyrden Read Inlandraye ImlwOval retlosign me ramps tnlersoGion with him lands and Insist aaffic signal when wananmd Hgh $3.. 0 ..000 S42 1.519mh Bey.Lynden Road Wiincrv,rr Major reconstruction of Interchange at Birch Bay-Lymid, focal Madam MW 5-13 IS I Gmndvew Rd Ir—tinge Improve/ mde,ign the ramps intersection with rum lanes and Install I.FrI signal. when waramed Medum S3.500.000 5-14 IS I GadtlN,w Road Intemhange Reconsn-th- of interchange at Grandview Road skQ r MA S-le Bach Bay Lymen Road l Blame aced! (SR 548) C—s-Ictnumaction improvements to include roundabout orimuell hum lanes and lmlae signal. when wimerand. High S3.ODO.M S-16 Grardview Rod (SR 548) I K—Ild Road Construca intersection improvements to lndude roundabout or install rum lane and traffic signal, when wamnletl. Metlium $3.000.000 8.17 Gramwaw Read (SR 548)1 V.I. Onto Consuvct mi—ricion impovements to include muntlabout or install rum lanes and traffic signal, when warranted. Hgh S3.o00.000 T ?`'•'1g1yr 0.1 Park a US Facility Contact naw Park and,lot (w 2 smaller lds)va,dafm,d parry suite apadty to serve geld by, Senialmlo, and Bain. Metlium Wp i,. 0.2 Inman Tansd Service Inns Intrs)semm be—n Birch Bay and Blers, Femdale, and Elsh,gham Metlium NIA t Represents planning level project coal estimates Project costs will too refined dung the projecttlesign phase. Hobe: Theca improvements ere Identified as preliminary recommentletims. Whatcom County or WSOOT M1ave not cemminetl funding for most If tress lmpmvementa. e Improvement IdenBDod In previous 2004 plan, all others are adtlioanal improvements. 575 21 ` 'hat have we h Whatcom County held two public open houses in June and December of 2007 to gather feedback from the local community and identify other issues to be addressed by the subarea plan update. Recommendations from the community included the following comments: • "We need more reliable access to and from 1-5. Birch Bay-Lynden Road can not handle the current traffic volumes." • "Emergency vehicles that service the Birch Bay area need direct access to and from 1-5 without having to wait at the train crossing." • "Consider connecting Lincoln Road between Harborview Road and Blaine Road to create additional east -west access for our community." • "Please increase public transportation service in Birch Bay." • "Key areas in our community need to be connected with bike paths. All roads should have improved shoulders to allow bike and pedestrian travel, and a safe place for drivers to pull of the road." • "The speed limit should be decreased year round on Birch Bay Drive." �und.ing strategies The total cost to implement the proposed improvements is $160.85 million Current available funding will not be able to cover all of the identified potential improvement projects. A funding strategy will be incorporated into the transportation plan update and will identify a number of potential funding sources which may include: • local, county, city, state or federal funds • impact fees or other developer improvements • grants • legislative appropriations i 576 Whatcom County is planning ahead for the growth expected to occur over the next twenty years. The County is committed to implementing policies and plans to keep your communities safe, move our economy forward, and maintain the quality of life unique to our community. To better tie transportation improvements with new development, Whatcom County is developing two transportation programs — a Transportation Concurrency Management Program and a Transportation Impact Fee Program. What is transportation concurrency? • Counties are required by the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) to ensure that its transportation system can adequately support approved developments in a timely manner, or concurrent with development • The County cannot approve a new development if the transportation system will not meet adopted service standards with the additional impact of that development, unless measures to accommodate that development are agreed upon and implemented along with the project • The Transportation Concurrency Management Program will update the interim program adopted in December 2007 • The end result will be a program that aligns with the County's vision for a safe and efficient transportation system that will support the projected population and employment growth with the available funding resources What are transportation impact fees? • Transportation impact fees are a tool that can be used by Whatcom County under the GMA to help fund transportation improvements necessary to help offset the impacts of growth • The fees are collected as a part of the approval process for a new development, and are used to help fund transportation improvements needed to serve new growth • The amount charged is based on the additional demand on the transportation system that will be created by the new development and the cost of the improvements to meet that demand • These fees cannot be used to resolve existing deficiencies or to fully fund the cost of needed transportation improvements • Impact fees must be used in combination with other potential funding sources to pay for improvements 577 c O lC c L fU fU V C N f0 O O I� C fp U O N n O m a Lo m N N O a LL O Ui N Y L O N TR c °o m N o E p c� c x E Co Q a 3 3 N ma i d � � r, f •¢e � :'- • 1° + ��i �._... � � .;- . _. __ fig6• j 75 N a 4XI a aai m � a a C C U f0 N N N U N N A m a E c c a y E a m T OQI O r Coll � N � y C N O Ol f0 C •C w n c fo a a o to N N N N N tap N a m N a'o C N N N OI N C C p f0 EO ` •C N a o o c$ m 16 O a O• C f0 o n o � E m g` c o c m m= c o o m a N ,O O f0 O. L y O jE- 0 m O f0 0 0 E m i a nt fu a> E no 1 O N a S 0 N 3 C L U N O L n f 578 i C N C O m m � r C - O jp "O C C C� C J _0 Yd o 0 C ) C N M S C 00o N m aw a) >d m E Lm LC a N p0N C oa U) Oy O c >-0 Co m O O U O O C --o R. O - `O. E OmaE a) C '0, � O ao On a) CLC OmooU ° m O uU 0 O � N 00 0 E U� p am N O 0mN E CY-0 7 E a0 d OIEm@ 0@-O y E a 0O m i O N> OW CU .o 76 O Lyy`o E Lm ' a - o � , T E c a) 0co d c 0 m 0 a m E£ o E (; ) m -.ffi oa 3 a) 41'c o n m m "LNym r )) o C m 0m0 ow � C o om �m d mmt 0 H 2 =mm� 0m ME 0) .0 c0oE wn O E 0 > -2 a)LLCU2-0 pCm C >, m y No m Cy tl0naOmNcO) m-C m Nm FO iU N� EE 45 lr 7 a G L j m .0 7 7 H • • • • m m a] m m m m c a. d �tm.. o.c o T N m v K r g ¢g $ y■ F _ �g o �r c Crn d�3 a�� Wa• m 3 2j C �3�i7 com ytt o m m oy c C c c K- va c>.o�i3m 2 r m < < ta mm 0 9L ,a �a A 3 ��?aIIIII�I�III FB I PqFs$ Ejj iii o a m O V N N- L ap Q� i�0rc L Oa = N_� N C N Y> m m m .O-. L L m R' O a E a �' m c E a �' v e m¢ v ° c c x m L) >. aU' .x v V >. « • c> o` c m m m Z o 'r m t m m m .S L w m a a 9 Q m d r a a (a7 a Q v n t d u N ac • w • LD • • r S 1 m15 a U N ro O O C L N .� y N U C L 'N-' m m - C E O _ C� Q U - m C E = .: O O n > o E d m mN m o 7 0 E O D d V m Y O L (n m O. N d aE N N > E O C coU p m N L C O E m 3 •ink. 11 c Q c O w p`, ,W c o c _ 6)N o > 2 m~ 3 °� I R L« o 3 o o m a � - m '2 >• d d N m-0 o a) m J o a aNi c E O oa -° c O' m y mm N m 2� c E N Cc a) O j a) N E -O V L ` O !� L ... N` ... L a 'C 0 cc N i -0 N> .0o •3 LYl E L N `O y m 0 N y C U U a)n T 4. U N __ U 3 a) a C a) U 'O is O p :O la 'E ° m N a) O 'O a) m C W d 0 .Q c m O C 3 c m .0 p• Y .. t C Cp m U E a1 L a m io a. C c o d m 0 3 c N !� V V L w y [D - 'ommo N N d C O N d O) O >. N 2 ... m _ U L m l6 on3c U q) m 4 ooEXcc ,� m- C m C L ` C L E o C L _ E - " m a� o N 3 �, o o E v m2 E m u) c n m E a) m w m 7 L L, na $ w chi >u. 7 m LQ07 d a cmi - o c ?) o> LU N N c 3- U a1 C E E C OmI-.00 d co 0. � L.. GfA Lm I- b� N d« O d N LL- 579 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study January 2009 ATTACHMENT B LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS ME Highway Capacity Manual, 2000 Signalized intersection level of service (LOS) is defined in terms of the average total vehicle delay of all movements through an intersection. Vehicle delay is a method of quantifying several intangible factors, including driver discomfort, frustration, and lost travel time. Specifically, LOS criteria are stated in terms of average delay per vehicle during a specified time period (for example, the PM peak hour). Vehicle delay is a complex measure based on many variables, including signal phasing (i.e., progression of movements through the intersection), signal cycle length, and traffic volumes with respect to intersection capacity. Table 1 shows LOS criteria for signalized intersections, as described in the Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board, Special Report 209, 2000). Table 1. Level of Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections Average Control Delay General Description Level of Service (sec/veh) (Signalized Intersections) A <10 Free Flow B >10 - 20 Stable Flow (slight delays) C >20 - 35 Stable flow (acceptable delays) D >35 - 55 Approaching unstable flow (tolerable delay, occasionally wait through more than one signal cycle before proceeding) E >55 - 80 Unstable flow (intolerable delay) F >80 Forced flow (jammed) Source: Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, Special Report 209, 2000. Unsignalized intersection LOS criteria can be further reduced into two intersection types: all - way stop -controlled and two-way stop -controlled. All -way, stop -controlled intersection LOS is expressed in terms of the average vehicle delay of all of the movements, much like that of a signalized intersection. Two-way, stop -controlled intersection LOS is defined in terms of the average vehicle delay of an individual movement(s). This is because the performance of a two- way, stop -controlled intersection is more closely reflected in terms of its individual movements, rather than its performance overall. For this reason, LOS for a two-way, stop -controlled intersection is defined in terms of its individual movements. With this in mind, total average vehicle delay (i.e., average delay of all movements) for a two-way, stop -controlled intersection should be viewed with discretion. Table 2 shows LOS criteria for unsignalized intersections (both all -way and two-way, stop -controlled). Table 2. Level of Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections Level of Service Average Control Delay (sec/veh) A 0-10 B >10 - 15 C >15-25 D >25 - 35 E >35 - 50 F >50 Source: Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, Special Report 209, 2000. 581 Birch Bay Transportation Planning Study January 2009 ATTACHMENT C FORECAST LAND USE METHODOLOGY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 582 The Transpo Group MEMORANDUM Date: October 23, 2007 TG: 06229.00 To: John Everett, Whatcom County From: Patrick Lynch, AICP, The Transpo Group Carmen Bendixen, The Transpo Group Subject: DRAFT Birch Bay Subarea Land Use Methodology This memorandum summarizes The Transpo Group's process for updating the existing and forecast land use in support of the travel demand modeling effort for the Birch Bay Subarea Transportation Plan. The land use data generates the transportation demands that are the foundation on which the Plan is based. The main objective of this process is to establish the existing baseline and future forecast that provides a reasonable basis to assess future land use and transportation system needs for the Birch Bay area. The following outlines the general process for updating the land use for the Birch Bay area: ■ Reviewed and refined the Transportation Analysis Zone structure for the Birch Bay area ■ Updated existing land use data for the study area based on Whatcom Council of Governments (WCOG) 2005 land use data and a county -wide aerial photo. ■ Updated forecast land use based on WCOG 2027 land use data and economic data provided by ECONorthwest. The following exhibits and appendices are attached: ■ Exhibit 1 — Original WCOG Model TAZs in Birch Bay Subarea ■ Exhibit 2 — Refined Whatcom County Model TAZs in Birch Bay Subarea ■ Exhibit 3 — Household Land Use in Birch Bay Subarea ■ Exhibit 4 — Employment Land Use in Birch Bay Subarea ■ Exhibit 5 — Blaine and Birch Bay Population and Employment Estimates ■ Exhibit 6 — Birch Bay UGA and Blaine City and UGA Land Use Controls ■ Appendix A — ECONorthwest Land Use Evaluation Memorandum ■ Appendix B — Final 2005 and 2027 Land Use Tables The Transpo Group Inc. 11730118th Avenue N.E., Suite 600 Kirkland, WA 98034-7120 425.821.3665 Fax: 425.825.8434 583 The Transpo Group Transportation Analysis Zone (TAZ) Structure The TAZ structure from the WCOG model provided the starting point for the Birch Bay Subarea Transportation Plan travel forecasting model. From this structure, a refined TAZ structure was developed for the Birch Bay area to provide the added detail needed for preparing the Birch Bay Subarea Transportation Plan. The additional detail is needed for evaluating transportation system needs on collectors and at intersections serving the subarea. Exhibits 1 and 2 illustrate the locations of the original TAZs and the new refined TAZs. The Birch Bay Subarea model includes all TAZs within the Birch Bay Urban Growth Area (UGA), and TAZs covering the adjacent Blaine UGA. TAZs south and east of the Birch Bay UGA also were included to ensure primary travel corridors serving the Birch Bay Subarea were included in the analyses. This includes trip producers and attractors as far south as the Cherry Point Refinery and east of I-5. A total of 30 original WCOG TAZs were the focus of the Birch Bay Subarea for the more detailed travel forecasting purposes of the Subarea Plan. For the size of this geographic area, the number and size of these TAZs in the Birch Bay Study area were not as sufficient as desired; therefore, the original TAZs had to be divided into smaller and more distinct zones. The WCOG TAZs and land use allocations within the selected travel forecast model subarea boundary were entered into an Excel spreadsheet for allocation and analysis purposes. These TAZs were subdivided and the WCOG boundaries were refined to support the more detailed model. The refinement was based on the locations of the UGA boundaries, natural features, the roadway network, and zoning designations. The new set of subarea TAZs was renumbered. The original 30 TAZs were divided into 116 refined TAZs as shown on Exhibit 2. WCOG TAZs outside of this area were not modified as part of the planning process. Existing (2005) Land Use The existing land use data from the original WCOG TAZs were allocated to new TAZs. The allocation was made based on zoning designations and review of aerial photographs. Certain adjustments were made to the Birch Bay Subarea's land use allocation. Such changes are necessary in the typical process of refining larger TAZs into more refined geographical units. Besides the need to divide each original WCOG TAZ down to several smaller TAZs, the household and employment allocated to each larger TAZ also needed to be divided appropriately among the new smaller TAZs. Households The County's GIS aerial photo was used to assign existing households to the refined TAZs. The total number of residential structures within the study area based on the aerial photo did not directly match the WCOG household estimates for individual WCOG TAZs. Since a reasonably accurate assessment of the number of households The Transpo Group Page 2 MI The Transpo Group in the subarea is essential to producing a reliable calibration for the travel demand model, the original land use estimates were adjusted. Exhibit 3 shows the summary of existing households for districts for the Birch Bay study area (the land use summary districts, which are aggregates of the smaller TAZs, are only used to illustrate the data). Based on the count of existing development from the aerial photo, the Transpo team re -allocated land uses in certain TAZs. These TAZs were selected for adjustments based on the size of the discrepancy between the development shown in the aerial photo and the amount of land use allocated to each WCOG TAZ. For example, the aerial photo indicated approximately 10 households in TAZ 512, while the previous WCOT model had 283 households (based on WCOG's original land use allocation). These types of adjustments result from the more refined review of land use in individual TAZs which can be better addressed at a subarea planning level instead of at the Countywide level conducted by the WCOG. During the model calibration process, it became clear that the types of households in the Birch Bay and Blaine UGAs do not follow the typical household trip generation pattern. The team's background knowledge of the region confirmed that the Birch Bay Subarea has a significant seasonal component. Using U.S. Census data, the ratio of occupied households to "unoccupied" households (i.e., seasonal or resort households) was calculated. The census reported that the percentage of "unoccupied" households for TAZs in the subarea model ranged from under 5 percent to over 80 percent The unoccupied households were then defined as a separate residential land use category in the model, with a reduced average trip generation rate. This additional refinement of the land use situation in the Birch Bay Subarea is intended to provide a more accurate tool for estimating existing and forecast travel demands. The following summarizes the most significant findings and adjustments allocating existing household data within the Birch Bay and Blaine UGAs. Birch Bay ■ The revised Whatcom County model identified approximately 4,085 dwelling units within the equivalent WCOG TAZs representing the Birch Bay UGA. This is approximately 630 units less than the original WCOG model. The refinement was most noticeable in the northern part of the UGA with approximately 1,465 fewer dwelling units. Another significant difference was found in the southern portion of the UGA with approximately 950 more dwelling units. Exhibit 6 compares existing households for the refined Whatcom County model and the original WCOG model. • WCOG TAZ 168 provides an example of the adjustments made to the original land use allocation. This rectangular zone, which is partially located in the Birch Bay UGA and partially outside the UGA, originally had 1,130 households allocated to it for the 2005 WCOG model. The County's aerial photo revealed that current development in this TAZ contained only 55 to 70 The Transpo Group Page 3 -N The Transpo Group structures or households and that these were primarily within the Birch Bay UGA. The remainder of the zone is largely undeveloped. After dividing the larger zone into seven smaller zones, the reduced household total was divided among the new refined zones. The seven new TAZs contain a total of 66 households; although this allocation is significantly smaller than the original allocation of 1,130 households, it is consistent with the existing development within this TAZ. ■ Several other WCOG TAZs were also modified that had significant differences between what was allocated and what was observed based on the aerial photo. These zones are generally located within Subareas 3, 4, 6, 7, and 9 as illustrated in Exhibit 3. City of Blaine and UGA The revised Whatcom County model identified approximately 1,900 dwelling units within the equivalent WCOG TAZs representing the City of Blaine and UGA. This is approximately 520 dwelling units lower than the original WCOG model. The refinement was most noticeable in the central part of the UGA along Drayton Harbor with a decrease of approximately 210 units. Exhibit 6 compares existing households for the refined Whatcom County model and the original WCOG model for the Blaine UGA. ■ For example, WCOG TAZ 235 is split between the Birch Bay UGA and the Blaine UGA. The original WCOG model household allocation was 543 households, but after reviewing the aerial photos, the refined Whatcom County model household allocation was reduced to 337. Employment Similar to the household allocation process described above, allocating the amount of employment also relied on the use of several tools. The aerial photo was useful in identifying where existing large scale commercial development is located, as well as major industrial uses. The countywide geographic information system (GIS) data, such as land parcels and zoning, provided detailed spatial information that also aided in determining where existing employment is. Exhibit 4 shows the resulting existing employment allocation in the Birch Bay Subarea study area. Birch Bay UGA Unlike the adjustment in the total number of households, the total existing employment in the Birch Bay UGA study area was not significantly modified from the WCOG totals. The employment was, however, reallocated to study area TAZs, as appropriate. A total of approximately 595 employees were included in the Birch Bay UGA and surrounding areas. There were some local area changes as described below. The aerial photo revealed some commercial activity located in the central area of the Birch Bay UGA, specifically in TAZs The Transpo Group Page 4 -lie Transpo Group 556 and 554. These areas are zoned General Commercial. Approximately 75 employees were allocated to these two TAZs. The Cherry Point refinery is located south of the Birch Bay UGA. Employment at the refinery is significant as it relates to the traffic volumes and operations of the study area transportation network. Based on information provided by the refinery's representative, the existing (2005) full time employment is reported at 800 employees. Contractor employees can add between 400 and 1,200 more employees depending on work fluctuations. A typical work day at the site experiences approximately 1,100 employees. Approximately 2/3 of those employees (approximately 735 employees) are expected to leave the site in the PM peak period (between 4 pm and 7 pm). Based on these data, the refined Whatcom County model allocated 800 employees to the TAZ for model calibration purposes. City of Blaine and UGA ■ The refined Whatcom County model identified approximately 2,875 employees within the equivalent WCOG TAZs representing the City of Blaine and its UGA. This is approximately 200 employees fewer than the original WCOG model for those TAZs. The refinement was most noticeable in the central part of the UGA with a decrease of approximately 60 employees. These employees were reallocated to other nearby TAZs outside of the Blaine UGA. Exhibit 6 compares existing employment for the refined Whatcom County model and the original WCOG model. ■ Based on the aerial photo and existing land use zoning map, the existing employment allocation outside the City of Blaine but within the UGA was limited to only a few TAZs, consistent with the largely residential nature of the land use in those areas. ■ Areas of the City of Blaine and surrounding UGA with more than 20 employees are generally located in the central part of UGA (subarea 3) and the far western part of the City limits (subarea 1) as illustrated in Exhibit 4. Forecasted (2027) Land Use Similar to the land use allocation for the 2005 base year, the land use forecasts from the WCOG model were reviewed to help support identification of transportation improvement projects for the Birch Bay Subarea Transportation Plan. Refining the land use forecasts within the subarea is needed to provide a more detailed assessment of transportation system needs. The initial land use allocation based on the refined TAZ structure was reviewed by ECONorthwest, one of the subconsultants on the project team. ECONorthwest completed a regional population and economic forecast report for Whatcom County in 2002; the geographic boundaries of Blaine and Birch Bay in that study do not exactly match with the boundaries of the process described in this memorandum. The Transpo Group Page 5 587 The Transpo Group ECONorthwest provided input and recommendations based on their past work and analyses of growth in the in the Birch Bay and Blaine study area. See Appendix A for ECONorthwest's memo summarizing their analysis. Exhibit 5 summarizes the land use for the two UGAs within the study area. The three population columns for 2002, 2007, and 2022 each have low, baseline, and high estimates. The three different estimates were calculated in ECONorthwest's 2002 population and economic forecasting report in order to accommodate different regional growth scenarios. Households After reviewing Transpo's preliminary land use allocation spreadsheets, ECONorthwest provided additional direction for estimating growth in households within the Birch Bay and Blaine UGAs, which were incorporated into the 2027 forecasts. Birch Bay UGA ECONorthwest recommended using a 2.88% average annual growth rate to project Birch Bay's population change between 2005 and 2027, compared to the original WCOG model growth rate of 1.91%. The recommended 2.88% growth rate represents the "high growth" scenario from ECONorthwest's 2002 Whatcom County population forecast. This growth rate was applied to the lower number of existing households in the Birch Bay UGA, which was discussed above. The refined Whatcom County model started from a lower estimate of existing households; the growth rate is approximately 1% higher than the original WCOG model. This results in a difference in the forecast growth between 2005 and 2027 of approximately 1,115 more dwelling units in the Birch Bay UGA in the subarea model than the original WCOG model. Overall, the refined Whatcom County model forecasts approximately 485 more dwelling units than the original WCOG model for 2027 (an additional growth of 1,115 units less the 630 fewer existing dwelling units). Exhibit 6 compares forecasted households for the refined Whatcom County model and the original *COG model. As an example, WCOG TAZ 169 located in the Birch Bay UGA, originally had 13 households allocated in the existing land use allocation, but the aerial photo revealed hundreds of residential structures. The 2005 household allocation was revised to 787; considering this change, the original 2027 allocation also was revised. The 2027 WCOG household allocation was adjusted from 395 to 907 split among three smaller TAZs for the Birch Bay Subarea analysis. The Transpo Group Page 6 De Transpo Group City of Blaine and UGA ECONorthwest recommended applying an annual growth rate of 2.19% within the City of Blaine and its surrounding UGA. Again, this is consistent with the "high growth" scenario from ECONorthwest's 2002 Whatcom County population forecast. This rate is approximately 0.5% higher than the original 1.7% WCOG model annual growth rate for the same area. The combination of the lower number of existing housing units and the higher annual growth rate result in a 2027 forecast of 3,059 dwelling units for the subarea model. This is approximately 450 residential units less than the original WCOG 2027 forecasts. Based on updated information, 2,000 additional households were added in three separate TAZs in the Blaine UGA, near Semiahmoo. In addition, 1,030 more households were added in two separate TAZs in the City of Blaine near the Canadian border. The developments in which these households will be based have not yet been permitted. The 2027 horizon may be too short to realize the construction of all of these households. The additional potential growth was added to the results based on the above growth rates to ensure that transportation system needs could adequately be defined. A sensitivity analysis without some or all of the additional growth will be conducted to ascertain what additional transportation improvements are needed due to the added growth. The additional 3,030 dwelling units described above result in a forecast growth of approximately 4,190 household dwelling units, which results in an average annual growth rate of 5.44% for the City of Blaine and the surrounding UGA. This is approximately 2,600 more dwelling units in the refined Whatcom County model than is forecasted in the original WCOG model. ■ The Semiahmoo area of Blaine within the Birch Bay Subarea also has a significant amount of household growth forecast by 2027. Based on information about pending development projects provided by Whatcom County, TAZs 563 through 568 are forecast to grow from 205 households in 2005'to 645 households by 2027. Employment The Transpo Team revised the previous land use allocations for TAZs within the Birch Bay and Blaine UGAs based on ECONorthwest's suggestions (see below). Based on the ECONorthwest review, the 2027 forecast employment levels for both the Birch Bay UGA and the Blaine UGA were reasonable. See Exhibit 6 for the growth of the employment allocation in the Birch Bay Subarea. The Transpo Group Page 7 The Transpo Group Birch Bay UGA As discussed in the existing land use section, the revised Whatcom County model identified approximately 50 more employees for the Birch Bay UGA than did the original WCOG model. ECONorthwest recommended using a 2.85% average annual growth rate to project Birch Bay's employment change between 2005 and 2027, while the original WCOG model identified a growth rate of 2.15%. The recommended 2.85% growth rate represents the "baseline forecast" scenario from ECONorthwest's 2002 Whatcom County population forecast. The refined Whatcom County model started from a slightly higher existing employment estimate and the recommended annual growth rate is approximately 0.7% higher than the original WCOG model. This results in a difference in growth (2005 to 2027) of 230 more employees for the Birch Bay subarea in the refined Whatcom County model than the original WCOG model. Exhibit 6 compares forecasted employment for the refined Whatcom County model and the original WCOG model. As discussed in the existing land use section, the Cherry Point Refinery is not within the Birch Bay UGA, but it is a major employer in the Birch Bay vicinity. Based on information provided by the refinery's representative, modest growth is anticipated by 2027. An additional 100 full time employees, for a total of 900 full time employees, was assumed by 2027 for use in the refined Whatcom County model. City of Blaine and UGA Based on recent growth and ECONorthwest's employment forecast from the 2002 report, an average annual growth rate of 2.44% was recommended to forecast the City of Blaine and UGA employment from 2005 to 2027. This is consistent with the "baseline forecast" from the 2002 ECONorthwest report. This recommended growth rate is,approximately 1% higher than the 1.4% annual growth rate based on the WCOG model. ■ This results in approximately 690 more employees in the refined Whatcom County model than the original WCOG model. Exhibit 6 compares forecasted employment for the refined Whatcom County model and the original WCOG model. The Transpo Group Page 8 590 N 224 304 219 A225 223 218 211 t220 �r 227 S [C222 $27- - — - - - -2%�;� � LLbb 228 303 217 44 ity o in 229 1 216 230 214 231 243 240 12 1 239 23 � t � a 215 2 2 306 307 238 234 21ZI c 237 170 326 233 v 325 Binh Bay w. 169 324., 323 168 167 171 172 Legend ` ICity Boundaries Birch Bay UGA ®Blaine UGA ❑ WCOG TAZs P,11 322 308.. r 164 \ 1 165 318 Exhibit 1 1,3j Original WCOG Model TAZs in Birch Bay Subarea Birch Bay Subarea Plan A y. 162 316 PUP` N A 224 3 219 25 223 218 +♦ A6 227 222 3 220 228 C' o ain 217 217 229 1 534 533 531 532 230 9 535 575 567 ` 7 564 536 568 540 578 561 577 565 56 550 549 584 607 562 559 560 569 ,g 587 588 546 583 582 570 571 558 548 545 tea,. 580 581 585 572. 5T 557 - 555 74 4 553 556 522 516 09 552 523 615 610 518 520p Birch Bay 521 5Y 5 511 6 1 510 509 514 508 507 506 513 504 505 503 512 590 589 591 611 500 612 592 593 613 501 614 as Legend r city Boundaries ® Birch Bay UGA ® Blaine UGA r7 TAZs 502 n4Z Exhibit 2 Refined Whatcom County Model TAZs in Birch Bay Subarea Birch Bay Subarea Plan 327m m m - -24-3 i 214 530 539, 3 608 5337. 529 544 543 040 600 541 ` 599 5 524 PAti< 527 606 1 526 164 318 t� 162 'h[ 592 N A • - - - - - O - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I♦ • 10 City of Blaine `f* �40 ♦ 1,320 / 2,663 44 �. Exhibit 3 'j Household Land Use in Birch Bay Subarea 5 229 / 272 6 561 / 574 499 / 598 11 d 12 820 / 1,123 Tenspo Birch Bay Subarea Plan 593 • N - - - - --O - - _- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , A r0 ♦ 10 City of Blaine ---—— —- ---- ♦ 1 � 2,640 / 4,285 PO 102 / 183 11 42 / 294 3 195 / 309 190 / 276 1 / 44 2 d $ r 9 316 / 412 159 / 409 4 Birch Bay 119 / 279 Legend - 11 City Boundaries D Birch Bay UGA D Blaine UGA 2005 Employment / 2027 Employment �E 1 Land Use Summary District Exhibit 4 Employment Land Use in Birch Bay Subarea Birch Bay Subarea Plan 236 / 397 a 6 310 / 493 12 flr- Thlrispo 41q, 594 IA f0 E 6. $A W C d E 0 c E yW y rt 3 a a° m 00 s co d C A m ui s X W N C �67 Q N ID 00 Co t 01 N � n t0 M H 3 QIt Co 3 tLo O N n m IE G O L rn N 01 to Q1 U1 N 3 N O C w N O N M 3 N C1 M •� O 4 m M O M ,� n N Lq O S IV N L v 00 O a' O l0 ll1 ro w C V1 00 0 a+ O Q O w t0 N 0 u1 u1 O ON m a a O O• 3 v m J C) ^ d S 3 p1 00 0 00 c O C f0 Q N C ^ rn O Go CL w n rn tD O o N a a M 00 47 J W 3 O 0 C N 00 (] O h 00 S •M N 0 g IA N 7 = a =° aQ v, U 00 to n rn v, Fp T an L u u D ro m F O 'm 3 1� 67 N N = N O iC Q C. ^ 00 00 00 0i NV U1 �u C. 0 N 00 �' N V1 L � � O m rn 00 rn �r N C ^ 00 N h ^ N C1 rtf 00 m M O N N O CA O n m M IA cn N C:, O = m N 00 N a E O ^ O aj C N t0 co C N w m 00 ni N J2 E 3 Z N = O J n N YI N N E O a E W O m 00 O N m N H IA CJ N O = N M C,Ln Vn N cu N M LA 0 0 00 � O N wN 3 M fr T 0OQ Q _cV m O 3 m O 'O C O N w nL N mF c w E w c ° °J m w c N ro � 3 o j. L Q E u o 3 w y y w p N > iE v ry d 3 w p m c ro oL . c a° ° E EZ uv cM E a, C = O F p o C ro u w wv °� 0000> a >b aV MLva E s o 3 ro E w 01 y w roc m w E O 7 .° N L2: W w 3 N w BE V N L i _ 7 Q u F o N O ro u ` m C,o F 01 ww O.+ 3 w ro w �c v c� 0 Q w C — roue o ta$ wb of N N w w m N y V ro > N w c O nE '(Sw�yw;? F >� w'o�u+oEw itl > O 0/ U C ro ry C w o rou O b w L V OOL C u y o C°� w C - p w � �w ui ro m i N row a� -ro Eoamcro c w C— j v1 O ow 0 wd w3ro°yac r� U o. ai M Ec amE Ea>ro of o� m,EEoroac 'O C w V L C U -O t0 ao t-c3�Em M w O ro o- o E = w o V w r w 3wb•.-c y Os-o ro V w oo u-`�bc0 b �u Etw ?3cy!�fc .� o, cv,' Nropw N o E a c a c w v O v c E v U o,o ro �° c c 5. 'O 7 w 0� V y O. . L2 OU = v F$ V �' y E w ro w0 w ro o w ^ o > �rov cw�'occ a:!:! E w U O' y 3 L O C O1 oo— W v 3 W c o 3 w b-t,3 -o c `va wu'a a u o+ro ro a >U aO w c a-u -c o� cau Qa -- �o U w E w c w O 7Ew3; aE Eya 3 —tpororo3> E= E- cm ao 3 o� a m 3 o'wa° a;gtvmcL o c `0 3 w c— ro u>.now NuZcC E w o b a o^° o ovw�EE'J roJ ba>bp�E wt S o a v w u QO w c a F c._FvN33 ro VF3 � N M �• V1 w O fIS a a 0 co s m m 595 Exhibit 6: Birch Bay UGA and Blaine City/UGA Land Use Control Totals Housholds (HH) Employment (EMP) Birch Bay UGA Birch Bay Subarea WCOG Estimate Original 2005 4,085 4,716 2027 7,629 7,145 2.88% 1.91 % HH growth 3,544 2,429 Blaine City/UGA Birch Bay Subarea WCOG Estimate Original 2005 1,899 2,419 2027 3,059 3,507 2.19% 1.70% HH growth 1,160 1,088 HH growth + 3,030 du's 4,190 Refined + 3,030 du's 6,089 5.44% Birch Bay Subarea WCOG Estimate Original 2005 593 545 2027 1,100 870 2.85% 2.15% EMP growth 507 325 Birch Bay Subarea WCOG Estimate Original 2005 2,876 3,081 2027 4,888 4,197 2.44% 1.41 % EMP growth 2,012 1,116 596 Appendix A: ECONorthwest Land Use Evaluation Memorandum The Transpo Group Inc. 11730118th Avenue N.E., Suite 600 Kirkland, WA 98034-7120 425.821.3665 Fax: 425.825.8434 597 ECONorthwest ECONOMICS • FINANCE • PLANNING Phone • (541) 687-0051 Suite 400 Other Offices FAX • (541) 344-0562 99 W. 10th Avenue Portland • (503) 222-6060 info@eugene.econw.com Eugene, Oregon 97401-3001 Seattle • (206) 622-2403 March 27, 2007 TO: Jon Pascal FROM: Beth Goodman and Anne Fifield SUBJECT: EVALUATION OF THE TRANSPO GROUP'S ESTIMATE OF HOUSING AND EMPLOYMENT IN BIRCH BAY AND BLAINE The Transpo Group developed population and employment estimates for Birch Bay and Blaine for the period 2005 to 2027. These estimates were used to allocate population and employment to TAZs for transportation planning purposes. The Transpo Group asked ECONorthwest to evaluate the forecasts based on recent development, growth trends, and the forecasts presented in the "Whatcom County Population and Economic Forecasts" prepared by ECONorthwest in 2002. ECO's evaluation of the population forecasts is that the population base and growth rate assumptions for the City of Blaine are reasonable but the population base and growth rate assumptions for Birch Bay are low. Our evaluation of the employment forecasts is that the employment base for both cities are reasonable. The growth rate assumptions for employment in Birch Bay are reasonable but the growth rate assumption for employment in Blaine are probably low. The remainder of this memorandum presents our conclusions in more detail, including an explanation of the factors we considered and information supporting our conclusions. The memorandum is organized into the following sections: • Evaluation of population forecasts presents ECO's evaluation of the population base and growth assumptions, • Evaluation of employment forecasts presents ECO's evaluation of the employment base and growth assumptions • Appendix presents additional data that ECO considered in the evaluations. EVALUATION OF POPULATION FORECASTS This section describes ECO's evaluation of the Transpo Group's estimates of the existing population base and the population forecasts. Rather than forecasting population, the Transpo Group developed forecasts for the number of households in Birch Bay and Blaine in 2027. They began with estimates of the number of households in the Birch Bay and Blaine UGAs in 2005 as the basis for their forecasts. Evaluation of population and employment forecasts March 26, 2007 Page 2 for Blaine and Birch Bay POPULATION BASE The Transpo Group started with the Whatcom Council of Government's (WCOG) estimate of households in Blaine and Birch Bay in 2005 and refined the estimate, based on an analysis of current aerial photographs. Table 1 shows WCOG's estimate of households in 2005, the Transpo Group's refinement of the estimate of households in 2005, the Transpo Group's forecast for households in 2027, and change in population from 2005 to 2027. ECO has evaluated two items presented in Table 1: (1) the Transpo Group's estimate of housing in 2005 and (2) the Transpo Group's forecast for dwelling units in 2027. Table 1. Estimate of households, Blaine and Birch Bay UGAs, 2005 and 2027 2005 WCOG Transpo Group Change 2005-2027 2005 2027 Number Percent AAGR Birch Bay UGA 5,103 Blaine w/UGA 2,235 3,734 2,035 8,426 3,351 4,692 1,317 126% 3.77% 65% 2.29% Source: Transpo Group Note: AAGR is average annual growth rate The Transpo Group estimated that Birch Bay and Blaine have fewer dwelling units than the WCOG estimate. ECO's evaluation is that the Transpo Group's estimates may be low, especially in Birch Bay. Blaine The Transpo Group estimated that the Blaine UGA has about 200 fewer dwelling units than the WCOG estimate. Based on 2000 Census data and building permit activity, this estimate may be low. In 2000, the Census estimated that the City of Blaine had 1,737 dwelling units. Between 2000 and 2005, the City reported issuing building permits for 277 single-family detached units and 142 multifamily dwellings. Based on these estimates, Blaine had about 2,160 dwellings in 2005, 125 more dwellings than the Transpo Group's estimates. It is possible that some of the building permits may not have resulted in construction of a dwelling unit, making the Transpo Group's estimate closer to the actual number of dwellings in Blaine in 2005. Birch Bay The Transpo Group estimated that Birch Bay had 1,369 fewer dwelling units than WCOG. ECO believes the Transpo Group's estimate of dwelling units is too low. The 2000 Census reported that the Birch Bay Census Designated Place �CDP) had 5,105 dwelling units, which is close to WCOG's estimate of dwelling units in 2005. Interviews with local real estate professionals in Birch Bay indicate that the area experienced significant residential development between 2002 and early 2006, consistent with regional housing trends. If is true, Birch Bay should have more dwelling units in 2005 than in 2000. Our 1 ECO was unable to obtain an estimate of building permit activity in Birch Bay from Whatcom County when this memorandum was written. 599 Evaluation of population and employment forecasts March 26, 2007 Page 3 for Blaine and Birch Bay conclusion is that either the Transpo Group's estimate of dwelling units in Birch Bay is low or the geography used to define Birch Bay is different between the Census and the current project. POPULATION FORECAST The Transpo Group asked ECO to evaluate their forecast of dwelling units in Blaine and Birch Bay in 2027 (shown in Table 1) based on recent growth trends and the population forecasts presented in the "Whatcom County Population and Economic Forecasts" report. This section discusses the evaluation. The Transpo Group presented their forecast in terms of housing units, but ECO's 2002 forecast was for population. The first step in evaluating the Transpo Group's forecast of housing units in 2027 was to convert households into population. Converting households to population has two assumptions and two points for uncertainty: household size and occupancy rate. Household sizes in Blaine and Birch Bay have remained relatively stable over the past ten years, suggesting that it is unlikely that they would vary substantially over the next twenty years.2 The stability of occupancy rates is less certain. The factors contributing to the purchase and ownership of second homes are complex and interconnected with trends in the economy at the local through international levels. For example, purchase of homes by Canadians, which is common in the area, varies based on the strength of the Canadian dollar relative to the U.S. dollar. Canadians purchased fewer homes in Birch Bay during the 1990's when the Canadian dollar was weak but have purchased more homes in Birch Bay during the last five years, when the Canadian dollar has been strong relative to the U.S. dollar. This complexity make it is unclear how occupancy rates will change in the planning period. In 2000, Whatcom County's occupancy rate was about 87%. Blaine's occupancy rate (86%) was similar to the County's average. Birch Bay's occupancy rate (42%) was much lower than the County average. If Birch Bay's occupancy rate became more like the County average over the next twenty years, it could have a significant impact on the forecast of households and population.3 In the absence of information about future occupancy rates in Birch Bay, ECO has assumed occupancy rates will be the same in the future as they were in the past. Table 2 shows the results of the conversion of households to population. Based on the Transpo Group's forecast and the assumptions about household size and occupancy, in 2027 Birch Bay would have about 8,170 residents and Blaine would have about 7,160 residents. 2 Household sizes have been decreasing nationally over the past several decades, a trend that is likely to continue. However, household size in Birch Bay has remained stable between 1990 to 2000 and household size increased (from 2.34 persons per household) in Blaine during the 1990's. 3 For example, if Birch Bay's occupancy rate increased to the County average (87%) and if Birch Bay had 8,426 dwellings in 2027, the population would be about 17,000 residents. WE Evaluation of population and employment forecasts March 26, 2007 Page 4 for Blaine and Birch Bay Table 2. Population estimate based on forecast of households, Birch Bay and Blaine, 2027 2027 2000 Population Est. DU HH size Occupancy Estimate Birch Bay UGA 8,426 2.33 42% 8,246 Blaine w/UGA 3,351 2.48 86% 7,158 Source: Census, 2000; Transpo Group; calculations by ECONorthwest The next step in the evaluation was to compare growth over the planning period. Table 3 shows a comparison of forecast population change in Birch Bay and Blaine between 2000 and 2027.4 Over the twenty-seven year period, Birch Bay is forecast to grow by 3,211 residents at an average annual rate of 1.87%. Over the same period, Blaine is forecast to grow by 3,388 residents at an average annual rate of 2.40%. Table 3. Population change, Birch Bay and Blaine, 2000-2027 2000 2027 Change Census Transpo Number Percent AAGR Birch Bay UGA 4,961 8,172 3,211 65% 1.87% Blaine w/UGA 3,770 7,158 3,388 90% 2.40% Source: Census, 2000; Transpo Group; calculations by ECONorthwest Blaine ECO's conclusion is that this forecast is probably reasonable for the Blaine UGA. This conclusion is based on historical population change and recent development activity in Blaine, shown in Table A-1 and A-2 in the Appendix. Between 2000 and 2006, population in the City of Blaine has grown at an average annual rate of 2.92% and has issued permits for 419 residential units. In a previous evaluation of population growth in Blaine, ECO concluded that the City is likely to grow between 3% and 4% annually between 2007 and 2012. The Transpo Group's forecast of growth fits with the "high growth" scenario from ECO's 2002 County population forecast, which projects that Blaine will grow at an average annual rate of 2.19% between 2007 to 2022. Birch Bay The evaluation of the forecast for Birch Bay is more difficult for three reasons: (1) recent development or population estimates are not available for Birch Bay, (2) there is uncertainty about whether Birch Bay will continue to have a low occupancy rate, and (3) there are significant differences between the estimates of the number of dwelling units in Birch Bay in 2005 from WCOG and the Transpo Group. 4 ECO used the Census estimate of population from 2000 because there is no more recent estimate of population for Birch Bay. 601 Evaluation of population and employment forecasts March 26, 2007 Page 5 for Blaine and Birch Bay ECO made the following assumptions about Birch Bay: (1) Birch Bay has grown at least as fast as Whatcom County since 2000 (1.67% AAGR)5, (2) the occupancy rate will be the same in the future as it has been historically, and (3) the Transpo Group's estimate of dwelling units in Birch Bay in 2005 is accurate. Based on these assumptions, the Transpo Group's forecast of population growth rate at 1.87% annually for the twenty-two year period is low. Historically, Birch Bay has grown much faster than the County. Between 1990 and 2000, Birch Bay grew at 7.1% annually, compared with the County's 2.7% annual growth rate. Interviews with real estate professionals indicate that the housing market in Birch Bay grew very quickly from 2002 to spring of 2006 and has since slowed but is still active. Based on this information, the best estimate for Birch Bay's growth is the "high growth" scenario from ECO's 2002 County population forecast, which projects that Birch Bay's population will grow at an average annual rate of 2.88% between 2007 to 2022. In addition, the Transpo Group's forecast for dwelling units is lower than the estimate of the build -out capacity of Birch Bay by 2022 presented in the Birch Bay Community Plan. The Plan estimates that the build -out capacity of the proposed Birch Bay UGA is 3,450 additional housing units by 2022. County planning staff indicate that Birch Bay has grown faster than the expectations presented in the Community Plan. Based on the Transpo Group's estimate of housing in 2005 and forecast for housing, Birch Bay would have capacity for nearly 300 more dwelling units than is forecast for 2027. In summary, ECO believes that the Transpo Group's base population for Birch Bay is low and the growth rate assumption is low. EVALUATION OF EMPLOYMENT FORECAST Change in employment for a city is generally measured using data from the Quarterly Census of Employment and Workforce (QCEW), confidential data about covered employment.6 ECO did not have access to QCEW data for Blaine or Birch Bay for this project. The best source of information for recent employment figures available to ECO was covered employment for the entire County. Between 2001 and 2005, employment in Whatcom County grew from 68,918 to 78,491 jobs, an increase of 9,573 jobs at an average annual rate of 3.31%. The forecasts of employment in the 2002 "Whatcom County Population and Economic Forecasts" report assume that employment in Blaine and Birch Bay will grow at a similar rate as the County. Based on that assumption, it is likely that employment has grown by about 3% annually since 2002. 5 It is likely that Birch Bay has grown much faster than the County. Between 1990 and 2000, Birch Bay grew at 7.1% annually, compared with the County's 2.7% annual growth rate. 6 Covered employment includes only employees who are covered by unemployment insurance, such as sole proprietors. It is unclear whether the estimates of employment from WCOG and the Transpo Group in Table 4 are for covered or total employment. It is likely that these estimates are for covered employment because estimates of total employment are not available from the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Using an estimate of covered employment for transportation planning with an UGA is reasonable because most sole proprietors in Whatcom County are likely to be employed from their home and have comparatively little impact on transportation. 602 Evaluation of population and employment forecasts March 26, 2007 Page 6 for Blaine and Birch Bay Table 4 shows the Transpo Group's estimate of employment in Blaine and Birch Bay in 2005 and 2027. Again, the Transpo Group's base estimate is lower than WCOG's estimates, by 60 employees in Birch Bay and is 126 employees in Blaine. ECO has no way to evaluate the accuracy of these estimates. It is worth noting that these estimates are higher than the estimates presented in the "Whatcom County Population and Economic Forecasts" report, which projected that Birch Bay had 356 covered employees and Blaine had 1,752 covered employees. The Transpo Group projected that employment would grow by 436 jobs in Birch Bay between 2005 to 2027, at an average annual rate of 2.83%. In the Blaine UGA, they projected that employment would grow by 1,069 jobs over the twenty-two year period at an average annual rate of 1.44%. Table 4. Estimate of employment, Blaine and Birch Bay UGAs, 2005 and 2027 2005 Transpo Group Change 2005-2027 WCOG 2005 2027 Number Percent AAGR Blaine w/UGA 3,0131 2,887 3,956 1,069 37% 1.44% Source: Transpo Group Blaine Based on recent growth and ECO's employment forecast from the 2002 report, presented in Table A-6, our conclusion is that the Transpo Group's forecast for employment in Blaine is probably low. The Transpo Group forecast employment growth of 1.44% annually, which is lower than the "low growth" scenario presented in the 2002 report. We recommend using the baseline forecast for Blaine from the 2002 report, which assumes annual change of 2.44% over the 2007-2022 period. Birch Bay Based on recent growth and ECO's employment forecast from the 2002 report, presented in Table A-7, our conclusion is that the Transpo Group's forecast of employment for Birch Bay is reasonable. We recommend using the baseline forecast for Birch Bay from the 2002 report, which assumes annual change of 2.85% over the 2007-2022 period. 603 APPENDIX: ADDITIONAL DATA This appendix presents data that was used in the evaluation of the Transpo Group's forecast for dwelling units and employment in Blaine and Birch Bay. Table A-1. Historic population growth, Whatcom County, Blaine, Unincorporated Whatcom County, 1970 to 2006 Year Whatcom Co. Blaine Unincorp. 1970 81,983 1,955 34,004 1980 106,701 2,363 48,622 1990 127,780 2,489 59,187 2000 166,826 3,770 74,231 2006 184,300 4,480 81,066 AAGR 1970-2006 2.28% 2.33% 2.44% 1990-2006 2.32% 3.74% 1.99% 2000-2006 1.67% 2.92% 1.48% Source: Office of Financial Management Table A-2. Number and type of residential building permits approved, City of Blaine, 2000 to 2005 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Total West Blaine Single-family dwellings 16 17 22 19 41 30 145 Multifamily dwelings 0 0 0 0 14 16 30 Central Blaine Single-family dwellings 9 14 12 19 19 39 112 Multifamily dwelings 18 6 10 13 28 33 108 East Blaine Single-family dwellings 0 2 0 1 13 4 20 Multifamily dwelings 0 0. 0 0 4 0 4 Total dwelling units 43 39 44 52 119 122 419 Source: City of Blaine M Evaluation of population and employment forecasts March 26, 2007 Page 8 for Blaine and Birch Bay Table A-3. Population forecast scenarios, Whatcom County, 2002-2022 Population High Low Growth Baseline Growth Year Scenario Scenario Scenario 2002 174,501 173,471 171,066 2007 195,931 187,980 182,901 2012 217,426 202,848 194,248 2017 238,636 217,574 204,916 2022 261,084 231,928 215,850 Average Annual Growth Rates 2002 - - - 2007 2.34% 1.62% 1.35% 2012 2.10% 1.53% 1.21 % 2017 1.88% 1.41 % 1.08% 2022 1.81 % 1.29% 1.05% Average Annual Net Changes 2002 - - - 2007 4,286 2,902 2,367 2012 4,299 2,974 2,269 2017 4,242 2,945 2,134 2022 4,490 2,871 2,187 Source: Whatcom County Population and Economic Forecasts, ECONorthwest 2002 Table A-4. Population forecast scenarios, Blaine UGA, 2002-2022 High growth scenario Baseline Low growth scenario Year Pop. Change AAGR Pop. Change AAGR Pop. Change AAGR 2002 5,011 -- -- 4,959 -- -- 4,886 -- -- 2007 5,738 727 2.75% 5,328 369 1.45% 5,136 250 1.00% 2012 6,465 727 2.41 % 5,711 383 1.40% 5,364 228 0.87% 2017 7,171 706 2.09% 6,085 374 1.28% 5,565 201 0.74% 2022 7,942 771 2.06% 6,440 355 1.14% 5,775 210 0.74% Source: Whatcom County Population and Economic Forecasts, ECONorthwest 2002 Table A-5. Population forecast scenarios, Birch Bay, 2002-2022 High growth scenario Baseline Low growth scenario Year Pop. Change AAGR Pop. Change AAGR Pop. Change AAGR 2002 4,815 -- -- 4,721 -- -- 4,605 -- -- 2007 6,004 1,189 4.51 % 5,265 544 2.21 % 4,941 336 1.42% 2012 7,193 1,189 3.68% 5,835 570 2.08% 5,242 301 1,19% 2017 8,347 1,154 3.02% 6,391 556 1.84% 5,495 253 0.95% 2022 9,619 1,272 2.88% 6,912 521 1.58% 5,764 269 0.96% Source: Whatcom County Population and Economic Forecasts, ECONorthwest 2002 605 Evaluation of population and employment forecasts March 26, 2007 for Blaine and Birch Bay Table A-6. Employment forecast scenarios, Blaine UGA, 2007-2022 High growth scenario Baseline Low growth scenario Year Pop. Change AAGR Pop. Change AAGR Pop. Change AAGR 2007 2,357 -- -- 2,262 -- -- 2,200 -- -- 2012 2,765 408 3.25% 2,580 318 2.67% 2,470 270 2.34% 2017 3,190 425 2.90% 2,909 329 2.43% 2,740 269 2.09% 2022 3,655 465 2.76%1 3,247 338 2.22%1 3,022 282 1.98% Source: Whatcom County Population and Economic Forecasts, ECONorthwest 2002 Table A-7. Employment forecast scenarios, Birch Bay, 2007-2022 High growth scenario Baseline Low growth scenario Year Pop. Change AAGR Pop. Change AAGR Pop. Change AAGR 2007 507 -- -- 486 -- -- 473 -- -- 2012 608 102 3.730/o 567 81 3.13% 543 71 2.82% 2017 716 108 3.31 % 653 86 2.86% 615 71 2.49% 2022 835 119 3.12%1 741 88 2.56% 690 75 2.34% Source: Whatcom County Population and Economic Forecasts, ECONorthwest 2002 Page 9 Appendix B: Final Land Use Tables The Transpo Group 607 Key to Land Use Tables Variable Description Units TAZ Transportation Analysis Zone ID number Total HH Total Households Households Un-occ HH Un-occupied Households Households Occ HH Occupied Households Households Total EMP Total Employment Employees EDU_EMP Educational Employment Employees FIRE_EMP Finance, Insurance and Real Estate Employment Employees SERV_EMP Service Employment Employees GOV_EMP Government Employment Employees MAN_EMP Manufacturing Employment Employees RET_EMP Retail Employment Employees WSLEMP Wholesale Employment Employees TCU EMP Transportation, Communications and Utility Employment Employees CON_EMP Construction Employment Employees AG_EMP Agriculture Employment Employees OTR_EMP Other Employment Employees MIN_EMP Mining Employment Employees The Transpo Group •�i 2005 Land Use ��o®®oo©000000000 �0©m0000000000000 �000aoo©0000©0000 �0©®®00o®000moomo ©o©�ommoo�■mmoomo ®©o©®000®00000000 ��mo®m�00000000000 ���m®moomoa©o©0000 �mm0�o©mooaoo©000 ■��®o0©ooaoo®000000 r��000®oomommm®0000 ��®�moom00000©000 ��®�moo0oo©0000©0 Imo®m00000m0000�o �00000000��0000000 �aoo�000�m©®o®omo ®©mmo©ooao©00000 �m©0000000®om0000 �mom000000©o©©000 �000 0000000000000 � o00 0000000000000 �000m0000��o©00000 �aoo moom000000000 ®gym 0oom000000000 �©oo 0000000000000 �o©o 0000000000000 �©m00000000000000 ��o®0000000000000 �om0000000000000 ��m�0000000000000 ®��®moo®0000000©o ®0000000000000000 �©©©000000a000000 �©oo®oo©000000000 �©oo©0000000©0000 �a©a0000000000000 �©©00000000000000 �mm©©ooa000000000 �©m000©0000000000 �m©®©000000000000 ®���®o©®000000000 mom©oo©000000000 moo®a0000000000©o mmm©00000■�©000000 �000000©000000000 �m®m®oo®000000000 ®m®m®oom0000©0000 ©0©00000000©0000 Imo®0000000000000 Imo®0000000000000 ®momm0000®0000000 ®000 000000©000000 �®o®000©o©0000000 �®00 000000©00©000 ®©0 000000�00©000 ���oo 000©oorrr©000000 Sao©000000©m©0000 �o©o 000©000000000 Como ©oomooa®©0000 � ®oo 0000000000000 moo©m00000m®o©000 �mo0000000®000000 �m©o®oo©oo©oo©000 �omm0000000000000 ��mm000®o©�0000000 moo 000000�000��000� �m®®000000■s000000 ®a0000000�rs000000 �©mm0000000000000 ®mom0000000000000 �00000©®000000000 ®mom©oo©000000000 �000®oomo©0000000 �000®o©®o©00000©o ���m0oom000000000 �mmm0000000000000 �©000000©00000000 ©00000000©©m0000 �m®®©oo©000000000 �m©0000ao©00000©o �m©00000000000000 mom®0000000000000 �m©00000000000000 �mmm0000000000000 �mmm0000000000000 �m©00000000000000 �o©000000000a0000 �m�©0000000000000 ®mom00000©00000©o ��o�mo0o0��0000000 ��m�oo©000■0000000 ��o�000000■0000000 �®oo ©00000©000000 •1• 2005 Land Use ��®©o0 000000000 moo©oo■00000000000 �o©o 0000000000000 �000®om00000m0000 �o©©0000000000000 �0000000000000000 ©o©0000000000000 �00000�0000000000 �m®®©o ©000000000 �m©00000000e00000 �m©00000000000000 ©©©0000000000000 ©o©0000000000000 �mmm0000000000000 �o©m©oo©000000000 �m000000000000000 Imo®0000000000000 moo©m0000000m0000 �m©mmoo�000000000 �0000000000000000 �®©®0000000000000 ®om0oo��000000000 �mommoo0oo®0©0000 ©oao 0000000000 �m©mm��0oo0000000 ©oa © 000®000®000 Imo®o�■oo�000000000 �ommo�t�00000000000 Imo®©00000©000000 ��000000000000000 �mom0000000000000 �0�m0000000000�ao� �mom0000000000000 �00000000moo�0000 �0000000000000000 �00000000mom00000 �000�000000000000 roam®oaooaooa0000 Total 6,855 2,555 4,400 1,808 271 141 1,164 386 1,311 384 288 446 138 0 278 610 2027 Land Use ��o��oo�oo®©o�000 �ma��oomoammmoomo ��o�®©omoomo©oo©o �m©m®©om®omomaomo �ooa�o®®oo�mm©©®o ®mommoom®oo®®m©oo ®omm�o®oomo©0000 �€®mom©oo®ooaoo©000 ��mm�o©�0omom®000 �momm00000m000000 �000®oo®om®®m0000 ��®�moomoom0000mo mommo®®oomm000®o �000000©ooa000000 �m©mmo©mmao©©0000 �m©moo®®ommm0000 �mo�®00000®000000 �000®oo©om000000� �000�0000�0000000 ©o©m0000©o©00000 mom®oo®000000000 ®��®o©m000000000 �mom000000�000000 �o©00000000000000 ��m�0000000000000 ��o�0000000000000 ��o�0000000000000 ��m�©oo©oo©000000 ®��®moomoo©0000ao Imo®0000000000000 ��ommoomoo0oo0000 ��00000®0000000©0 �m©m0000000000000 ®m©m0000000000000 ��0�000©0000000©0 �mmomo©moo©000000 ®©m0000000000000 ®���©o©moo©000000 �mom000®o©oo©oo©o Imo®00000000000©0 �©o©®00000moo©000 �o®®®oomoo©o©®000 �m®m®oom0000©moon ©o©moomoo©o©0000 Imo®©000000000000 Imo®©000000000©oo ®®om®0000m000©000 ®mo0a00000©0000©o ®®o®moo©o©0000000 �00®®00000000©000 mom®oom00000m000 �m©mmoom00000©000 ®©00000©oo©000000 moo©moom000m00000 �o©0000©oo©©00000 �omomoo®Doom©0000 �®ommoo©©oo©00000 �ooam00000m®00000 Imo®m00000®000000 ®©®m000000000000 ��m®©oomooa000000 ��m®mo©mo©000©000 �®om0000000000000 ��®�0000000000000 �mam0000000000000 ®mmo©000000000000 Imo®moomo©0oo0000 �mo�©oo©000000000 �0ommoo®oa0o©©o00 ��o�0000000000000 room®oomo©0000000 ���®�oom000000000 �mm®moomoom000000 �mommo©o©o©000000 Imo®moo®oo©©00000 �o®m000a0000©0000 �m©m®o©mo©00000©o �m©00000000000000 ��mm0000000000000 �®©�moom000000000 ��m00000000000000 ®©m0000000000000 ®©m0000000000000 �®®�0000000000000 ®mom©0000©00000©o ��o�momom00000000 ®�m�oo©0000000000 ��o�0000000000000 ��o�moo®oom000000 611 2027 Land Use ®®mmo©mo oa0000 � mommoom000000000 m©mmoamao 000000 000mom000 om0000 o©®000000 00000is oo©0000000000000 �0000Q000■o0000000 �0000000000000000 ®©m000m00000©000 mm©00000000000000 ®©m0000000000000 �mom0000000000000 mmmm0000000000000 m®©mono©0000©0000 mm�00000000000000 mm ®0000000000000 mo a®000000©m0000 m0©mm000000000000 m0000000000000000 m®©©®00000©oo©000 m®ommoom00000m000 m®oa000®oomoo©000 m®om000®o■omo©©000 m©oa0000000000000 �0©m®®o®oo©oo©000 ©oa000mo®000®000 mmo®0000000e00000 �mmmaoo©000000000 �mm0000©oo©000000 �mmm000000a000000 �mom0000000000000 �mm00000000000000 �mm■�0000000000000 m©o©m0000m0000000 �0000000000000000 �000m0000mom00000 m�000000000000000 m om®0000aooa0000 TOW 15,024 2,555 12,089 71815 378 23B 2,080 494 1,680 1,002 381 593 329 19 395 612 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 2009-065 CLEARANCES Initial Date Date Received in Council Office A enda Date Assi ned to: Originator: Gary Davis 6/-0 1'L Pt i loed � FR E 0 D� V �/� E D 1113109 Planning Committee; Introduction Division Head: 1/27/09 Pub Wrks/Council Dept. Head: David Stalheim JAN 0 6 2009 Prosecutor: cif H IATC O M COUNTY PurchasinglBudget: COUNCIL Executive: Pete Kremen I �0 TITLE OF DOCUMENT. - Ordinance amending Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan Chapter Four — Capital Facilities, Chapter Six — Transportation, and Appendix G -- Transportation Impact Fees Background Information ATTACHMENTS: (1) Memorandum to County Council (2) Proposed Ordinance for Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan amendments SEPA review required? ( x ) Yes ( ) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing? ( ) Yes ( ) NO SEPA review completed? ( x )Yes ( ) NO Requested Date: 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.) Amend Chapters Four and Six, and Appendix G of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan to revise concurrency provisions for transportation facilities and establish policy for transportation impact fees. COMMITTEE ACTION: COUNCIL ACTION: 1/13/2009: Approved to introduce tonight. 1/13/2009: Introduced 1/27/2009: Substituted page 243 and forwarded 1/27/2009: Council forwarded to Concurrency Council for approval. Committee recommends 6-1 Nelson opposed having public hearing before forwarding to concurrency, Caskey-Schreiber opposed. Related County Contract #: Related File Numbers: Ordinance or Resolution Number: CMP2008-00004 Please Note: Once adopted and signed, ordinances and resolutions are available for viewing andprinting on the County's website at: www.co.whatcom.wa.us/council. 613 WHATCOM COUNTY pp` Planning &Development Services 3�P4GOM 5280 Northwest Drive A Bellingham, WA 98226-9097 360-676-6907, TTY 800-833-6384 �9syING40 360-738-2525 Fax MEMORANDUM TO: Whatcom County Planning Commission THROUGH: David Stalheim, Director David Stalheim Director J.E. "Sam" Ryan Assistant Director FROM: Wain Harrison, Long Range Planning Supervisor Gary Davis, AICP, Senior Planner, Transportation DATE: December 31, 2008 SUBJECT: Ordinance to Amend Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan -Transportation Concurrency and Transportation Impact Fees The attached proposed ordinance would amend Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan, revising policy for transportation concurrency and transportation impact fees (TIF). PDS staff is forwarding to the County Council two proposed ordinances on these items for consideration at the January 13, 2009 Planning and Development Committee meeting. One would amend the Whatcom County Code and the other would amend the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan. The code amendments can be enacted immediately, but the Comprehensive Plan amendments must be considered concurrently with other proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments. For this reason, staff has prepared separate ordinances for the code amendments and the Comprehensive Plan amendments for those items. The code amendments apply only to transportation concurrency (Chapter 20.78), while the Comprehensive Plan amendments apply to both transportation concurrency and transportation impact fees. Adding l"IF policy to the Comprehensive Plan at this time allows the county to adopt code amendments establishing a TIF program later this year without waiting for the next concurrent review of Comprehensive Plan amendments. The requested action for the WCCP amendments is to forward the item to concurrent review. The Planning Commission has recommended approval of the draft amendments shown as Exhibit A in the proposed ordinance. The following summarizes the proposed Transportation Concurrency and TIF WCCP amendments: 614 Description and Analysis of Proposed Amendments Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan - Chapter 4 Capital Facilities o Add text in Background Summary section to clarify GMA authorization of impact fees. New wording more clearly describes facilities eligible for impact fee funding and removes reference to formulation of an impact fee ordinance in 2004. o Remove specific level of service (LOS) standards for transportation facilities in Policy 4G-1, referring to the LOS standards listed in Chapter 6, Transportation. Currently the WCCP adopts transportation LOS in both Chapters 4 and 6. This amendment would consolidate transportation LOS standards in one location. o Update Goal 4J and Policy 4J-1 to reflect adoption of transportation concurrence ordinance. Current wording refers to concurrency management program in the future tense; new wording reflects that it has been adopted. Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan - Chapter 6 Transportation o Add text in GMA Requirements section to describe GMA concurrence requirements. New text summarizes GMA's transportation concurrency requirements and definition. o Amend text in Overall County Transportation section explaining LOS standards for county and state transportation facilities. New text provides a clearer discussion of how LOS standards are measured, and of the LOS standards adopted by the county for county roads, and by Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) for state highways. LOS for both county and state facilities is generally LOS C in rural areas and LOS D in urban areas, except for a proposed amendment that would set a LOS D for county roads in rural areas that serve as primary routes connecting urban areas and activity centers. The proposed change in LOS for these roads reflects that they function differently from other rural roads, permitting peak hour congestion consistent with that in the city urban growth areas. If these roads were to retain a rural LOS, the ability to develop within urban growth areas at urban densities as required by GMA may be affected. WAC 365-195-510(3)(b) states, "Levels of service should be set to reflect realistic expectations consistent with the achievement of growth aims. Setting such levels too high could, under some regulatory strategies, result in no growth. As a deliberate policy, this would be contrary to the act." The roads affected by this change are shown on Map 14A are all designated as part of the primary road system in the regional transportation plan (see discussion of the regional transportation plan in the discussion of the countywide planning policies, above). o Add to Policy 6A-3 the adopted LOS previously listed in Chapter 4, Policy 4G-1. The additions maintain the existing adopted LOS except to adopt LOS D for specified primary routes in rural areas (as discussed above), and amending the wording of transit LOS to reinforce coordination between county and Whatcom Transit Authority to ensure adequate transit service in urban areas. o Add text to Policy 6A-4 to adjust LOS standards for new developments with access to nonmotorized modes. This amendment would affect developments within urban growth areas that provide access to transit service or nonmotorized facilities (bike or 4 615 pedestrian facilities). The LOS volume -to -capacity ratio that must be met by the development would be raised where these facilities are provided. o Add text in Policy 6A-5 encouraging extension of city concurrency review in UGAs. This amendment is described in proposed 20.78.110 below. o Add text in Policy 6A-6 to address other impacts to transportation facilities. This amendment is to clarify that intersection function standards or other criteria adopted in the county development standards would be used to evaluate impacts to transportation facilities under SEPA review of projects (as opposed to the volume -to - capacity standards for roadway segments that are adopted in the comprehensive plan and used for concurrency evaluation purposes). This would replace the current policy 6A-7, which states, "consider including intersection function in level of service definitions." o Add text to the Financing section and policy 613-6 to provide for a transportation impact fee system. The text references the GMA's authorization of transportation impact fees and the county's impact fee regulations, and the policy establishes that the impact fees would "fund a proportionate share of the costs of transportation system improvements that benefit and are reasonably related to new development," which is in accordance with GMA. o Amend title of the Local Arterial Improvements section and Policy 6H-2 to add the word "collectors." This amendment clarifies that the policy applies to county -owned collectors as well as arterials. o Amend action item 4 in the Transportation — Action Plan section to reflect adoption of a transportation concurrency ordinance. Replaces the word "create" with "maintain" in reference to the transportation concurrency program (or the action item could be deleted altogether). Please contact Mike Donahue at extension 50608 or Gary Davis at extension 50246 if you have questions concerning these amendments. 616 MINUTES FROM THE ]ANUARY 27, 2009, PUBLIC WORKS AND SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL — COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 1. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER FOUR — CAPITAL FACILITIES, CHAPTER SIX — TRANSPORTATION, AND APPENDIX G — TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES BACKGROUND INFORMATION (AB2009-065) Caskey-Schreiber moved to recommend approval to the full Council. Mike Donahue, Public Works Department, stated there is a substitute for Council packet page 243. He gave a staff report. Correct the language to reflect that an urban growth area is .9, which is a level of service D. Crawford asked if the affect is to allow more or less congestion in an urban growth area that isn't a city. Donahue stated the affect would be a little more congestion. Caskey-Schreiber stated it would also collect fees to fix that congestion. Nelson moved to have a public hearing on this item before moving it forward to concurrency. Motion to hold a hearing carried 2-1 with Caskey-Schreiber opposed. Blair Murray, citizen, stated there should be a public hearing on this matter to address level of service (LOS) issues, connections between the cities and non - municipal urban growth areas. MINUTES FROM THE )ANUARY 27, 2009 COUNCIL MEETING 4. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER FOUR — CAPITAL FACILITIES, CHAPTER SIX — TRANSPORTATION, AND APPENDIX G — TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES BACKGROUND INFORMATION (AB2009-065) Brenner reported for the Public Works and Safety Committee and moved to have a public hearing before forwarding to the concurrency hearing. This ordinance includes a substitute for Council packet page 243. She doesn't know what comments were brought up during the Planning Commission meeting. She wants to hear from people. They should get more information on this before they vote. Caskey-Schreiber stated she likes the ordinance as it is. The Planning Commission already had a hearing. Move this forward. Motion failed 3-4 with Fleetwood, Nelson, and Brenner in favor. Caskey-Schreiber moved to forward to the concurrency hearing. Motion carried 6-1 with Nelson opposed. 617 10-7-08 SPONSORED BY: PROPOSED BY: INTRODUCTION DATE: ORDINANCE # AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: CHAPTER FOUR - CAPITAL FACILITIES, CHAPTER SIX - TRANSPORTATION, AND APPENDIX G - TRANSPORTATION FEE BACKGROUND INFORMATION WHEREAS, The Washington State Legislature, through Chapter 82.02 RCW, authorizes counties planning under the act to impose impact fees to fund a proportionate share of transportation facility improvements; and WHEREAS, The Washington State Legislature, through RCW 36.70A.070(6)(b), requires counties planning under the act to adopt and enforce ordinances that ensure that adequate transportation facilities are provided concurrently with growth; and WHEREAS, Legal notice was published in the Bellingham Herald; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission held public hearings on the proposal; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission has evaluated the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, The County Council has considered the Planning Commission's recommendations. The Council makes the following findings of fact and conclusions: FINDINGS OF FACT The Washington State Legislature, through RCW 36.70A.070(6)(b), requires counties to adopt and enforce ordinances which prohibit developments that would cause the level of service on locally owned transportation facilities to fall below the adopted standards unless improvements or strategies .to accommodate the impacts of the development are made concurrent with the development (in place at the time of development or a financial commitment is made to complete the improvements within six years). 2. The Washington State Legislature, through Chapter 82.02 RCW, authorizes cities and counties planning under GMA to impose impact fees on development activity as part of the financing for public facilities to help ensure that adequate facilities are available to serve new growth and development. 3. New residential development resulting from forecasted population growth will create additional demand for transportation facilities. P. 1 4. Transportation Impact Fees are a vital and appropriate means of enabling the county to maintain adopted levels of service on county transportation facilities. 5. It is appropriate to require new development to pay its proportionate share of the cost of new facilities. 6. RCW 82.02.050(2) authorizes counties to impose impact fees on development activity as part of funding for public facilities, provided that there is a balance between impact fees and other sources of public funds. 7. RCW 82.02.050(3) requires that impact fees be used to fund only system improvements that that will reasonably benefit new development and shall not exceed a proportionate share of the costs of the improvements that are reasonably related to new development. 8. RCW 82.02.060(2) authorizes jurisdictions to exempt low-income housing and other development activities with broad public purposes from impact fees. 9. WAC 365-195-850(4) recommends jurisdictions exempt low-income housing from impact fees. 10. Per RCW 47.80.030, the Regional Transportation Planning Organization adopted a regional transportation plan on October 18, 2006 that designates certain county roads as part of a primary road system serving urban areas and major activity centers, but does not adopt level of service standards. A previous edition of the regional transportation plan, adopted October 10, 2001, reflects LOS standards already adopted by local jurisdictions and Washington State Department of Transportation. 11. Countywide Planning Policy J.1 requires the transportation chapter of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan to be consistent with the regional transportation plan. 12. WAC 365-195-510, which discusses transportation concurrency as required by the Growth Management Act, states in (3)(b), "Levels of service should be set to reflect realistic expectations consistent with the achievement of growth aims. Setting such levels too high could, under some regulatory strategies, result in no growth. As a deliberate policy, this would be contrary to the act." 13. Whatcom County adopted interim ordinance 2007-09 on February 13, 2007 to add Chapter 20.78, Transportation Concurrency Management, to the zoning code. The County Council renewed the interim ordinance on September 11, 2007 (2007-043) and February 6, 2008 (Ord. 2008-006). 14. In January 2007 the County Executive appointed a project steering committee to help guide the development of the concurrency and impact fee amendments. That committee met with county staff and the project consultant five times between March and December 2007. 15. At the April 24 and June 26, 2008 Planning Commission meetings, the commission held work sessions to discuss the topics of transportation concurrency and TIFs in general. P. 2 619 16. On June 10, county staff e-mailed to stakeholders and reviewing agencies a summary of the proposed amendments, drafts of the amendments, and other materials that were presented to the Planning Commission. Staff also posted that information on the county's web site before the June 26 meeting. Following the June 26 meeting, staff added to the web site the Powerpoint documents Larry Toedth presented at the June 26 meeting. 17. County staff presented information on the proposed amendments to the Citizens' Transportation Advisory Group on July 16, 2008 and the Birch Bay Steering Committee on July 23, 2008. Staff also presented information on the transportation concurrency amendments to the regional Transportation Technical Advisory Committee on June 26, 2008. 18. On May 9, 2008 county staff mailed a notification of the proposed amendments to the Department of Community Trade and Economic Development, and on June 10, 2008 staff sent the department more detailed information on the draft amendments. 19. A determination of non -significance (DNS) was issued under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) on August 12, 2008 20. Notice of the Planning Commission hearing for the subject amendment was published in the Bellingham Herald on August 3, 2008. 21. The Planning Commission held a public hearings relating to the subject amendments on August 14 and September 11, 2008. CONCLUSIONS 1. The proposed amendments are consistent with the goals and policies of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan. 2. The proposed amendments are consistent with the Growth Management Act and Chapter 82.02 RCW. 3. The amendments conform to RCW 36.70A.070(6)(b), which requires local jurisdictions to adopt and enforce ordinances which prohibit development approval if the development causes the level of service on a locally owned transportation facility to decline below the standards adopted in the transportation element of the comprehensive plan, unless transportation improvements or strategies to accommodate the impacts of development are made concurrent with the development. 4. The amendments conform to RCW 82.02.050(2), which authorizes counties that plan under RCW 36.70A.040 to impose impact fees on development activity as part of funding for public facilities, provided that there is a balance between impact fees and other sources of public funds. 5. The amendments conform to RCW 82.02.050(3), which requires that impact fees be used to fund only system improvements that that will reasonably benefit new development and shall not exceed a proportionate share of the costs of the improvements that are reasonably related to new development. P. 3 620 6. The amendments conform to RCS 82.02.060, which lists provisions required in local ordinances. 7. The amendments conform to RCW 82.02.060(2), which authorizes jurisdictions to exempt low-income housing and other development activities with broad public purposes from impact fees. 8. The amendments are consistent with WAC 365-195-850(4), which recommends jurisdictions exempt low-income housing from impact fees. 9. The amendments are consistent with the regional transportation plan, which designates certain county roads as part of a primary road system serving urban areas and major activity centers 10. The amendments comply with the approval criteria for comprehensive plan amendments stated in WCC 20.10.080. 11. The amendments are consistent with Countywide Planning Policy J.1, which requires the transportation chapter of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan to be consistent with the regional transportation plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Whatcom County Council that: Section 1. Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan Chapters Four and Six, and Appendix G, are amended as shown on Exhibit A. Section 2. Adjudication of invalidity of any of the sections, clauses, or provisions of this ordinance shall not affect or impair the validity of the ordinance as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so declared to be invalid. ADOPTED this day of , 2009 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL ATTEST: WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Dana Brown -Davis, Council Clerk Seth Fleetwood, Council Chair APPROVED as to fig Civjj�Mputy Prosecutor P. 4 () Approved () Denied Pete Kremen, Executive Date: 621 EXHIBIT A Chapter Four- Capital Facilities 1 2 Chapter Four 3 CAPITAL FACILITIES 4 5 ..... 6 7 8 BACKGROUND SUMMARY The GMA expressly authorizes cities and counties to impose impact fees on new development to help finance the capital facilities required to serve new development. This authorization applies only to capital facilities owned or operated by government entities: (a) public streets and roads; (b) publicly owned parks, open space, and recreation facilities; (c) school facilities; and (d) fire protection facilities in jurisdictions that are not part of a fire district. Certain background information that must be included in a capital facilities element of the Comprehensive Plan in order to collect transportation impact fees is included in Appendix G. 27 ISSUES, GOALS, AND POLICIES 28 29 30 ..... 31 32 33 GOAL 4G: Establish levels of service for roads, parks, corrections, and 34 administrative services. 35 36 Policy 4G-1: For purposes of transportation management systems, adopt level of 37 service standards (LOS) for transportation facilities as listed in Chapter 38 6, Transportation, Policy 6A-3. 39 40 • 41 42 43 ..... 44 45 GOAL 4J: Maintain effective concurrency measures and procedures for all 46 facilities and services necessary for development. 47 622 EXHIBIT A Chapter Four- Capital Facilities 1 Policy 4J-1: Based on established levels of service for all road segments under 2 control of the county, administer a concurrency management program 3 that provides for consistent and predictable evaluation of the impacts of 4 future proposed development. 5 6 ..... 7 P" 623 EXHIBIT A Chapter Six Transportation 2 3 GMA Requirements Chapter Six TRANSPORTATION The Growth Management Act requires jurisdictions to adopt a transportation element which includes land use assumptions, estimated traffic impacts to state-owned transportation facilities, a facilities and services inventory, level of service standards for arterials and transit routes, actions to bring services below level of service standards into compliance, forecasts of traffic for ten years consistent with the land use plan, identification of system expansion needs and a management system to meet the needs. It also requires a financing analysis of funding capability, a multi -year financing plan and alternatives in case funding falls short. Demand management strategies are to be created. This comprehensive plan addresses the above requirements through this chapter, the six - year transportation improvement program, the Whatcom County Transportation Plan (including the Whatcom County Transportation Plan Existing Conditions Report), incorporated herein by reference, and Chapter 4: Capital Facilities. Land use assumptions used for transportation planning, inventories, level of service standards, traffic projections and alternative system expansion needs are quantified in the Whatcom County Transportation Plan. Financing analysis and multi -year financing plans are in the six -year transportation improvement program. Goals, policies and actions, level of service standards, actions to take in case funding falls short, demand management strategies and specific recommended improvements are included in this chapter. 29 GMA requires adequate transportation facilities to be provided concurrent with 30 development. In the goals and policies of this chapter, Whatcom County establishes 31 the acceptable levels of service (LOS) for county -owned transportation facilities. Per 32 GMA, any development that would cause the level of service on a county facility to fall 33 below the adopted LOS must be denied, unless improvements that accommodate the 34 impacts of the development — or other strategies that accommodate the growth, such as 35 increased transit service -- are made concurrent with the development. Overall County Transportation Over the next two decades Whatcom County will be shaping its transportation network with several fundamental goals in mind. The system must be cost-effective; it must be compatible with subarea, county and regional plans; it must be properly maintained and upgraded; it must provide access for transit and non -motorized travel; and it must offer acceptable levels of service and safety. 624 EXHIBIT A Chapter Six Transportation The LOS standards adopted for county -owned transportation facilities in Policy 6A-3 are measures of traffic congestion on arterial and collector roadway segments, expressed as a ratio of estimated volume in weekday afternoon peak hours to roadway capacity. Levels of service range from completely unrestricted flow of traffic (LOS A) to stop -and -go traffic jams (LOS F). At LOS C or better the road segment is less than or equal to 80% full (or a volume -to -capacity ratio of less than or equal to 0.80). The flow of traffic is generally stable, though individual users are significantly affected by the presence of other vehicles. At LOS D the volume -to -capacity ratio is greater than 0.80 but less than or equal to 0.9. At LOS D small increases in flow may cause some delays and decreases in speed during the afternoon peak hour. The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) has adopted levels of service for highways of statewide significance and the Regional Transportation Planning Organization, in consultation with WSDOT, has adopted levels of service for other state highways. For state highways in Whatcom County the standards are LOS D in urban areas and LOS C in rural areas. Similar to the LOS adopted on state highways, Whatcom County generally adopts for its roadways a LOS D in urban areas and LOS C in rural areas, though for some of the rural roads that function as primary routes connecting major activity centers (as designated in the regional Whatcom Transportation Plan), the county adopts a LOS D to reflect higher peak -hour volumes. GOAL 6A: Provide for the safe and efficient movement of people and goods. Policy 6A-1: Make safety and mobility the primary considerations in ranking transportation improvements. Policy 6A-2: Use the transportation planning process to identify transportation system needs throughout the county in order to provide adequate transportation facilities and services to meet current and future travel needs; identify and protect specific transportation corridors and alignments where transportation facilities including auto, commercial, bicycle, transit and rail are needed. Policy 6A-3: Establish the following levels of service (LOS) for purposes of maintaining transportation concurrency: • A volume -to -capacity ratio less than 0.75 during weekday p.m. peak hours for county arterials and collectors located outside of urban growth areas, except for specified primary routes as shown on Map 14A, which shall have a volume -to -capacity ratio less than or equal to 0.90 (LOS D). A volume -to -capacity ratio less than or equal to 0.90 (LOS D or better) during weekday p.m. peak hours for county arterials and collectors within urban growth areas not associated with cities, which may be reduced for concurrency evaluation purposes in accordance with Policy 6A-4. 2 625 EXHIBIT A Six Transportation A volume -to -capacity ratio less than or equal to 0.9 during weekday p.m. peak hours (equivalent to LOS D) for county arterials and collectors within city urban growth areas, which may be reduced for concurrency evaluation purposes in accordance with Policy 6A-4. • Coordinate with Whatcom Transit Authority to ensure adequate transit service in urban areas. 513 ferry passenger trips annually per capita Lummi Island population. Policy 6A-4: For proposed developments in designated urban growth areas, increase the volume -to -capacity ratio standard for impacted transportation facilities by 0.05 if at least one of the following amenities is existing or is committed to being provided as part of the development: o Transit service and stop within one quarter mile walking distance accessible from the development using non -motorized facilities that meet or are functionally equivalent to Whatcom County Road Standards o Non -motorized facilities that meet or are functionally equivalent to Whatcom County Road Standards along the impacted facility Policy 6A-5: Encourage extension of city concurrency review authority and LOS standards into their respective UGAs to provide for greater consistency in concurrency review for urban areas. Policy 6A-6: Identify and mitigate safety and other impacts to transportation facilities caused by development during SEPA review, using standards adopted for intersections and other minimum standards established by WCC Development Standards. Policy 6A-7: Consider implementation of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) technology to increase safety, reduce traffic congestion, decrease delays, expedite commercial vehicle travel, and provide appropriate traveler information. 3 626 EXHIBIT A Chapter Six Transportation Financing The Growth Management Act is very specific in its requirement that transportation improvements must be based on financial capability. Furthermore the Act requires that improvements must occur concurrent with developments. It is therefore very important to coordinate funding and land -use -driven transportation improvements. The majority of county transportation dollars are spent on upkeep and maintenance of the existing road system with a much smaller amount available for major improvements and even less for actual capacity improvements. Potential additional revenue sources include a greater share of gas tax revenues and impact and/or mitigation fees. Gas tax revenues can only be imposed through a vote of the people. Impact and/or mitigation fees are enforced through a county ordinance and are intended to pay for improvements required as result of additional traffic generated by development. GMA authorizes counties to impose impact fees that fund a proportionate share of transportation system improvements made necessary by planned growth. Whatcom County has identified future system improvements eligible for impact fee funding and has enacted a transportation impact fee system to fund a portion of those projects that are reasonably related to and reasonably benefit the planned growth. GOALGB: Create a cost-effective transportation system that optimizes public investment. Policy 613-6 Utilize impact fees to fund a proportionate share of the costs of transportation system improvements that benefit and are reasonably related to new development. Policy 613-7: Identify and pursue funding sources for activities and improvements which encourage the use of transportation modes other than the single -occupant vehicle. Policy 613-8: Use the financial resources available for transportation improvements to support a program of capital facilities needed for a multi -modal transportation system. The priority ranking system should balance the overall system and individual improvement needs. Policy 6B-9: Consider and address any major fluctuations between expected revenues and needed improvement costs during the annual review process of the comprehensive plan. Such resolution could result in a reassessment of land use allocation, level of service standards and/or revenue availability. Policy 6B-10: Implement a methodology for public -private partnerships when it would result in a more efficient use of public resources. 4 627 EXHIBIT A Chapter Six Transportation 1 2 3 4 5 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Policy 613-11: Encourage cooperative funding for bicycle trails. Local Arterial and Collector Improvements The Citizens' Transportation Advisory Committee and Technical Transportation Advisory Committee worked out a list of criteria for judging the effectiveness of a transportation network. The elements include uncongested traffic flow; sound engineering and construction; safety; mobility; facilities for public transit, bicycles, and pedestrians; access to air, rail, and other forms of transportation; and cost effectiveness. Whatcom County's program of local arterial improvements has to address all these aspects. GOAL 6H: Ensure an efficient regional system of arterials that is functional, safe, and consistent with regional priorities and city and county comprehensive plans. Policy 6H-1: Develop access control plans, which may include joint driveways, for classifications higher than neighborhood collector roads; and require new developments to minimize the number of access points to road classifications higher than neighborhood collector roads. Policy 6H-2: Where new arterials or collectors are necessary, such routes should follow topographic or land use patterns which minimize disruption to residential neighborhoods and the environment. TRANSPORTATION - ACTION PLAN Capital Facilities Planning, Funding, and Impact Fees 4. Maintain a system for level of service measurements which allows the county to assess the impact of growth -related additional vehicle trips on existing roads. Use this measurement in identifying needed improvements in capital facilities planning, and in establishing impact and/or mitigation fees, or in determining the desirability of the area to be serviced for additional growth. 5 • EXHIBIT A Appendix G TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE - BACKGROUND INFORMATION Identification of Transportation Projects to Serve New Development State Law Requirement State law requires that impact fees may be collected and spent only for the public facilities defined in RCW 82.02.090 (including roads) that are addressed by a capital facilities plan element of a comprehensive land use plan (RCW 82.02.050(4)). State law also requires that the County's Comprehensive Plan must identify additional transportation facility improvements required to serve new development (RCW 82.02.050(4)(c)). Procedure Through a transportation impact fee program development study performed in 2007-08, the County has developed a list of planned system improvements that are reasonably related to the impacts of projected growth and are therefore eligible for funding through impact fees. The Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program shows all projects that are programmed for construction in 2009 through 2014. Results Whatcom County has identified transportation facility improvements necessary to serve new development as shown below. Projects Eligible for Impact Fees Project Name Project Limits Project Cost TSA ($1,OOOs) Project Estimated Location Birch Bay- Lynden Road / Intersection $3,000 1 Portal Way Birch Bay-Lynden Road / Intersection $3,000 1 Harborview Road Birch Bay-Lynden Road Portal Way to UGA limit just east of Blaine Road $1,500 1 Widening Birch Bay-Lynden Road UGA limit just east of Blaine Road to Harborview $1,800 1 Widening Birch Point Connector Road Birch Pt. Road. to Shintaffer Road. $2,000 1 629 EXHIBIT A Lincoln Road Extension and Shintaffer Road. to Blaine Road (SR 548) $9,000 1 Improvement Portal Way/Dakota Creek Bridge $5,000 1 Bridge #500 Birch Bay- Lynden Road / Intersection $3,000 1 Blaine Road (SR 548) Hannegan Rd. Intersections Intersections of Hannegan Rd with Kelly Rd., E $1,800 3 (4 intersections) Laurel, Ten -Mile Rd., Van Dyk Rd. Hannegan Rd./SR 544 (E Intersection $3,000 3 Pole Rd.) Intersection Haxton Way Non -motorized Gooseberry Point to Slater Rd. $3,000 2 Improvements- 2 phases Lake Louise Rd. Sudden Valley Gate 13 to Austin St. $8,000 5 Lake Louise Rd. Sudden Valley Gate 13 to Whatcom Blvd. $8,000 5 Lake Whatcom Blvd. High Entire bridge $5,500 5 Bridge #115 Marine Drive Bennett Drive to Locust St. $1,400 2 Slater Rd. Hannegan Rd to Northwest Dr $4,000 3 (50%), 2 (50%) Slater Rd. intersections (3 Slater Rd with Imhof Rd., Ferndale Rd., and $3,000 2 intersections in project) Northwest Rd. Yew St. Rd.-Samish Yew St. (San Juan Blvd.) and Samish Way $1,000 4 connector (amalgamation of severalprojects) Yew Street Rd. Phase 2 Samish Way to Kingsmill $6,000 4 Ferry Dock Improvements Undefined $6,000 2 $79,000 2009-2014 Transportation Improvement Program Priority Project Identification Project Costs in Thousands of Dollars Federal Cost by State Local Total Phase Funds Funds Funds 1 Hannegan Road / SR 544 Intersection: Sj nalization 1,910 1,910 Lincoln Road - I: Reconstruction and non -motorized 2 enhancements 500 500 Birch Bay Lynden Road / Blaine Road SR 548: 3 Intersection Improvements 5 5 Yew Street Road, Phase 2: Reconstruction and non- 4 motorized enhancements 1,864 1,636 3,500 Birch Bay Drive Pedestrian Facility: Pedestrian and non- 5 motorized enhancements 5 5 Bay Road Fish Passage: Fish Passage project, CRP # 6 908012 5 5 7 West Illinois / Timson Way: New roadway 1,100 750 5 1,855 Hampton Road, Mormon Ditch Bridge #261: Bridge 8 replacement 4,775 350 5,125 630 EXHIBIT A 9 Baker Lake Road, Sulphur Creek Bridge #422: Replacement 1,100 165 1,265 10 Mosquito Lake Road, Middle Fork Bridge #140: Rehabilitation 4,150 4,150 11 Slater Road / Nooksack River Bride 750 750 12 Lake Louise Road: Reconstruction 2,860 750 3,610 13 Haxton Way Non -Motorized Improvements: Pedestrian and bicycle off -road trail and safety improvements 1,624 430 2,054 14 Birch Bay Lynden Road / Portal Way: Intersection improvements 750 750 15 Clearbrook Road / Johnson Creek, Bridge #302: Bridge Replacement 794 794 16 Portal Way / Dakota Creek Bridge #500: Reconstruction 5 5 17 Potter Road, Bridge #148: Replacement 5 5 18 Lummi View Drive: Embankment Stabilization 5 5 19 Haxton Way: Structural overlay, paved shoulders, flood proofing 500 500 20 Tyee Drive: Reconstruction and non -motorized enhancements 5 5 21 North Shore Road: Reconstruction, non -motorized enhancements 5 5 22 Slater Road Intersections: Install turn lanes at Imhof Road and Ferndale Road 5 5 23 Lincoln Road - 11: Reconstruction and new road, non- motorized enhancements 5 5 24 Siper Road: Reconstruction 5 5 25 Marine Drive: Reconstruction and bicycle/pedestrian facilities 5 5 26 Marine Drive, Little S ualicum Brid e#1: Rehabilitation 5 5 27 Mountain View Road: Reconstruction 5 5 28 Hannegan Road, Scott Ditch Bridge #245: Reconstruction/replacement 10 10 29 Refurbish/Upgrade of the Whatcom Chief 40 40 30 Ferry Dock Improvements: Improvements to Lummi Island Ferry Docks 30 30 31 Various Ferry Parking and Staging 30 30 32 Gooseberry Point Ferry Dock Relocation: Relocation feasibility study 154 71 225 33 Various Bridges Rehabilitation / Replacement: As prioritized 1,400 1,400 34 Subdivision overlays: Various locations 5 5 35 Structural Overlays: Various locations 5 5 36 Right of Way Acquisition: Various locations 30 30 37 Unanticipated Site Improvements: As prioritized 2,400 2,400 38 Gravel Conversions: Various locations 5 5 39 Storm water Quality Improvements: As Prioritized 5 5 40 Non -motorized Transportation Improvements: Various Locations 5 5 41 Fish Passage Project: Various Locations 5 5 42 Railroad Crossing Improvements: Various Locations 5 5 43 Neighborhood Traffic Calming: Various Locations 5 5 Totals 16,797 6,510 7,731 31,038 631 :t i =f � ?� ��Easy,•s �� — � H nONAL FOREST I �s �el� I �S 9 tE[SF�Fs � 1 , I 1 I V' mvFxuc ao. I I , --- - ----- - yr------ - -�- - --- - - -- --r - ---- ------ I w � 1 W l.f � � �'� i.--. an a3xsoo-xosn3n3 ,�`��•�'`*'v Z Q _�_a' 1 W o- I 341 , i Fkba'x,! f emnia a. ; a � - "� � f � •., - "" � .f eel � � � � LUly,}� n asnan'aua s:_ :J :.S sV �fr i '$'., 'tE.4L Rix"- f �'� _' n an36a� °nix,„amp la o re' Msoa �,� t NOW, A. tea+. .� v `•7 #W.. z. ti�+�,gb i I �� �a �{itFz �b� K}' L..:Z ' ° n z alc ,�.�" az ✓--js'§,- n_b� �a„yr� �° cc d.:r,` It �'. _ voa.s. �'" �,�'�.--.� � '1Nr a•y..+n3i �. p'y` gx- uoanvrr � b — ;�:- tom. - �.:r-_°'..,� J•1�.,'i#'�k' ;'a":.yt�.. �- e§;..;,•,a,. fib8_��7 Ls *P{ k>isVy. �IYF�fi�; ��?�r i ,� r � x ! $ ye ��' �i x +"� F 't'S ?'�, �'�' r } f d .kr�',,,rp•� r -+z . _fi�r.,..r :�n^f�t�-t.+•�v pSs..'�fr;_,'q.-� n z� 3 t r a g j ' 1 r73, : V 4 i O Q� cc Tom k�cccc CL O r- V > cn d J E 632 i I Fe AWONNOa 153aO1� - - - - -~I'- -- -- - -'•+ �3� ��-'EE�'£'- - - l' I N no,I FoftEST i ! I 91 _.-`� I LL I I i •"fir, °ahD IQ R Dax'MD D°° bnUUM 10 _I�' ] 'Y}• � .F,;�._'^*��,VD. Otl'NI NvD:�xjj9#: ,'` x3tl11B Z Y,yeY,J V� �:J''i Z fn�.—--- — —- — — --— — — -- —---—- P. uld �- DbN3xsD aan3 w a' a°x 3 Z_ s I O w 2aS - 1wc- s.. -. ; ti s � e Ijr•1 i-:—. "O mlAe° ; v-, i. "F%-..�. ' ;; tii 3 1 '�"� a. e t2 I r 3,a }�y_ 1Av 1�i yip+ i tl 3Abatl3tN3 'q •J .V� j r� Y �'.1 `_� Otl35 tlN�5 ab3atlNl1 i k�+s ;�_*nvvJ�{ck� 4 dI ba3a I�.12, SO '4 na 31mUxen Zk Z • I u x - - r ,ax sa $ `+ - b {_ ipF 3x €fax c A hszSaa'Fs"`=3" 's�+ •E. Wit. �I Li o w t.Gee- OR ' .: Y� Myd r� �` : f � � ;+� e'er - �'g`a�4-���`tt"t••cf�" � %s ^e��c� . ' "l�.lY y�'V g I �J "�K -�a� y •. ���' 3�� rf rr t � h J I'Y p � � r _��e�'�Z: 'k �� -FN� ,r `k3t u ..7 M 1�' �t -.. x��4s',?_ �Ary� �Fkl e��";•4� 3''�..�'?', a -a,F s�FF-�- � ��F.ri° _ '�iS 5'fvtl f�� 1,3 .>` r-F-- ., ' Y�.F'�' .�,3•a�-.��a �w-'e-,����t,,z�Y t,��, � y� - '�' � �, 1�N� � _,.,,,.>„ ��.3+„p_F>s ' €y�e `�y "� �-F '; vb $ .3. 3k fi• i`i,t; 3i• _ t `"�' - h 5"'•, x 2 �'' ¢ t`�`_ � 3- WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 2009-064 CLEARANCES Initial Date Date Received in Council Office Agenda Date Ass i ned to: Originator: g _ L b `�' E D JAN 0 6 2009 O pNTY WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL 1 1-13-09 Introduction Division Head: 1 27 09 l l P&D / Council Dept. Head: David Stalheim / _� _O Prosecutor: �� 1 � � Purchasing/Budget: Executive: TITLE OF DOCUMENT. Ordinance amending Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan, Chapter Four, Capital Facilities. ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance SEPA review required? ( x ) Yes ( ) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing? ( ) Yes ( X) NO SEPA review completed? ( x ) Yes ( ) NO Requested Date: SUMMAR Y STA TEMENT 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.) Ordinance amending Chapter Four, Capital Facilities, of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan. Amendments would allow the county to adopt by reference capital facility plans of other public entities for water, sewer, fire protection, storm water, schools, parks and recreation facilities. Amendments would adopt the capital facility plans for Bellingham, Ferndale and Lynden School Districts. COMMITTEE ACTION. COUNCIL ACTION.• 1/27/2009: Forwarded to Council for approval 1/13/2009: Introduced for concurrency 1/27/2009: Council Approved forwarding to concurrency 7-0 Related County Contract #: Related File Numbers: Ordinance or Resolution Number: 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. 634 SPONSORED BY: PROPOSED BY: INTRODUCTION DATE: ORDINANCE NO. AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER FOUR, CAPITAL FACILITIES WHEREAS, the Washington State Legislature, with the passage of the Growth Management Act, has removed previously enacted restrictions and authorized the imposition of development of impact fees as an additional source of funding for common school facilities, in addition to local tax revenues and state grants from the common school construction fund; WHEREAS, the Washington State Legislature, through Chapter 82.02 RCW, authorizes cities and counties planning under GMA to impose impact fees on development activity as part of the financing for public facilities to help ensure that adequate facilities are available to serve new growth and development; WHEREAS, new residential development resulting from forecasted population growth will create additional demand for public school facilities; WHEREAS, while the general community benefits from new public facilities and should continue to pay the majority of facility costs, it is appropriate to require new development to pay its proportionate share of the cost of new facilities; WHEREAS, the Whatcom County Council adopted Ordinance No. 2007-067 adding a new chapter to Title 20, School Impact Fees; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 11, 2008 and have forwarded amendments to Chapter 20.75 for Whatcom County Council consideration; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 11, 2008 and have forwarded amendments to Chapter Four, Capital Facilities that would adopt by reference capital facility plans of other public entities for water, sewer, fire protection, storm water, schools, parks and recreation facilities; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 11, 2008 and have forwarded amendments to Chapter Four, Capital Facilities that adopt the capital facility plans for Bellingham, Ferndale and Lynden School Districts; Page 1 635 WHEREAS, the County Council enters the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: 1. A determination of non -significance (DNS) was issued under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) on December 8, 2008. 2. Notice of the Planning Commission hearing for the subject amendment was posted on the County's website on December 3, 2008. 3. Notice of the Planning Commission hearing for the subject amendment was published in the Bellingham Herald on November 30, 2008. 4. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the subject amendment on December 11, 2008. 5. RCW 82.02.050(2) authorizes counties that plan under RCW 36.70A.040 to impose impact fees on development activity as part of funding for public facilities, provided that there is a balance between impact fees and other sources of public funds. RCW 82.02.090(7) defines public facilities to include "(a) public streets and roads; (b) publicly owned parks, open space, and recreation facilities; (c) school facilities; and (d) -fire protection facilities in jurisdictions that are not part of a fire district." 6. RCW 82.02.050(4) requires that impact fees may be collected and spent only for public facilities addressed by a capital facilities element of a comprehensive plan. 7. County -Wide Planning Policy L-1 encourages the county and cities to adopt fair and reasonable impact and/or mitigation fee ordinances to ensure that new growth pays its fair share of the cost of capital facilities, such as transportation improvements, parks, and schools. 8. County -Wide Planning Policy L-2 states the county and cities shall work with their school districts to develop impact fee formulas as appropriate to the district's capital needs. 9. Whatcom County Code 20.75.060(1) states, "A school district becomes eligible to receive school impact fees once the county adopts the school district's six -year capital facilities plan (CFP)." 10. Whatcom County Code 20.75.080(3) requires that school district capital facilities plans contain certain information, including facility needs and financing plans over a six -year period, student enrollment projections, and a methodology for calculation of impact fees. 11. The Bellingham, Ferndale, Lynden, and Mount Baker School Districts have sent to Whatcom County Planning and Development Services their adopted capital facilities, which include proposed amounts for the impact fees. 12. PDS staff has reviewed the capital facilities plans and finds that the Bellingham, Ferndale, and Lynden School District capital facilities plans meet the requirements of 20.75.080(3). 13. RCW 82.02.060(2) authorizes local ordinances to exempt low-income housing and other development activities with broad public purposes from impact fees. 14. WAC 365-195-850(4) recommends jurisdictions exempt low-income housing from impact fees. 15. The subject comprehensive plan amendment complies with the approval criteria of WCC 20.10.080 for comprehensive plan amendments, and is in the public interest 16. The subject zoning code amendments comply with the goals, policies, and objectives of the comprehensive plan, and is in the public interest Page 2 636 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Whatcom County Council that: Section 1. Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan Chapters Four, Capital Facilities, is amended as shown on Exhibit A. Section 2. Adjudication of invalidity of any of the sections, clauses, or provisions of this ordinance shall not affect or impair the validity of the ordinance as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so declared to be invalid. ADOPTED this day of , 2009. WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL ATTEST: WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Dana Brown -Davis, Carl Weimer, Council Chair Clerk of the Council APPROVED as to form Civil r utor ( ) Approved ( ) Denied Pete Kremen, County Executive Date: Page 3 637 Buckingham stated that's up to the Council. He would be more comfortable looking at it. If he gets something else at the last minute, he will spend one minute going through it and try to determine if it's a concern. This item seems to be a concern. Fleetwood stated people from the BIA are here at this meeting. He hopes this discussion serves as notice that any other information should be submitted soon. Motion carried unanimously. 3. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE CHAPTER 20.75, SCHOOL FACILITIES IMPACT FEES, AND CHAPTER 20.97, DEFINITIONS (AB2009- 063) David Stalheim, Planning and Development Services Department Director, gave a staff report. Crawford asked the role of the school district in setting fees. Stalheim stated the County has the regulatory authority and sets the fees. Whatcom County is adopting the school districts' capital facilities plans, calculations, and fees by reference. The impact fees are collected at the time of the issuance of the development permit. The impact doesn't occur until there's construction. The land division doesn't create demand for school facilities. Crawford stated the Lynden City Council doesn't want to create a disparity between the City collecting fees and the County not collecting fees, which would push growth into the county. The City of Lynden was ready to adopt their impact fees, but was waiting until the County was also ready to adopt impact fees. Caskey-Schreiber stated that's correct. Crawford stated part of the Meridian School District is in Bellingham. He asked how these will line up with the City's impact fees. Stalheim stated he thinks the cities are adopting the school district capital facilities plans. The City of Bellingham is not collecting school impact fees for the Meridian School District, just the Bellingham School District. Weimer moved to recommend approval to the full Council. Motion carried unanimously. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL — COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 1. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER FOUR, CAPITAL FACILITIES (AB2009-064) Weimer moved to recommend concurrency to the full Council. Motion carried unanimously. a I n rl, )Zb9 -- 2 C-O�x_022JG�3c--A ca-1-1 -k400--- lz� i s638 EXHIBIT A Chapter Four - Capital Facilities Chapter Four CAPITAL FACILITIES INTRODUCTION Capital facilities as defined here, and for purposes of the plan, include afi--facilities owned by Whatcom County and other public entities, used rdireGtly or 'ndireotly to serve the publ'n interec+ These Capital facilities typically have long useful lives, significant costs, and are not mobile. Whatcom County capital facilities include buildings, land, parks, and roads. Those capital facility plans that may be adopted by reference include plans for water, sewer, fire protection, storm water, schools, parks and recreation facilities. �Nhereon or�me ii—;G die+ions are therefore has Re Genital fr.rilitioo related to them GOAL 4M: Enable school districts to receive impact fees to fund a proportionate share of system improvements reasonably related to new development by adopting into this plan their capital facilities plans and establishing interlocal agreements with.the districts to collect and transfer funds. reference. Policy 4M-2: The capital facilities plan for the Ferndale School District, adopted by the district on December 23, 2005, is adopted into the comprehensive plan by reference. Policy 4M-3:. The capital facilities plan for the Lynden School District, adopted by the district on June 29, 2006, is adopted into the comprehensive plan by reference. 639 Lynden School District No. 504 Lynden, Washington Whatcom County Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan June, 2006 Adopted: June 29, 2006 M1 7 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Executive Summary .......................................................................:..........1 II. Six -Year Enrollment Projections...............................................:::..................2 III. Current District Standard of Service...............................................................3 IV. Inventory of Existing Capital Facilities ................................. ........ ....4 ... ............ V. Current and Future Capital Facilities Needs and Financing Plan ..............................5 VI. Projected Classroom Capacities.....................................................................7 VII. Impact Fee Formula and Schedules................................................................9 TABLES: TABLE A: EXISTING PERMANENT CLASSROOM CAPACITY ..............................4 TABLE B: ENROLLMENT AND CAPACITY BY YEAR.....................................5-6 TABLE C: CAPITAL FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN..........................................8 APPENDICES: APPENDIX I LYNDEN SCHOOL DISTRICT ENROLLMENT HISTORY............................................................................A-I-1 APPENDIX II LYNDEN SCHOOL DISTRICT SIX -YEAR ENROLLMENT PROJECTION .................................................. A -II -I APPENDIX III SCHOOL IMPACT FEES........................................................A-III-1 APPENDIX IV STUDENT GENERATION RATES............................................A-iV-1 641 I. Executive Summary: This Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan (the "Plan") has been adopted by the Lynden School District (the "District") as the District's principal planning document in compliance with the requirements of Washington's Growth Management Act. The Plan has been prepared using data available through April 2006. The Plan is consistent with prior long-term capital facilities plans of the District. In addition to this Plan, the District may from time to time prepare other short-range and long-range plans that identify the new needs for capital improvements. Any such plans will be consistent with this Six - Year Capital Facilities Plan and adopted Board policies. The District plans to request school impact fees from developments in Whatcom County for projects located in that unincorporated portion of Whatcom County within the District's boundaries and school impact fees from developments in the City of Lynden for projects located within the city limits. Both Whatcom County and the City of Lynden must adopt a school impact fee ordinance in order to collect school impact fees on behalf of the District. Pursuant to the requirements of the Growth Management Act, this Plan will be updated on a regular basis and any charges in the fee schedules will be adjusted accordingly. The Plan refers to the District's "standard of service" in order to ascertain the District's current and future capacity. The District establishes its standard of service based on enrollment profiles, program needs, and any other determinations as deemed appropriate by the Board. (See Section III for a more detailed explanation of the District's standard of service.) The District's 2005-06 permanent capacity is 2,219, whereas the full-time equivalent enrollment Y' on October 1, 2005 was 2,614. Lmden School Disinct Six, -Year Capital Facilities Plan Page I 642 II. Six -Year Enrollment Projections: Since the 1997-98 school year, the District's student population has increased from 2,425 FTE to 2,614 FTE, a 7.79% increase. Based on the current forecast, the District's student enrollment is projected to increase to 2,940 FTE students by the 2011 school year. This represents an increase of approximately 326 students, or 12.5%, over the next six years. A table containing the District's six -year enrollment projections is set forth in Appendix II. These enrollment projections are based on the cohort survival methodology used by the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction. The cohort survival method uses historical enrollment data to forecast the number of students who will be attending school the following year. This methodology assumes that the enrollment trends which have occurred over the previous six years will likely continue through the next six years. Notably, the cohort survival method does not 10 anticipate new students from new development in the District. As such, the cohort survival M projections should be considered a conservative measure of projected enrollment. Enrollment growth is expected to occur throughout the District. According to a population forecast for Whatcom County, prepared by F,CONorthwest in May of 2002, the City of Lynden's population is expected to have a Five year growth rate of approximately 12%. In addition, the ECONorthwest report indicates that Whatcom County annual growth rate is projected to be between 1.35% (as the low estimate) and 2.34% (the high estimate) during the same five year period. Lyndon SchooI Di>tfict Six -Ycm-Capiial FaciIitics Plan Page 2 643 III. Current District Standard of Service: Each school district must establish a standard of service in order to determine the instructional space available within existing school facilities and the District's overall capacity. The District has set the following service standards: Grades kindergarten through fifth: Grades six through eight: Grades nine through twelve: 18.65 students/classroom 25 students/classroom 25 students/classroom Relocatable classrooms are utilized in the District and will continue to serve as interim facilities. Rowever, they are not included in the calculation of the District's permanent capacity. The IL standard of service defined herein may change significantly as student population changes and the District is challenged to educate a larger population of students with significant special needs that require special services. Other space needs in all school buildings include libraries, gymnasiums, and other core facilities, areas for special programs on an as -needed basis, as well as space for teachers to plan and to provide materials for the classrooms. Lvnden School District Sic-YcirCapital Facilities Plan Page 3 644 0 IV. Inventory of Existing Capital Facilities: The following list identifies the existing capital facilities of the District and the number of permanent classrooms per school. Using the standard of service set forth in Section III, the permanent capacity of each school and the permanent capacity of the District are identified in the far right-hand column of Table A. TABLE A: EXISTING PERMANENT CLASSROOM CAPACITY Facility Address Permanent Capacity Bernice Vossbeck Elementary (Grades K-5) 1301 Bridgeview Drive 369 Fisher Elementary (Grades K-2) 501 N. 14 Street 360 Isom Intermediate (Grades 3-5) 8461 Benson Road 390 Lynden Middle School 516 Main Street 550 Lynden High School 1201 Bradley Road 550 Total Capacity (District -wide) 2,219 The District also provides instruction through the Parent Partnership Program (grades K-12) and at Timber Ridge Alternative School (grades 6-12). These programs are housed in leased facilities and are therefore not included in the District's inventory of permanent capacity. Lyndon School District Six-YcarCapital Facilities Plan Naoz 4 645 VI. Projected Classroom Capacities: Based on the District's enrollment forecasts, current standard of service, and current inventory and capacity space, the District does not have sufficient permanent capacity district -wide to house students until capacity improvements are made at all levels. The District will use relocatable facilities to provide interim capacity and may also adjust class sizes where necessary. Boundary changes, movement of relocatables, zoning changes, market conditions and educational restructuring will all play a major role in addressing issues related to overcrowding conditions and the underutilization of facilities in different parts of the District. The enrollment projected for the next six years is as follows: TABLE C: PROJECTED ENROLLMENT AND CAPACITY BY YEAR: (These charts combine the information in Table A with the enrollment projections in Appendix It.) Table C-1: K-5 School Surplus/Deficiency Actual 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010* 2011 October 2005 Existing 1,119 1,119 1,119 1,119 1,119 1,179 1,215 Capacity Added Capacity 60* 36** Total Capacity 1,119 1,119 1,119 1,119 1,179 1,215 1,215 Enrollment 1,110 1,124 1,143 1,152 1,141 1,150 1,181 Surplus (Deficiency) 9 (5) (24) (33) 38 65 34 *The Fisher Elementary modernization project will create new capacity for 60 students. ** Isom Elementary will be expanded to include space for an additional 36 students. Lynden School Dist ict Six-YcarCapital Facilities Plan Pa.oe 5 646 0 Table C-2: Middle School Surplus/Deficiency H Actual 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 October 2005 Existing 550 550 550 550 5.50 550 850 Capacity Added Capacity 300* Total Capacity 550 550 550 550 550 850 850 Enrollment 646 673 684 704 732 754 741 Surplus (Deficiency) 1 (96) (123) (134) (154) 1 (182) 96 109 *Lynden Middle School will be reconstructed on -site or on a new site. In either case, the net student capacity will expand by 300 students. Table C-3: High School Surplus/Deficiency Actual 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 October 2005 Existing 550 550 550 550 550 550 550 Capacity Added Capacity Total Capacity 550 550 550 550 550 550 550 Enrollment 879 900 914 935 972 991 1,018 Surplus (Deficiency) (329) (350) 1 (364) 1 (385) (422) (441) (468) Lyndon School Dktrict Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan Page 6 647 V. Current and Future Capital Facilities Needs and Financing Plan: During the next six years, new growth will create the need to complete capacity additions at the elementary and middle school levels. In addition, the District will need to start planning for capacity additions at the high school level. Subject to voter approval, the District plans the following capital projects: • Fisher Elementary School. Modernization project will include the addition of two new classroom wings, for a net capacity addition of 60. • Fisher Elementary School — East Wing. The East Wing will be converted to accommodate the District's administrative offices, special education administrative offices, and pre-school classrooms. • Isom Elementary School. Expansion project will include the.addition of kindergarten classrooms, resulting in a net capacity addition of 36. • Middle School. The Middle School will be reconstructed on the existing site or built on a new site. In either case, net student capacity will increase by 300. • High School. Counseling and administrative offices will be expanded at the High School. • Middle School Land Purchase. A twenty acre site will be purchased for a new middle school. • Elementary School Land Purchase. A ten acre site will be purchased for a new elementary school. Based upon the District's capacity data and enrollment projections, as well as the student generation data; the District has determined that a significant portion of its capacity improvements are necessary to serve students generated by new development, with the remaining additional capacity required to address existing needs. Lyndon School District Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan Page 7 648 0 TABLE D: CAPITAL FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN (a Project Status Projected Total New Projected Cost Funding Source Completion Capacity Date Fisher Elementary Planning 2007 60 $1,296,000 Bond, State School Expansion Match, Impact Fees Isom Elementary Planning 2007 36 $842,400 Bond, State School Expansion Match, Impact Fees New Middle School Planning 2010 300 $9,072,500 Bond, Impact Construction (new Fees capacity costs only) Fisher Elementary Planning 2007 --- $15,120,000 Bond, Other School Capital Funds modernization Isom Elementary Planning 2009 --- $3,967,600 Bond, Other (non -capacity Capital Funds improvements) New Middle School Planning 2010 --- $23,898,000 Bond Construction (without new capacity costs) Education Services Planning 2008 --- $3,378,240 Bond, Other Center Capital Funds High School Planning 2008 --- $21,315,360 Bond renovations Land Purchase — --- $750,000 Impact Fees, New Elementary Other Capital School Funds Land Purchase — --- $1,500,000 Impact Fees, New Middle School Other Capital Funds Lynden School Di.,trict Sis-Yea Capital Facilities Plan Pa': 8 649 4 VII: Impact Fee Formula and Schedules: The Growth Management Act authorizes jurisdictions to collect impact fees to supplement funding of additional public facilities needed to accommodate new development. Impact fees cannot be used for the operation, maintenance, repair, alteration, or replacement of existing capital facilities used to meet existing service demands. Whatcom County and the City of Lynden must each adopt a school impact fees ordinance in order to collect school impact fees on behalf of the District. New residential developments built within the District's boundaries will generate additional students. These students will create the need for new or expanded schools and student transportation. New growth should pay a part of the cost of the facilities needed to serve growth. Through the use of a student generation rate, the impact fee formula ensures that each dwelling unit only pays a proportionate share of the costs of new capacity projects necessary to serve new development. The impact fee formula, included herein as Appendix III, takes into account the cost of the new capacity improvements identified in this Plan for the next six years. It calculates the cost per dwelling unit to purchase land for school sites, make site improvements, construct schools, and purchase/install relocatable facilities that add interim capacity needed to serve new development. The fiscal impact of each single family or multi -family development in the District is based on projected student generation rates for single family and multi -family dwelling units. For additional information regarding the student generation rate data, see Appendix IV. As required under the GMA, credits have also been applied in the formula to account for State Match funds to be reimbursed to the District and projected future property taxes to be paid by the dwelling unit. L.yndcn School District Sir -Year Capital Facilities Plan Pagc y 650 0 The following projects are included in the impact fee calculation: No- • Construction of a capacity additions at Isom and Fisher Elementary Schools; and • Capacity addition at the New Middle School. Please see Table B for relevant cost data related to each capacity project. SCHOOL IMPACT FEE SCHEDULES Impact Fee per Single Family Dwelling Unit $ 2,781.00 Impact Fee per Multi -Family Dwelling Unit $ 732.00 Lynden School Disnict Six -Year Capital Facilities Plan Pagel() 651 APPENDIX I ENROLLMENT HISTORY A -I 652 Table A-1 LYNDEN SCHOOL DISTRICT NO.504 HISTORICAL STUDENT ENROLLMENT 1999-2005 FULL TIME EQUIVALENT ENROLLMENTS ON OCTOBER 1st GRADES 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 K 90 83 76 96 88 92 83 15 Grade 197 185 178 166 181 202 192 2"d Grade 186 189 179 187 173 194 213 P Grade 169 177 198 191 186 189 200 4th Grade 220 164 178 195 211 205 203 5 Grade 207 210 183 179 196 206 219 6 Grade 208 203 206 178 191 211 211 7 Grade 204 207 208 219 191 211 218 8 Grade 203 204 206 208 227 194 214 9 Grade 217 206 206 224 237 223 222 10 Grade 197 219 215 225 218 249 228 11 Grade 198 175 179 185 216 207 213 12 Grade 168 193 172 167 180 193 197 Total K-12 Enrollment 2,464 2,415 2,385 2,420 2,495 2,576 2,614 *October I FFE enrollment. Source: OSPI A- [ 653 9 04 F W z � z w w Q 654 H a F z 2 h N O/ O 0 N (V m h m tl tl a Y) h N cS ry r �O +q ^ v 9 a 2 Y a u t7 D h a P M SI o Cob e0 n�+ IQ o Ad r r N a n y O to O A :9 y F• h .' a n q 94 U w W oo N O1 O h h ft h v n ti h i n O IO W O N O a t- V' O A m C! A, O • .d tp n a +o n Al m a O t h O ;� 4o t 9 s> fi N o — a •! h 9 N h h tY N' .• h N � w Y • 4 ed In II} Yi 9 � ri O Cy a! a' 1 � swb :! 9 p�� •- r N � d N O h Q O O '!S .. k3 tl •? 14 .. y T 1 • `+'J 4 O N l7 4 9 :'1 >D '4 ^ s� a 3� ^ c9 n 1•� O o O LY .} D Ol m � ry tF :] N ..•. cl t ^ d d , ¢ Z .+ y e U a v A .- < t a It d v - O U j n e ' u1 q m 0 A ate} CV -•y 21 S t- .q 2 3 .: a O Q l ;f -t• N ;p �R �6 � 31 2 2 +D Yf AF A �'! O Y' ^ ^t t'y PI Z V QQ u F t i� c� a `n �` 7 .a M:. r •y tj .J J .J:l 655 APPENDIX III IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS A-H[ 656 School Impact Fee Calculation :DISTRICT :LVhdWKcYiooifl .. ...... .. School Site Acquisition Cost: ((AcresxCost per Acre)/F9cilit Capqcity)xStudent Generation Fact Y. I . .. I . . V - --*,--- ­ , or...,;: ' ""'IStudent _... .. I iStudent- Cost/ 'Facility 'Factor 'Factor Cost/ :;Cost/ .Facility Acreage Acre Capacity-SFR MFIR SFR :MFR .......................... i .................... ......... ............... ........................................... $0 ........................................................ Middle * $0 $0 ... ........ ... ........................... Sr. High ........... .............. $0 $0 ..................................... 'TOTAL $01 $0 School Construction Cost: ((Facility qqst/faclllty Capaclty)xStudent Generation Facto!)x( nq(!!/LqLqt§qft) istud­erit ';Student -%Perm/. Jalit -y c(Facility iFactor Factor :Cost/ J :Cost/ Jotal Sq,FICost �!yi§ER SFR !. !Capqqi NFIR .......... ............... Elementai::::::-9%49.%-$2;129,400..: 96; 0. 199! 0.085 . ............................. . Middle % 300 0.092 0.021 $2,740 $625 Sr. Hich 550: 0.135 0.106 $0 $o TOTAL $7,1061 Temporary Facility Cost. ((Facility Cost/Facility Capacity)xSlydent Generation, Factor)x(Temporary/Total Square Feet Student !Student Cost/ :Facility :Facility ;Fqqt9! :Factor ISFR 4MFR .Total Sq.F(.Cost Size SFR MFR Elemental 0.199' 0.085 . .. ........ .............. Middle 0.0921 0 021: RJ Si. High ......... --..0....1061 $0. l ;TOTAL $o State Matching Credit:' Boeckh Index X SPI Square Footage X District Match % X Student Factor ,Student Student Boeckh SPI District Factor 'Factor !Cost/ :!Cost/ Index ;Footage Match % SFR 1MFR iSFR :MFR de"im, . .... 0.0851 ff, .. .............. * .......... Middle 0:::-. . .,: - ............... 1. 61.74% 0.0920.021 : ....... Sr. High .............61.74-/* 0.108. 0. 106; .. 'TOTAL $1,705 Tax Payment Credit: i (SFR erage Assessed value .apital Bond Interest Rate Jet Present Value of Average Dwelling ,ears Amortized Iroperty Tbx Levy Rate Present Value of Revenue Stream Yee Summary, .Site Acquistion Costs Permanent Facility Cost Temporary Facility (;ost.. .State Match Credit Tax Payment Credit FEE FEE WITH DISCOUNT Of 25% FEE WITH DISCOUNT OF 25�' . $164,594 ................. .......... . ............ ............ ............... ................. Sin u .... M. TOP ......... . Family .!family $0-991... ..Wool .... ...... $7.105.86.- $2.490.24 $6.00. $0.66 ($1,705.31)' ($1,692.33)! ($785.96)' $3,708 $976 $2,781 Appendix A M $76,442 4.57% .1602,788 $1.3039 657 nm- APPENDIX IV STUDENT GENERATION RATES A -IV • Michael J. McCormick, FAICP Planning Services Growth Management Intergovernmental Relations March 18, 2005 Memorandum To: Dennis Carlson Lynden School District From: Mike McCormick Re: 2005 Student Generation Rates (SGR) for the Lynden School District This memorandum contains the 2005 Lynden School District Student Generation Rates (SGR) for both single family and multiple family. The rates have been calculated for single family and multiple family units_ The survey includes all residential development within the Lynden School District boundaries. The analysis is based on projects permitted between 2000 and 2004.1 The primary sources of data are the Whatcom County Assessor and the Lynden School District. The methodology applied to this analysis was identical to that used to produce Student Generation Analysis for school districts throughout western Washington and for the Bellingham School District (2001, 2003) and Meridian School District (1999). The process of analysis involved gathering the residential development data from the county. The addresses of each of these developments were matched with the 2004-2005 student addresses. The matched records are identified and the number of students in each grade recorded. The individual grade totals were generated along with the total number of units. 'Me individual grade totals were grouped for elementary, middle and high school. A student generation rate was produced for each grade grouping and for the total. 2 The basic development information was acquired from the Whatcom County Assessor's Office which identified projects developed between 2000 and 2004. This data includes the street address for each project by parcel. The address for each residential parcel was extracted from the Assessor's data. The student address and grade information was provided by the Lynden School District A separate file was built comparing the parcel addresses and the student addresses. Each student was accounted for by grade. This Five years is a reasonable time frame to account for any lag between the time a permit is issued and when a particular project is occupied. The development activity occurred between January 1, 2000 and December 31.2004. Student address information was from the 2004-2005 academic year. t For the purposes of this analysis, single family includes single family detached, manufactured and condominium units. Multiple family includes any development with two or more units. For single family there are 1353 units with 577 students. For multiple family there are 47 units with to students. 2420 Columbia SW, Olympia, WA 98501 360.754.2916 Fax 360.754.3448 mjmccormick@olywa.net A -IV 659 2005 Student Generation Rates March I8, 2005 Page 2 information was aggregated into the three grade groupings and student generation rates for each were calculated for single family and multiple family categories. Each SGR represents the number of students produced for each unit of housing in that individual category. The single family and multiple categories are totaled to show the total number of students for all grades that were produced in this study.; 2005 Lynden School District Student Generation Rates Single Family Multiple Family Elementary School 0.1" 0.085 Middle School 0.092 0.021 High School 0.135 0.106 Totals 0.426 0.213 Attached is a summary table showing the information and the student generation rate calculations for both single family and multiple family for each of the three grade groupings. Attachment: Table— Lynden School District Student Generation Rates 2005 t The students were grouped in elementary school (K through 5), middle school (6 through 8) and high school (9 through 12). 4 For single family housing, each unit produced a total of .426 students. For multiple family, each unit produced a total of.213 studenm Totals may vary due to rounding. A -IV Lynden School District Resolution No. 05-06. A Resolution of the Board of Directors (the "Board") of the Lynden School District No. 504 (the "District") to adopt a Capital Facilities Plan (the "Plan") for school facilities pursuant to requirements of the State Growth Management Act. Whereas, the District desires to cooperate with Whatcom County and the City of Lynden in implementing the Growth Management Act (the "GMA"); Whereas, the GMA authorizes local jurisdictions to collect school impact fees from development in order to ensure that school facilities are available to serve new growth and development; Whereas, the District's projected student enrollment is expected to increase over the next six years; Whereas, the District will need to build new schools and develop additional capacity in order to serve the increasing student enrollment; and Whereas, the District is authorized by the GMA and RCW 82.02.050 to adopt a Capital Facilities Plan, and is required to do so if impact fees are to be assessed; Whereas, development of the Plan was carried out by the District in accordance with accepted methodologies and. 19 requirements of the Growth Management Act and 82.02 RCW; and Whereas, the impact fee calculations are consistent with methodologies meeting the conditions and tests of 82.02 RCW; and Whereas, the District finds that the methodologies for determining capital facilities requirements accurately assess necessary additional capacity which address only future growth -related needs; and Whereas, the District finds that the Capital Facilities Plan complies with RCW 36.70A and 82.02 RCW; and Whereas, environmental review of the Capital Facilities Plan was carried out pursuant to RCW 43.2 LC (the State Environmental Policy Act) and its implementing regulations, with a Determination of Nonsignificance having been issued; Now, Therefore Be It Resolved as follows: The 2006 Capital Facilities Plan for the years 2006-2011 is hereby adopted pursuant to the requirements of 36.70A RCW and 82.02 RCW. 2. The District hereby requests that the City of Lynden adopt the Plan as an element of its Capital Facilities Plan during the 2006 Comprehensive Plan update. 3. The District hereby requests that the City of Lynden consider and adopt a school impact fee ordinance. 4. The District hereby requests that Whatcom County adopt the Plan as an element of its Capital Facilities Plan during the 2006 Comprehensive Plan update. 5. The District hereby requests that Whatcom County consider and adopt a school impact fee ordinance. 661 f/ "'pted this r.) 9 of all , P4� .Presi nt At,14rz- J, Director Director 2006, and authenticated by the signatures affixed below: Vice r dent \ , )�� �O Director ATTEST: BY: `D - Dr. Dennis L. Carlson, Secretary, Board of Directors 662 BELLINGHAM SCHOOL DISTRICT NO.501 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2004-2009 BOARD OF DIRECTORS Ken Gass Jeffrey Haggen Elaine Lynch Stephen Schoenfeld Ann Whitmyer SUPERINTENDENT Dr. Dale E. Kinsley Board Approved March, 25, 2004 Contact Jim Stevens, Assistant Superintendent, at (360) 676-6400 for information. 663 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVESUMMARY...........................................................................................................................I SIX -YEAR ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS.............................................................................................2 ................................ SERVICE STANDARDS.............................................................................. ...............3 INVENTORY AND EVALUATION OF CURRENT FACILITIES...........................................................5 THE DISTRICT'S SIX -YEAR CONSTRUCTION PLAN..........................................................................6 SIX -YEAR CLASSROOM CAPACITIES...................................................................................................7 FINANCEPLAN..........................................................................................................................................8 IMPACTFEES.............................................................................................................................................8 TABLE1-A...............................................................................................................................................T-1 TABLE1-13 ............................................................................................................................................... T-2 TABLE2-A............................................................................................................................................... T-3 TABLE2-13 ............................................................................................................................................... T-4 TABLE3................................................................................................................................................... T-5 APPENDIXA.......................................................................................................................................... A-1 APPENDIXB........................................................................................................................................... A-2 i M I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Capital Facilities Plan (the "Plan") has been prepared by the Bellingham School District No. 501 (the District") as the District's principal facility planning document, in compliance with the requirements of Washington's Growth Management Act. It has been prepared using data available in March 2004. This Plan is consistent with prior long-term capital facilities plans adopted by the District. However, it is not intended to be the sole plan for all the District's needs. The District also prepares interim long-range capital facilities plans consistent with board policies. Such plans take into account longer and shorter time periods, other factors, and trends in the use of facilities, and other needs of the District as may be required. These plans are consistent with this Plan. Pursuant to the requirements of the Growth Management Act, this Plan and the fee schedule will be updated based on the City of Bellingham's and Whatcom County's schedules for updating comprehensive plans. The City of Bellingham has adopted a school impact fee ordinance. This updated Plan must be adopted by reference as a part of the City's Comprehensive Plan. For impact fees to be collected in unincorporated areas of Whatcom County, the Whatcom County Council must adopt this Plan and must adopt a school impact fee ordinance. The. Plan establishes a service standard in order to ascertain current and future capacity. Though the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction ("OSPI") establishes square foot guidelines for use as capacity funding criteria, those guidelines do not account for the local program needs in the District. The Growth Management Act authorizes the District to make adjustments to the service standard based on the District's specific needs. In general, the District's current standard provides the following: Grade Level - Class Size Prim (K-3) 23 Students Intermediate 4-5 23 Students Middle School 6-8 25 Students High School (9-12) 25 Students School capacity is based on the number of teaching stations or classrooms, class size, and the type of educational program provided by the school district. Existing inventory includes both permanent and relocatable classrooms. The District's 2003-2004 permanent capacity is 9,740 (plus relocatable capacity of 902), and student enrollment is 10,296. Based upon preliminary projections, the District anticipates growth in enrollment to be focused in the elementary levels. This increase will necessitate the completion of one new elementary school during the next six years. A financing plan is included in Section VII which demonstrates the District's ability to implement this Plan. 665 II. SIX YEAR ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS Enrollment projections are most accurate for the initial years of the forecast period. Moving further into the future, more assumptions about economic conditions and demographic trends in the area affect the projections. The District expects enrollment increases in the next six years to occur in the City's northwest quadrant, east Bakerview, Sudden Valley, and Yew Street vicinity. This projection is based upon population forecasts made in both the Bellingham Comprehensive plan and the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan, and upon existing land use policies and anticipated development decisions. Student enrollment projections have been developed using the Whatcom County Population Forecast to determine base enrollments. (See Table 1-A.) The Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction prepares enrollment projections for school districts using the cohort survival method. This method uses historic patterns of student progression by grade level to measure the portion of students moving from one grade level up to the next higher cohort or grade. This ratio, or survival rate, is used in conjunction with an estimate of kindergarten enrollment as a base for enrollment projections. These projections are used as a comparison. (See Table 1-B.) 2 •.• III. SERVICE STANDARDS The District's service standard is used to ascertain its overall capacity. The service standard identifies the program year, the class size, the number of classrooms, students, and programs of special needs. The service standard outlined below reflects only those programs and educational opportunities provided to students which directly affect the capacity of the school buildings. The District operates basic educational programs under the following grade level configurations: Elementary schools house kindergarten through grade five. Middle schools house grades six through eight. High schools house grades nine through twelve. The District has updated its standard of service since the preparation of the last Plan. Specifically, the District engaged in a comprehensive review of its facilities, identifying the actual use of each school for regular classroom instruction, special programs, and other non - instructional needs. The District also incorporated class size reductions as a result of Initiative 728 (passed by the Legislature in 2000) as well as other District programs and contract requirements. Service Standard for Elementary Students • In general, class size for grades K-3 should not exceed 23 students. • In general, class size for grades 4-5 should not exceed 23 students. • Special Education for students with disabilities is generally provided in self-contained classrooms. • Music instruction for all students is generally provided in a separate classroom. • Computer instruction for all students is generally provided in both the classroom and a special computer lab. Identified students will also be provided other special educational opportunities in classrooms designated as follows: • Resource rooms • Learning assisted programs • Life skills programs • Mild, moderate, and.severe disabilities Service Standard for Secondary Students • In general, class size for grades 6-8 should not exceed 25 students. • In general, class size for grades 9-12 should not exceed 25 students. • Special Education for students with disabilities is generally provided in self-contained classrooms. • Music instruction for all students is generally provided in a separate classroom. 667 • Computer instruction for all students is generally provided in both the classroom and special computer lab. Identified students will also be provided other special educational opportunities in classrooms designated as follows: • Resource rooms • Learning assisted programs • Life skills programs • Mild, moderate, and severe disabilities Room Utilization It is not possible to achieve 100% utilization of regular teaching stations because of scheduling conflicts for student programs, the need for specialized rooms for certain programs, and the need for teachers to have a work space during their planning periods. New School Planning When planning, designing, and constructing new schools, the school facilities are sized to accommodate the number of students shown below: • Elementary schools — 500 students • Middle schools — 700 students • High schools — 1,200 students When acquiring new school sites, the following standards are used: • Elementary schools —10 acres • Middle schools — 20 acres • High schools — 40 acres rd IV. INVENTORY AND EVALUATION OF CURRENT FACILITIES As discussed above in Section III, the District recently completed a comprehensive review of its facilities, identifying the actual use of each school for regular classroom instruction, special programs, and other programmatic needs. The District currently has permanent capacity to house 9,740 students and relocatable capacity to house 902 students. This capacity is based upon the District's service standard as set forth in Section III. The District's actual enrollment in February 2004 was 10,296. Based upon population forecasts contained in the City of Bellingham and Whatcom County Comprehensive Plans, the District's enrollment is projected to increase to 10,880 in 2009 (see Table 1-A). Calculations of elementary, middle school, and high school capacities are set forth in Tables 2-A and 2-B. Relocatables The District inventory includes 46 relocatables (portable classrooms). Due to the age and condition of some of the portables, the District intends to remove thirteen portables from its inventory by the year 2008. Other portables may be relocated throughout the District to meet capacity needs. Based on enrollment projections and planned permanent facilities, the District may need to acquire additional relocatables during the next six -year period. As enrollment fluctuates, relocatables provide flexibility to accommodate immediate needs and interim housing. The use and need for relocatables will be balanced against program needs. Table 2-B contains an evaluation of District capacity in relation to the six -year enrollment projections. V. THE DISTRICT'S SIX -YEAR CONSTRUCTION PLAN During the next six years, new growth will create the need to complete one new elementary school and add classrooms to existing schools in the District. To respond to neighborhood enrollment projections, the new elementary school (Elementary No. 14) should be located in the northwest area of Bellingham. After an extensive review of existing facility information, the District has identified the following list of major maintenance and modernization projects which will be required over the next 10 years: Facilities Upgrade and Classroom additions, gymnasium expansion, windowwall Modernization replacement, structural modifications, athletic bleachers Districtwide Flooring replacement, hazardous materials removal, heating unit vents replacement, technology, indoor air quality assessment Property Purchase Two elementary school sites Mechanical/Electrical Install heat pumps, water tank replacement, electrical Upgrade upgrade Facility Assessment Conduct condition assessments of several existing facilities Systems Upgrades . Chimney relining, fire alarm system upgrade, re -roofing, Wetlands Mitigation Squalicum/Roosevelt Fiber Lite Districtwide fiber optics installation 0 670 VI. SIX -YEAR CLASSROOM CAPACITIES: AVAILABILITY/DEFICIT PROJECTION Based on the District's enrollment forecast, current service standard, current inventory and capacity, and future planned classroom space, enrollment will exceed District permanent capacity within the six -year period covered by this Plan, particularly at the elementary level. To meet the needs associated with deficiencies or surpluses, the District will utilize a number of tools. These tools include the movement of relocatables, boundary changes, new construction, and modifications in the educational program. Completion of Elementary Number 14 will accommodate expected growth at the elementary level. 7 671 VII. FINANCE PLAN The Finance Plan shown on Table 3 demonstrates. how the District plans to finance improvements for the years 2004 through 2009. The financing components include secured and unsecured funding. The Finance Plan is based on remaining interest earnings and state matching funds from prior bond issues, collection of impact fees under the State Growth Management Act, and a future bond issue which will need to be approved by voters. VIII. IMPACT FEES New residential developments built within the District's boundaries will generate additional students. Specifically, the District's student generation rate indicates that .377 students will be generated from each new single family development in the District and .161 students will be generated from each new multi -family dwelling unit. (See Appendix B.) These students will create the need for additional capacity at the elementary level. The impact fee formula takes into account the cost of the growth -related capital improvements identified in this Plan for the next six years. It calculates the fiscal impact of each single-family or multi -family development in the District based on projected student generation rates for single-family and multi -family dwelling units. It also takes into account the taxes that will be paid by these developments and any funds that will be provided by the State for new construction. For the impact fee calculations see Appendix A. School impact fees will be used to offset that portion of the cost to construct Elementary No. 14 that is related to new growth, with the majority of the facility being funded by state and local funds. School impact fees will not be used to fund improvements necessary to correct existing needs. The financing plan for the non -growth capital projects and non -capacity projects clearly indicates funding from other sources. School Impact Fee Schedule Impact fee per single-family dwelling unit Impact fee per multi -family dwelling unit $1,211.00 $ 721.00 N. 672 Table 1-A Bellingham School District Projected Student Population Whatcom County Population Forecast, Medium Range GRADE 2003* 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 K 714 719 729 739 748 758 768 1 723 796 801 813 824 834 845 2 772 732 806 811 823 834 844 3 730 786 745 820 826 838 849 4 732 729 785 744 819 825 836 5 773 750 747 .804 763 839 845 6 819 786 763 759 818 775 853 7 812 830 796 772 769 828 785 8 828 835 853 819 795 791 852 9 1,012 979 987 1,009 968 939 935 10 925 954 923 931 951 913 886 11 853 854 881 852 859 878 842 12 646 717 718 741 716 723 738 K-5 4,444 4,512 4,613 4,732 4,802 4,927 4,988 6-8 2,459 2,451 2,412 2,351 2,382 2,395 2.,491 9-12 3,436 3,504 3,509 3,532 3,495 3,453 3,402 TOTAL 10,339 10,467 10,534 10,615 10,678 10,775 10,880 *Actual enrollment Source: Kask Consulting. Full enrollment report available by request from the Bellingham School District. T-1 673 Table 1-B Bellingham School District Projected Student Population Cohort Survival GRADE 2003* 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 K 714 645 691 696 702 704 768 1 723 796 763 770 776 782 789 2 772 732 806 773 780 786 792 3 730 786 746 821 787 794 801 4 732 729 785 745 820 786 793 5 773 750 747 805 764 840 806 6 819 786 763 760 819 777 854 7 812 829 796 773 770 829 787 8 828 835 853 819 795 792 853 9 1,012 977 987 1,009 968 940 936 10 925 953 921 930 951 912 886 11 853 851 879 850 858 878 842 12 646 717 716 739 715 722 l 738 K-5 4,444 4478 4,538 4,601 4,629 4,696 4,695 6-8 2,459 2,450 2,412 2,352 2,384 2,398 2,494 9-12 3,436 3,498 3,503 3,528 3,492 3,452 3,402 TOTAL 10,339 10,426 10,453 10,490 1 10,505 105465 10,591 *Actual enrollment Source: Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction. T-2 674 Table 2-A Existing Facilities Currently there are thirteen elementary schools (K-5), four middle schools (6-8), and three high schools (9-12). Following is an inventory of their capacity. Inventory of Existing School Facilities Bellingham School District .Srte 's rte Srze Facility Size . (s uare. eet) Capacity' .. . (Enhanced) Elementary 4,817 Alderwood 10.7 30,947 357 Birchwood 4.6 33,510 379 Carl Cozier 4.2 45,390 513 Columbia 3.0 35,041 223 Geneva 8.8 52,013 469 Happy Valley 7.5 39,697 446 Larrabee 1.3 18,260 201 Lowell 3.2 35,427 290 Northern Heights 16.0 _ 50,108 379 Parkview 4.1 33,882 334 Roosevelt 14.2 50,140 468 Silver Beach 10.0 48,364 446 Sunnyland 2.9 32,607 312 Middle 2,525 Fairhaven 13.6 89,480 550 Kulshan 17.0 74,497. 675 Shuksan 15.7 87,964 675 Whatcom 8.2 103,844 625 High 3,300 Bellingham 16.5 166,164 1,050 Sehome 41.0 175,624 1,025 Squalicum 39.0 178,616 1,225 TOTAL 10,642 *Capacity Permanent Capacity 9,740 Relocatable 902 Total (Enhanced) 10,642 T-3 675 Table 2-B PROJECTED CAPACITY BY GRADE LEVEL: 2004-2009 BASED UPON HEADCOUNT ENROLLMENT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL FACILITIES Actual Feb. 2004 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Permanent Capacity 4215 4215 4215 4215 4215 4715 4715 Capacity Enhancements Portables 602 602 602 602 602 602 602 Enhanced Capacity 4817 4817 4817 4817 4817 5317 5317 New Construction 500 School Closures Projected Enrollment 4445 4512 4613 4732 4802 4927 4988 Permanent Capacity Sur lus/ Deficit (229) (297) (398) (517) (587) (212) (273) Enhanced Capacity Sur lus/ eficit 372 305 204 85 15 390 329 MIDDLE SCHOOL FACILITIES Actual Feb 2004 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Permanent Capacity 2325 2325 2325 2325 2325 2325 2325 Capacity Enhancements Portables 200 200 200 206 200 200 200 Enhanced CaReity 2525 1 2525. 2525 2525 2525 2525 2525 New Construction School Closures Projected Enrollment 2445 2451 2412 2351 2382 2395 2491 Permanent Capacity Surplus/(Deficit) 126 87 26 57 70 166 Enhanced Capacity Surplus/(Deficit) 80 74 113 174 143 130 34 HIGH SCHOOL FACILITIES Actual Feb 2004 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Permanent Ca aci .3200 3200 3200 3200 3200 3260 3200 Capacity Enhancements(Portables) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Enhanced Capacity 3300 3300 3300 3300 3300 3300 3300 New Construction School Closures Projected Enrollment 3406 3504 3509 3532 3495 3453 3402 Permanent Capacity Sur lus/ eficit (206) (304) (309 (332) (295) (253) (202) Enhanced Capacity Surplus/(Deficit) (106) (204) 1 (209) (232) (195) 1 (153) 1 (102) T-4 676 k d 2 w g � w @ � / O I 0 m I < I e 2 LU m § CD k k E cu k c /�7 7 4) 0 R 0 c _j 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 /// 7 7\ k 2 0 7 7 k -j L O 0 / 2 / / @ CN n c o / R 0/ 0/ c E CD k k kkNk����I k o g n q 2 k A k cok 0 k k 0 0 0 A k 0 / \ q \ k k / k to� \ k \ _ Cej + k k k k k k # k � � ; / _ cN § \ \ / CL I = t 2 a c c\ § .2 a)/ \ / M 0 2 a a w / 2 f \ § S q m '- k < 0 0 f f E k§)m IE / w� 3 I� m % t \ / S /� b Kk f / k� � k 2 m kk / f 0 b CD Q) § CD 3% 72 \/ 04) C: X co An U) ffk R w [ w � 677 Appendix A School Impact Fee Calculation DISTRICT -9 .. gl 'ai SEhoQE IJi trt t #501 School Site Acquisition Cost: ((AcresxCost per Acre)/Facility Capacity)xStudent Generation Factor Student Student Facility Cost/ lFacility Factor Factor Cost/ Cost/ Acreage Acre Capacity SFR MFR SFR MFR ,. Elemental 15 00;:' $83 3331;79 _. 0:rJ89° $447 $222 Middle . 0036 $ 0 $ 0 ;:::<;..::.:::::,,; Sr. High 0 00'_ $0: _ 100 0.:108 ..:... _........ .... : . ............................ . :....:. 4036. $0 $0 TOTAL 1 $447 $222 School Construction Cost: ((Facility Cost/Facility Capacity) xStud ent Generation Factor)x(permonent/Total Sq Ft) Student Student %Perm/ Facility I Facility Factor Factor Cost/ Cost/ Total Sq.Fi Cost ICapacity SFR MFR SFR MFR Elementar,,... 907:0.O00 500 ..:.:::$.... 0.179 . 0.089 $3,119 $1,551 .......:...:...... ...:....:....... Middle ;i6$0°�a>'i;l>';;.<'$Q 700 0.089 0.036 $0 $0 Sr. High 96.8.0::::, :.: $,:' 1,2001 0.1081 0.036 $0 $0 TOTAL 1 $3,1 19 $1,551 Temporary Facility Cost: ((Facility Cost/Facility Capacity) xStudent Generation Factor)x(Temporary/Total Square Feet) Student Student Cost/ Cost/ %Temp/ Facility Facility Factor Factor SFR MFR Total Sq.Ff Cost Size SFR MFR Elemental 3.20%>`>>l'>>>`>`«::.:$.._:._::::::::::::.::>:::::::::. 9 0.089 $ 0 $ 0 Middle 3.20%`>»<>><>>: �<<<><s:::.......... $ 00 . 36 $ 0 $ 0 Sr h 0.108 0.036 0 0 ...................... TOTAL $0 $0 State Matching Credit: Bo.eckh Index X SPI Square Footage X District Match % X Student Factor Student Student Boeckh SPI District Factor Factor Cost/ Cost/ Index Footage Match % SFR MFR SFR MFR Elemental:`::;::';; 0.179 00 89 0 0 Middle 0=>>s'€;tflj 0.00% 0.089 0.036 $0 $0 Sr. High 0[`:`:.- >'`'€t( 0.00% 0.108 ............................... 0.036 $0 $0 ................................ TOTAL $0 $0 Tax Payment Credit: SFR MFR Average Assessed Value $148,904 $55,057 Capital Bond Interest Rate ::.. a 4.35% Net Present Value of Average Dwelling $1,186,973 I $438,881 Years Amortized .................................................................. ::::::::..:::.:::,......................................1.... Property Tax Levy Rate ................................... $;1.039' $1.3039 Present Value of Revenue Stream $1,548 $572 Fee Summary: Single Multiple Family Family Site Acquistion Costs $447.50 $222.50 Permanent Facility Cost $3,118.90 $1,550.74 Temporary Facility Cost $0.00 $0.00 State Match Credit $0.00 $0.00 Tax Payment Credit ($1,547.67) ($572.25) FEE $2,019 $1,201 FEE WITH DISCOUNT OF 40% $1,211 FEE WITH DISCOUNT OF 40% 1 $72'1 A-1 678 2003 BELLINGHAM SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT GENERATION RATES Single Family Multiple Family Elementary 0.179 0.089 Middle School 0.089 0.036 High School 0.108 0.036 Total' 0.377 0.161 Attached is a summary table showing the summary information and the student generation rate calculations for both single family and multiple family. Single Family # of Students SGR Elementary K-5 262 0.179 Middle School 6-8 130 0.089 High School 9-12 158 0.108 Total 550 0.377 Multiple Family # of Students SGR Elementary K-5 173 0.089 Middle School 6-8 70 0.036 High School 9-12 69 0.036 Total 312 0.161 Grade SF # MF # K 33 37 1 36 32 2 38 27 3 41 31 4 72 23 5 42 23 6 43 26 7 48 24 8 39 20 9 36 19 10 48 21 11 36 18 12 38 11 Total 550 312 Total Units 1460 1942 'Total may vary due to rounding. A-2 679 Ferndale Schools CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN and SCHOOL IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE Ferndale School District Ferndale, Washington Kask Consulting, Inc. Mercer Island, Washington 23 December 2005 .:c Ferndale Schools CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN and SCHOOL IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE Ferndale School District Dr. Roger Lehnert, Superintendent Ron Cowan, Assistant Superintendent, Business and Support Services (Former) Mark Deebach, Executive Director, Business and Support Services 6041 Vista Drive Post Office Box 698 Ferndale, Washington 98248 360 383-9203 Kask Consulting, Inc. Mart Kask, AICP, PE 8 Lindley Road Mercer Island, WA 98040 206 275-0140 23 December 2005 2 CONTENTS 1. Enrollment 1 2. Service Standards 3 3. Adequacy of Existing Facilities 4 4. Construction Program 9 5. Financing Plan 11 6. Impact Fees 13 7. Appendix Draft Impact Fee Ordinance 3 .: ENROLLMENT Student population in the Ferndale School District is forecasted to grow from 5,204 students in 2005 to 6,840 students in 2623, an increase of 1,636 students. This increase of students translates to an annual growth rate of about 1.5 percent per year. The forecast of students by grade level is shown in Table 1 below. This forecast is a very conservative forecast. For comparison purposes, the cohort survival technique or projecting past trends results in the forecasted 2023 student population number of 8,789 students. Table 1 Student Enrollment Forecast Ferndale School District Year Elementary Middle High Total 2003 2,665 878 1,487 5,030 2004 2,721 855 1,537 5,113 2005 2,721 867 1,616 5,204 2006 2,800 851 1,606 5,258 2007 2,873 798 1,625 5,297 2008 2,964 804 1,579 5,347 2009 3,059 8.00 1,545 5,403 2010 3,050 922 1,528 5,501 2011 3,105 976 1,487 5,568 2012 3,160 929 1,623 5,712 2013 3,216 946 1,669 5,830 2014 3,270 964 1,728 5,963 2015 3,326 981 1,780 6,087 2016 3,381 998 1,765 6,144 2017 3,435 1,017 1,796 6,248 2018 3,491 1,034 1,829 6,354 2019 3,546 1,051 1,862 6,460 2020 3,601 1,069 1,894 6,564 2021 3,656 1,086 1,927 6,670 2022 3,722 1,093 1,960 6,775 2023 3,760 1,100 1,980 6,840 2 A newly constructed and occupied single family residence in the Ferndale School District generates, on an average, a total of 0.70 public school K-12 students. About one half of the total, 0.35 students, are destined to attend elementary school (K-6). The remaining 0.35 students split 0.17 for the middle school (7-8) and 0.18 for the high school (9-12). A newly constructed and occupied multi family housing unit, an apartment, generates on an average a total of 0.24 public school K-12 students. Again, about one half, 0.12 students are destined to attend the elementary school. The remaining 0.12 splits evenly between the middle school and the high school, 0.6 and 0.6 students each. The Ferndale School District's student generation rates compare reasonable well with student generation rates of other school districts with similar urban and rural development characteristics. A comparison of student generation rates of a select group of school districts is shown in Table 2. Table 2 Comparison of Student Generation Rates School District Single Family Multi Family Ferndale Element K-6 0.35 0.12 Middle 7-8 0.17 0.06 High 9-12 0.18 0.06 Total 0.70 0.24 Auburn Element K-5 0.38 0.14 Middle 6-8 0.14 0.06 High 9-12 0.11 0.04 Total 0.63 0.24 Bellingham Elementary K-5 0.18 0.09 Middle 6-8 0.09 0.03 High 9-12 0.11 0.04 Total 0.38 0.16 Peninsula Element K-5 0.24 0.05 Middle 6-8 0.15 0.05 High 9-12 0.14 .007 Total 0.53 0.17 = SERVICE STANDARDS Service standards, in the context of a capital facilities plan, deal only with those issues that relate to school facilities planning, design and construction. The following service standards are discussed in some detail below: grade configuration, class size, classroom utilization, school size, land area, and portable classrooms. In the Ferndale School District, elementary schools are composed of K though 6 grades. Middle schools encompass grades 7 and 8 and high school grades are 9 through 12. The District attempts to limit K-6 grades to 22 students per classroom. Middle and high school class size is limited to 25 students while portables capacity to house students is limited to 20 students. The objective is to achieve 100 percent classroom utilization. This objective is hardly ever achieved. At the elementary level, classroom utilization is at 95 percent. At the middle school level, classroom utilization is at 90 percent and at the high school level at 85 percent. When planning for new schools, elementary schools are designed to accommodate 500 students, middle schools 650 students and high schools 1,250 students. Land area requirement for an elementary school amounts to 15 acres, for a middle school 25 acres and for a high school 40 acres. The school size and land area requirements are summarized in Table 3 below. Table 3 Planning and Design Standards for New Schools Ferndale School District School Type Design Capacity Students Desired Site Size Acres Element K-6 500 15 Middle 7-8) 650 25 High 9-12 1,250 40 0 ADEQUACY OF EXISTING FACILITIES Existing Schools Capacity The calculated capacity of the Ferndale School District in 2003 was estimated at 5,710 students. The seven elementary schools estimated to accommodate 2,875 students, the two middle schools 1,300 students, and the high school is estimated to accommodate 1,535 students. The capacity is calculated by multiplying the number of classrooms by class size. The calculated capacity for each school is shown in Table 4. Table 4 Inventory of Existing School Facilities March 2003 Ferndale School District School Facility Size Square Feet Student Capacity Elementary Beach 8,919 60 Central 42,568 315 Custer 46,467 500 Ea lerid e 46,793 500 Mountain View 48,306 500 North Bellingham 45,602 500 Skyline 50,661 500 Total Elementary 289,316 2,875 Middle Horizon 72,027 650 Vista 101,403 650 Total Middle 173,430 1,300 High Ferndale 207,557 1,535 Windward leased facility) (15,497) (300) Total High 207,557 1,535 Total K-12 1 670,303 5,710 7 .:. The practical capacity of each school is considerably lower than the calculated capacity. Practical capacity takes into consideration the fact that specialty classrooms may not be utilized throughout each day's school period. For example, a music room or an art room or a computer lab may not be utilized throughout all periods of the school day. An art room may remain vacant for a number of periods. For these reasons, elementary schools generally operate at a ninety-five percent practical capacity, middle schools at 90 percent practical capacity and high. schools at 85 percent practical capacity. At the practical capacity level, the elementary school capacity amounts to 2,731 students, the middle school practical capacity to 1,170 students, and the high school practical capacity to 1,305 students. In total, the practical capacity of the School system amounts to 5,206 students. The School District responds to the capacity restrains by bringing onto various school sites 15 portable classrooms and leasing space in an additional building. Since the Washington State Office of the Superintendent of Public Instructions only considers the calculated capacity, the student enrollment versus the capacity analysis, as presented below, is presented in calculated capacity. Supply /Demand Comparison Today, the Ferndale School District is deficient in capacity to house it students. Over time when school enrollment grows and facility size remains constant, the gap between supply and demand for classroom space will increase significantly. The comparison of capacity and supply in the elementary school system is shown in Table 5. The comparison of supply with capacity in the middle school system is shown in Table 6 and the supply to capacity comparison for the high school, in Table 7. In addition to a comparison between capacity and estimated enrollment to determine the need for additional facilities, district planners must also consider how programmatic changes might create the need for additional facilities, i.e. class size reduction efforts, all day kindergarten, pre-school, etc. In today's dollars, it costs the School District $13,500,000 to construct Elementary School No. 8. In addition, there is the cost of the land. Land for the Elementary School No. 8 was acquired in 2002. It is estimated that it would cost the School District $15,300,000 to construct Elementary School No. 9. Of the total, $1,800,000 is the land cost. There does not seem to be any overcrowding at the middle school level. There is adequate classroom capacity for the entire twenty year plannin� period. One way to relieve pressure at the elementary school level is to move the 6` grade into the middle school ranks. This action postpones the need to construct Elementary School No. 8 for about five to six years. Previously, district patrons have expressed strong opposition to the idea of moving 6t' grade into the middle school 8 .: Table 5 Comparison of Elementary School Capacity and Enrollment Ferndale School District Year Enrollment Capacity Surplus or (Deficiency) Action 2003 2,665 2,875 210 2004 2,721 2,875 154 2005 2,721 2,875 154 Bond issue 2006 2,800 2,875 75 Design/Construct Elementary 8 2007 2,873 3,375 502 Open Elementary No. 8 2008 2,964 3,375 411 2009 3,059 3,375 316 2010 3,050 3,375 325 2011 3,105 3,375 270 2012 3,160 3,375 215 Acquire land for Elementary 9 2013 3,216 3,375 159 2014 3,270 3,375 105 Bond issue 2015 3,326 3,375 49 Eleiiientary No. 9 2016 3,381 3,375 6 -Design Construct Elementary No. 9 2017 3,435 3,875 440 Open Elementary No. 9 2018 3,491 3,875 384 2019 3,546 3,875 329 2020 3,601 3,875 274 2021 3,656 3,875 219 2022 3,722 3,875 153 2023 3,760 3,875 115 The answer to the question "when to build High School No. 2" is an elusive one. There is no clear cut date when the existing high schools become overcrowded to the point that a new high school is warranted. The calculations, in Table 7 above, make the assumption that the new Windward High School continues to be a viable temporary facility. Under this assumption, a new high school No. 2 should be built and open in 2019. If the Windward program does not succeed, a new high school No. 2 should be built and open in the year 2015. The estimated cost of constructing High School No. 2, in today's dollars, is about $46,300,000 of which $4,800,000 is in land costs. 0 .:: Table 6 Comparison of Middle School Capacity and Enrollment Ferndale School District Year Enrollment Capacity Surplus (Deficiency) Action 2003 878 1,300 422 2004 855 1,300 445 2005 867 .1,300 433 2006 851 1,300 449 2007 798 1,300 502 2008 804 1,300 496 2009 800 1,300 500 2010 922 1,300 378 2011 976 1,300 324 2012 929 1,300 371 2013 946 1,300 354 2014 964 1,300 336 2015 981 1,300 319 2016 998 1,300 302 2017 1,017 1,300 283 2018 1,034 1,300 266 2019 1,051 1,300 249 2020 1,069 1,300 231 2021 1,086 1,300 214 2022 1,093 1,300 1 207 2023 1,100 1,300 200 Summary — Supply / Demand The above analysis clearly demonstrates that the Ferndale School District is overcrowded and is operating at over practical capacity. The need to purchase, transport to the site, connect with utilities and equip for instruction 15 portable classrooms, all demonstrates that additional capacity over and above the current calculated capacity is needed. The need to lease additional classroom space in a separate facility further demonstrates the overcrowding situation. 10 Table 7 Comparison of High School Capacity and Enrollment Ferndale School. District Year Enrollment Capacity Surplus (Deficiency) Action 2003 1,487 1,535 48 2004 1,537 1,535 (2) 2005 1,616 1,535 81 2006 1,606 1,535 71) Acquire land for High School 2 2007 1,625 1,535 90) 2008 1,579 1,535 44 2009 1,545 1,535 10) 2010 .1,528 1,535 7 2011 1,587 1,535 52 2012 1,623 1,535 88 2013 1,669 1,535 134 2014 1,728 1,535 193) 2015 1,780 1,535 245 Bond issue 2016 1,765 1,535 230 Design 2017 1,796 1,535 261 Construct 2018 1,829 1,535 294 Construct 2019 1,862 2,785 934 Open High School No. 2 2020 1,894 2,785 891 2021 1,927 2,785 858 2022 1,960 2,785 825 2023 1,980 2,785 805 11 O CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM A number of projects have been identified for construction over a period of eighteen years spanning from 2006 through 2023. Some projects are new construction that results in added classroom capacity while other projects are modernization and renovation. A list of projects is presented in Table No. 8 below. Table 8 Construction Program, 2006-2023 Project Improvement Type Cost Timin Start Complete Elementary No. 8 New construction $13,500,000 2006 2007 Beach Elementary Modernization $313,000 2006 2006 Custer Elementary Modernization $3,745,000 2006 2008 Mt. View Elementary Modernization $1,665,000 2006 2006 N-B Elementary Modernization $784,000 2006 2006 Skyline Elementary Modernization $183,000 2006 2006 Vista Middle School Modernization $180,000 2006 2006 High School Modernization $8,635,000 2006 2007 High School Acquire site $4,800,000 2006 2006 Elementary No. 9 Acquire site $1,800,000 2012 2012 Elementary No. 9 New construction $13,500,000 2015 2017 High School No. 2 New construction $41,500,000 2016 2018 Total 2006-2023 $90,605,000 12 691 The School District is faced with a significant construction program. During the i+ 18-year period form 2006 through 2023, the School District is looking at constructing two elementary schools and one high. school. In addition the School District is obligated to constantly maintain and modernize school facilities to meet public demand and changing governmental regulations. During the first six -year construction period from 2006 through 2011, the School District is looking to expend about $34 million. During the remaining 12-year period from 2012 through 2023, the School District is looking to construct two new schools at an estimated cost of about $57 million. 13 692 FINANCING PLAN Traditionally, capital improvement projects in the Ferndale School District are financed or paid out of voter approved bond funds. In 2006, the voters in the Ferndale School District will be asked to approve the sale of $36.8 million in bonds. Proposition No. 1 is a $32.2 million capital improvements bond issue and Proposition No. 2 is an additional $4.6 million bond issue. Although, a number of capital improvement projects in the Ferndale School District qualify for State grants from the Capital Construction fund, it is very unlikely that the District will receive any funds. Projects throughout the State compete for a fixed amount of money. All projects are ranked in priority, based on a ranking criterion. It is likely that the funds will run out before the Ferndale School District project application on the ranking roster comes up for consideration. A financing plan for the identified capital projects is shown in Table 9. Table 9 Financing Plan, Capital Projects, 2006-2023 Project Improvement Type Cost Financin 2006 Bonds Other Bonds Elementary No. 8 New construction $13,500,000 $13,500,000 Beach Elementary Modernization $313,000 $313,000 Custer Elementary Modernization $3,745,000 $3,745,000 Mt. View Elementary Modernization $1,665,000 $1,665,000 N-B Elementary Modernization $784,000 $784,000 Skyline Elementary Modernization $183,000 $183,000 Vista Middle School Modernization $180,000 $180,000 High School Modernization $8,635,000 $8,635,000 High School No. 2 Acquire site $4,800,000 $4,800,000 Elementary No. 9 Acquire site $1,800,000 $1,800,000 Elementary No. 9 New construction $13,500,000 $13,500,000 High School No. 2 New construction $41,500,000 $41,500,000 Total $90,605,000 $33,805,000 $56,800,000 14 693 It should be noted that at the time of the writing of this report, the School District does not have a secure source of funds for any capital expenditure. The proposed 2006 bond issue needs to be approved by 60 percent of the votes cast at a special election, anticipated to take place in March of 2006. If the bond issue were to fail to get voter approval in March, it is likely that the School District will try again in May by lowering the bond amount. Looking at financing in the 18-year time frame, specific plans have been made to secure bond funds in 2006 to finance the 2006-2011 period with $37 million. There are no specific plans to finance the supplemental $54 million in capital improvements needs, estimated for the 2012-2023 period. In summary, the School District faces $91 million in unfunded capital expenditure needs. Of that amount, $37 million financing is planned to be placed before the voters in March 2006 as a bond issue, leaving un-planned and un- financed need of $54 million. The Ferndale School District has in the past and, will continue in the future to look for school impact mitigation or impact fee funds to supplement local bond and State funding sources. 15 = IMPACT FEES State statutes authorize cities and counties to levy school impact fees on behalf of School Districts. The Ferndale School District is desirous of instituting a school impact fee program with the City of Ferndale and with Whatcom County. The School District, in the past, has applied for and received school impact mitigation payments authorized under the State Environmental Policy Act or SEPA. The Ferndale School District is requesting that the school impact fee for a newly constructed single family housing unit be established at $4,983 and a fee of $964 be established for a newly constructed multi family housing unit. School impact fees are to be applied to all new construction in single family and multifamily housing whether built in a subdivision or on a single lot. School impact fees also apply to manufactured and mobile homes. The school impact fees are to be collected at the time of building permit issuance. The impact fee calculations are shown on the following pages. A sample daft of a school impact fee ordinance is found in the appendix of this document. 16 t.- 695 APPENDIX 19 City of Ferndale School Impact Fee Ordinance 16.100.010 — Finding, Purpose and Applicability A. Findings B. Purpose C. Applicability 16.100.020 - Authority 16.100.030 — Definitions 16.100.040 - School District Eligibility A. School Capital Facilities Plan required B. Expiration of District Plan C. Revising the School Capital Facilities Plan 16.100.050 - School Facilities Plan Requirements and Procedures A. Minimum requirements for the District's School Capital Facilities Plan B. Council adoption. C. Failure to adopt 16.100.060 — School Impact Fee A. Fee required B. Impact fee schedule C. Service areas established D. Impact fee limitations E. Fee determination F. Credit for in -kind contributions G. SEPA mitigation and other review 16.100.070 — Impact Fee Accounting A. Collection and transfer of fees B. Use of funds C. Refunds 16.100.080 - Adjustments, Waivers, Appeals and Arbitration A. Administrative adjustment of amount B. Appeals of decisions — procedure C. Arbitration of disputes 16.100.010 — Finding, Purpose and Applicability A. Findings. The City Council of the City of Ferndale (Council) hereby finds that new residential growth and development resulting from forecasted population growth will create additional demand for public school facilities. all 697 B. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is (1) to ensure that adequate school facilities are available to serve new growth and development; (2) to require that new growth and development pay a proportionate share of the costs of new school facilities needed to serve new growth and development; and (3) to ensure that school impact fees are administered consistently and fairly. C. Applicability. The terms of this chapter shall apply to all development for which a complete application for approval is submitted on or after the effective date of this chapter, except for development that was the subject of a prior State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) threshold determination that provided for school mitigation. All building permit applications accepted by the city prior to the effective date of this chapter, or for development that was the subject of a prior SEPA threshold determination that included provisions for school mitigation, shall be reviewed for all purposes allowed under state law, including environmental review pursuant to the City of Ferndale environmental policy ordinance. 16.100.020 - Authority This chapter is adopted as a basis for the exercise of substantive authority by the City under the Growth Management Act, Chapter 36.70.A RCW and Chapter 82.02 RCW as a means of mitigating impacts on school facilities as an element of the environment. 16.100.030 -Definitions A. As used in this chapter the following terms have the meaning set forth below: 1. Words defined by RCW 82.02.090. Words used in this title and defined in RCW 82.02.090 shall have the same meaning assigned in RCW 82.02.090 unless a more specific definition is contained herein. 2. Affordable Housing: The City's definition of affordability as stated in the Comprehensive Plan. 3. Average Assessed Value: The average assessed value for each dwelling unit type within the Ferndale School District. 4. Boeckh Index: The current construction trade index of construction costs for each school type. S. Building Permit: The permit required for new construction and additions pursuant to the Ferndale Municipal Code. As used herein, this shall not be deemed to include permits required for remodeling, rehabilitation or other improvements to an existing structure or rebuilding a damaged or destroyed 21 structure; provided there is no increase in the resulting number of dwelling units. 6. Capital Facilities: School facilities identified in the District's 6-Year School Capital Facilities Plan (See Attachment B) that are "system improvements" as defined by the State Growth Management Act as opposed to localized "project improvements." 7. City: The City of Ferndale. 8. Council: The Ferndale City Council. 9. Department: the City of Ferndale Planning and Community Development Department. 10. Developer: The proponent of a development activity, such as any person or entity who owns or holds purchase options or other development control over property for which development activity is proposed. 11. Development: For the purposes of this chapter, development shall mean all single-family subdivisions (short and preliminary/final plats), condominium and multifamily residential development, including planned residential development, and all multifamily structures which require building permits, but excluding remodel or renovation permits which do not result in additional dwelling units. 12. Development Activity: Any residential construction or expansion of a building, structure or use of land, or any other change in use of a building, structure, or land that creates additional demand and need for school facilities, but excluding remodeling or renovation projects which do not result in additional dwelling units. Also excluded from this definition is "Housing for Older Persons" as defined by 46 U.S.C. §3607, when guaranteed by a restrictive covenant. 13. Development Approval: Any written authorization from the City that authorizes the commencement of a development activity. 14. Director: The City's Planning and Community Development Director or the Planning Director's designee. 15. District: the Ferndale School District #502 16. District Property Tax Levy Rate: The Ferndale School District's current capital property tax rate per thousand dollars of assessed value. 22 t. 17. Duplex Dwelling Units: Any residential building containing two separate dwelling units. For purposes of calculating school impact fees to correctly mitigate the impact of new development; each duplex building shall be considered as two single family dwelling units. 18. Encumbered: School impact fees identified by the District to be committed as part of the funding for capital facilities for which the publicly funded share has been assured, development approvals have been sought or construction contracts have been let. 19. Estimated Facility Construction Cost: The planned costs of new schools or the actual construction costs of schools of the same grade span recently constructed by the District, including on -site and off -site improvement costs. If the District does not have this cost information available, construction costs of school facilities of the same or similar grade span within another district are acceptable. 20. Facility Design Capacity: The number of students each school type is designed to accommodate, based on the standard of service as determined by the District. 21. Growth Management Act/GMA: The Growth Management Act, Chapter 17, Laws of the State of Washington of 1990, 1 st Executive Session, as now in existence or as hereafter amended. 22. Interest Rate: The current interest rate as stated in the Bond Buyer Twenty Bond General Obligation Bond Index. 23. Interlocal Agreement: The 2005 agreement between the City and the District concerning collection and handling of school impact fees. 24. Land Cost Per Acre: The estimated average land acquisition cost per acre (in current dollars) based on recent school site acquisition costs, comparisons of comparable site acquisition costs in other districts, or the average assessed value per acre of properties comparable to school sites located within the district. 25. Multi -Family Dwelling Unit: Any residential building containing three or more dwelling units. 26. Permanent Facilities: School facilities of the District with a fixed foundation. 23 700 27. Relocatable Facilities: Factory -built structures, transportable in one or more sections, that are designed to be used as education spaces and are needed to prevent the over building of school facilities, to meet the needs of service areas within a district, or to cover the gap between the time that families move into new residential developments and the date that construction is completed on permanent school facilities. 28. Relocatable Facilities Cost: The total cost, based on actual costs incurred by the district, for purchasing and installing portable classrooms. 29. Relocatable Facilities Student Capacity: The rated capacity for a typical portable classroom used for a specified grade span. 30. School Facilities Plan: The District's 6-Year plan for capital facility improvements adopted by the School Board consisting of those elements required by Chapter 16.100.040 FMC and meeting the requirements of the GMA. 31. School Impact Fee: A payment of money imposed upon development as a condition of development approval to pay for school facilities needed to serve new growth and development. The school impact fee does not include a reasonable permit fee, an application fee, the administrative fee for collecting and handling impact fees, or the cost of reviewing independent fee calculations. 32. Single Family Dwelling Unit: Any attached or detached residential dwelling unit designed for occupancy by one or two families or households, including mobile homes. For purposes of this ordinance and to correctly mitigate the impact of new development, duplex buildings are classified as two single family dwelling units. 33. Standard of Service: The standard adopted by the District which identifies the program year, the class size by grade span and taking into account the requirements of students with special needs, the number of classrooms, the types of facilities the District believes will best serve its student population, and other factors as identified in the District's capital facilities plan. The District's standard of service shall not be adjusted for any portion of the classrooms housed in relocatable facilities which are used as transitional facilities or from any specialized facilities housed in relocatable facilities. 34. State Match Percentage: The proportion of funds that are provided to the District for specific capital projects from the State's Common School Construction Fund. These funds are disbursed based on a formula which 24 701 calculates district assessed valuation per pupil relative to the whole state assessed valuation per pupil to establish the maximum percentage of the total project eligible to be paid by the State. 35. Student Factor or Student Generation Rate: The number of students of each grade span (elementary, middle school, high school) that the District determines are typically generated by different dwelling unit types within the District. 16.100.040 - School District Eligibility A. School Capital Facilities Plan required. The Ferndale School District shall be eligible to receive school impact fees upon adoption by the City Council of a 6- Year School Capital Facilities Plan. This action will also constitute adoption by the City of the schedule of school impact fees specified in such facilities plan. The District's plan shall meet the applicable requirements of the State Growth Management Act. B. Expiration of District Plan. For purposes of school impact fee eligibility, the District's School CFP shall expire on December 31, 2011, or when an updated plan meeting the requirements of the GMA is adopted by the City Council, whichever date first occurs. C. Revising the School Facilities Plan (CFP). 1. The School District may initiate revisions to the School CFP or fee schedule prior to the 2011 expiration date. The revised plan shall first be approved by the School Board and then transmitted to the City. 2. The Ferndale City Council may, by resolution, recommend that the District initiate a review of the School CFP or impact fee schedule prior to the expiration date. 3. The School Facilities Plan may, include revised data for the impact fee formula and/or calculations, and a corresponding modification to the fee schedule. 16.100.050 - School Facilities Plan Requirements and Procedures A. Minimum requirements for the District's School Capital Facilities Plan. Te be eligible for school impact fees, the District must submit a 6-year School CFP to the City pursuant to the procedure established by this chapter. The plan shall contain data and analysis necessary and sufficient to meet the requirements of the 25 702 State GMA. The plan must provide sufficient detail to allow computation of the fees according to the formula contained in the School CFP. B. Council adoption. Following receipt of the District's School CFP or amendment thereto, the City Council shall schedule a public hearing to consider adoption or amendment of said plan. C. Failure to adopt. If an updated school facilities plan has not been adopted by the City Council prior to the existing plan's expiration date due to the District's failure to submit an updated plan, the District shall not be eligible to receive school impact fees until the updated plan has been adopted by the Council. 16.100.060 — School Impact Fee A. Fee required. Each development activity, as a condition of approval, shall be subject to the school impact fee established pursuant to this title. The school impact fee shall be calculated in accordance with the formula established in the CFP. The school impact fee due and payable shall be as shown in the School CFP. B. Impact fee schedule. The school impact fees specified in the District's School Capital Facilities Plan and adopted by the City Council shall constitute the City's schedule of school impact fees. The Planning and Community Development Department and the School District shall, for the convenience of the public, keep available an information sheet summarizing the schedule of school impact fees applicable throughout the City. C. Service areas established. For purposes of calculating and imposing school impact fees for various land use categories per unit of development, the geographic boundary of the Ferndale School District constitutes a separate service area. D. Impact fee limitations. 1. School impact fees, shall be imposed for District capital facilities that are reasonably related to the development under consideration, shall not exceed a proportionate share of the costs of system improvements that are reasonably related to the development, and shall be used for system improvements that will reasonably benefit the new development. 2. School impact fees must be expended or encumbered for a permissible use within 6 years of receipt by the District. 3. To the extent permitted by law, school impact fees may be collected for capital facilities costs previously incurred to the extent that new growth and 703 development will be served by the previously constructed capital facilities, provided that school impact fees shall not be imposed to make up for any existing system deficiencies. 4. A developer required to pay a fee pursuant to RCW 43.21C.060 for school facilities shall not be required to pay a school impact fee pursuant to RCW 82.02.050 -.090 and this title for the same facilities. E. Fee determination. 1. For residential building permits, the applicability of school impact fees will be determined at the time of building permit application. The amount of the fee due shall be based on the fee schedule in effect at the time of permit application. Credit amounts and allocation of credits to be applied against the fees shall be determined by the District at the time of permit approval in accordance with FMC: 16.100.060 F. 2. Residential development activities that are subject to review by the City such as long plats and planned contracts shall include in the conditions of approval a determination of the project's school impact fee obligation under this chapter. Said determination shall include any credits for in -kind contributions provided under FMC 16.100.060 F. below. Final determinations may be appealed pursuant to the procedures established in Chapter 16.100.080. 3. In all cases, the amount of school impact fees shall be that which is in effect at the time of application for building permit. The fee shall be paid at building permit issuance. F. Credit for in -kind contributions. 1. A developer may request, and the District may grant a credit against school impact fees otherwise due under this title for the value of any dedication of land, improvement to, or new construction of any capital facilities identified in the District's School Facilities Plan provided by the developer. Such requests must be accompanied by supporting documentation of the estimated value of such in -kind contributions. All requests must be submitted to the District in writing prior to the City's determination under Section E above. 2. Where the District determines that a development activity is eligible for a credit for a proposed in -kind contribution, it shall provide the Department and the developer with a letter setting forth the justification for and dollar amount of the credit, the legal description of any dedicated property, and a 27 704 description of the development activity to which the credit may be applied. The value of any such credit may exceed the impact fee obligation of the development, but the District shall not be responsible for reimbursing the developer for the difference. 3. Where there is agreement between the developer and the School District concerning the value of proposed in -kind contributions, the developer's eligibility for a credit, and/or the amount of any credit, the Director may (1) approve the request for credit and adjust the impact fee obligation accordingly, and (2) require that such contributions be made as a condition of development approval. Where there is disagreement between the developer and the District regarding the value of in -kind contributions, however, the Director may render a decision that can be appealed by either party pursuant to the procedures in Chapter 16.100.080. 4. For subdivisions, planned residential developments and other large-scale projects where credits for in -kind contributions are proposed or required, it may be appropriate or necessary to establish the value of the credit on a per - unit basis as a part of the development approval. Such credit values will then be recorded as part of the plat or other instrument of approval and will be used in determining the fee obligation - if any - at the time of building permit application for the development activity. In the event that such credit value is greater than the impact fee in effect at the time of permit application, the fee obligation shall be considered satisfied. G. SEPA mitigation and other review. 1. The City shall review development proposals and development activity permits pursuant to all applicable state and local laws and regulations, including the State Environmental Policy Act (Chapter 43.21 C RCW), the State Subdivision Law (Chapter 58.17 RCW), and the applicable sections of the Ferndale Municipal Code. Following such review, the City may condition or deny development approval as necessary or appropriate to mitigate or avoid significant adverse impacts to school services and facilities, to assure that appropriate provisions are made for schools, school grounds, and safe student walking conditions, and to ensure that development is compatible and consistent with the District's services, facilities and capital facilities plan. 2. Impact fees required by this title for development activity, together with compliance with development regulations and other mitigation measures offered or imposed at the time of development review and development activity review, shall constitute adequate mitigation for all of a development's specific adverse environmental impacts on the school system 28 705 for the purposes of Chapter 16. Nothing in this chapter prevents a determination of significance from being issued, the application of new or different development regulations, and/or requirements for additional environmental analysis, protection, and mitigation measures to the extent required by applicable law 16.100.070 - Impact Fee Accounting A. Collection and transfer of fees. 1. School impact fees shall be due and payable to the City at the time of issuance of building permits for all development activities. 2. The District shall establish an interest -bearing account separate from all other District accounts in which to deposit the impact fees. The City will remit to the District all impact fees collected, with interest. The District shall deposit all impact fees received from the City in the impact fee account. 3. The District shall institute a procedure for the disposition of impact fees and providing for annual reporting to the City that demonstrates compliance with the requirements of RCW 82.02.070, and other applicable laws. B. Use of funds. 1. School impact fees may be used by the District only for capital facilities that are reasonably related to the development for which they were assessed and may be expended only in conformance with the District's adopted School Capital Facilities Plan. 2. In the event that bonds or similar debt instruments are issued for the advance provision of capital facilities for which school impact fees may be expended, and where consistent with the provisions of the bond covenants and state law, school impact fees may be used to pay debt service on such bonds or similar debt instruments to the extent that the capital facilities provided are consistent with the requirements of this title. 3. The responsibility for assuring that school impact fees are used for authorized purposes rests with the District. All interest earned on a school impact fee account must be retained in the account and expended for the purpose or purposes for which the school impact fees were imposed, subject to the provisions of Section 16.100.070.0 below. 29 706 4. The District shall provide the City an annual report showing the source and the amount of school impact fees received by the District and the capital facilities financed in whole or in part with those school impact fees. C. Refunds. 1. School impact fees not spent or encumbered within 6 years after they were collected shall - upon receipt of a proper and accurate claim - be refunded, together with interest, to the then current owner of the property. In determining whether school impact fees have been encumbered, impact fees shall be considered encumbered on a first in, first out basis. At least annually, the City, based on the annual report received from the District pursuant to FMC 16.100.070.B(4) and shall give notice to the last known address of potential claimants of any funds, if any. that it has collected that have not been spent or encumbered. The notice will state that any persons entitled to such refunds may make claims. 2. Refunds provided for under this section shall be paid only upon submission of a proper claim pursuant to City claim procedures. Such claims must be submitted to the Director within one year of the date the right to claim the refund arises, or the date of notification provided for above, whichever is later. 16.100.080 - Adjustments, Waivers, Appeals and Arbitration A. Administrative adjustment of fee amount. 1. An applicant for a building permit or the School District may, within 21 days of acceptance by the City of a complete building permit application, submit a letter to the Director requesting an adjustment to the impact fees imposed by this title. The Director may adjust the amount or waive the entire fee, in consideration of studies and data submitted by the developer and the District, if one of the following circumstances exists: a. It can be demonstrated that the school impact fee assessment was incorrectly calculated; b. Unusual circumstances of the development activity demonstrate that application of the school impact fee to the development would be unfair or unjust; 30 707 c. A credit for in -kind contributions by the developer, as provided for under FMC 16.100.060.F above, is warranted; d. The proposed development will result in the provision of affordable housing as defined by the City. Fee reduced or waived in this circumstance must be replaced with other public funds; or e. Any other credit specified in RCW 82.02.060(1)(b) may be warranted 2. To avoid delay pending resolution of the adjustment or appeal, school impact fees may be paid under protest in order to obtain a development approval. 3. Failure to exhaust this administrative remedy shall preclude appeals of the school impact fee pursuant to FMC 16.100.080.13 below. B. Appeals of decisions - procedure. 1. The Director's final impact fee determination may be appealed to the City Council. 2. At the hearing, the appellant shall have the burden of proof, which shall be met by a preponderance of the evidence. The impact fee may be modified upon a determination that it is proper to do so based on the application of the criteria contained in FMC 16.100.080.A. Appeals shall be limited to application of the impact fee provisions to the specific development activity and the provisions of this title shall be presumed valid. C. Arbitration of disputes. With the consent of the developer and the District, a dispute regarding imposition or calculation of a school impact fee may be resolved by arbitration. 31 bi cl U a� E o cn w Q r-; U 0 0 U Cd w 0 709 � 2 § § % G ca k k 8\ k2 d) k/ /2 Q 0 �kI'D C14�77 /2�� \� Q : o d]_ o W) m n ��©'o$ ;?f r-o 0— e � 3 @ \ � 22 \k U U § © 2zI k 4/\ o ®)cat 2% (\0\\$]2 2 ± ± $'en w / �� Cd Q CISR § E = §� � _91. � k / k \ /S±�w�< CA( $ d k/d/Q 3 m 710 iWHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 2009-204 CLEARANCES Initial Date Date Received in Council Office A enda Date Assigned to: Originator: Cathy 4/14/09- Crave!' ED C E � V (introduction Division Head: Oliver crab 4128109 NR / C OuriC l l�tE Dept. Head: David Stalheina APR 7 2009 Prosecutor: Royce., `� � Buckin ham !� � OJH,ATCM COUNTY Purchasing/Budget: COC U N C I L Executive: PeteKrenaen �: 7- TITLE OF DOCUMENT: Ordinance amending the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan to recognize the significance of Lake Whatcom as a drinking water source, the state listing of Lake Whatcom as an impaired waterbody, and the role of forestry in the Lake Whatcom watershed. ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance SEPA review required? ( X ) Yes ( ) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing? ( ) Yes ( X ) NO SEPA review completed? (X ) Yes ( ) NO Requested Date: 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.) Ordinance amending the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan to recognize the significance of Lake Whatcom as a drinking water source, the state listing of Lake Whatcom as an impaired waterbody, and the role of forestry in the Lake Whatcom. watershed. COMMITTEE ACTION. COUNCIL ACTION. 4/28/2009: Forwarded to Council for 4/14/2009: Introduced approval 4/28/2009: Council forwarded to concurrency 7-0 Related County Contract #: Related File Numbers: Ordinance or Resolution Number: 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.us/council.. 711 WHATCOM COUNTY Planning & Development Services 5280 IVorthwest Drive, Bellingham, WA 98226-9097 360-676-6907, TfY 800-833-6384 360-738-2525 Fax MEMORANDUM To: Whatcom County Council Through: From: Date: Subject: David Stalheim Cathy Craver, Planner II April 3, 2009 Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Lake Whatcom David Stalheim Director J.E. "Sam" Ryan Assistant Director APR 0 3 2009 PETE KREIVIEN COUNTY EXECUTIVE The Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan does not currently includes text referencing Lake Whatcom as a drinking water source for about half of Whatcom County residents, the Department of Ecology's listing of Lake Whatcom as an impaired water body, the Lake Whatcom Total Phosphorus and Bacteria Total Maximum Daily Load (TNIDL), or the Department of Natural Resources Lake Whatcom Landscape Plan. This proposed amendment would make the necessary references in the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan to significant facts regarding Lake Whatcom. 712 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 SPONSERED BY: PROPOSED BY: INTRODUCTION DATE: ORDINANCE NO. AMENDING THE WHATCOM COUNTYCOMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO RECOGNIZE THE SIGNIFICANCE OF LAKE WHATCOM AS A DRINKING WATER SOURCE, THE STATE LISTING OF LAKE WHATCOM AS AN IMPAIRED WATERBODY, AND THE ROLE OFFORESTRY IN THE LAKE WHATCOM WATERSHED WHEREAS, Lake Whatcom is the drinking water source for approximately half the residents of Whatcom County; and WHEREAS, the preservation and protection of drinking water is a high priority for Whatcom County; and WHEREAS, the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan, adopted on May 20, 1997, establishes the Lake Whatcom watershed as a Special Study Area; and WHEREAS, Washington State Department of Ecology has listed Lake Whatcom as an impaired waterbody and placed Lake Whatcom on the federal Clean Water Act 303(d) list because of low oxygen levels; and WHEREAS, Whatcom County Code 20.71 has established the Lake Whatcom watershed as part of a Watershed Resource Protection Overlay District that provides additional controls to preserve and protect unique and important water resources within Whatcom County; and WHEREAS, Whatcom County Code 20.80.635 has established the Lake Whatcom watershed as part of a Stormwater Special District that provides additional stormwater controls to preserve and protect unique and important water resources within Whatcom County; and WHEREAS, Whatcom County Code 20.80.735 includes the Lake Whatcom watershed as part of a Water Resource Special Management Area that establishes a more stringent standard for clearing activity in highly valued water resource areas within Whatcom County; and WHEREAS, the Department of Natural Resources Lake Whatcom Landscape Plan was adopted in 2004, and provides additional protections on Statemanaged lands within the Lake Whatcom watershed; and WHEREAS, the Draft Lake Whatcom Watershed Total Phosphorus and Bacteria Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Water Quality Findings were released in Apii 2008; and Page 1 713 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 WHEREAS, the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan does not currently reference the Department of Ecology's listing of Lake Whatcom as an impaired waterbody, the Lake Whatcom Watershed Total Phosphorus and Bacteria TNIDL, or the Department of Natural Resources Lake Whatcom Landscape Plan; and WHEREAS, RCW 36.70.795 requires the adoption of Findings of Fact to justify Council action, the Council makes the following Finding of Facts: Notice of the Planning Commission hearing for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment was published in the Bellingham Herald July 13, 2008. 2. Notice of the subject amendment was sent to the Department of Community Trade and Economic Development (CTED) and other State agencies on July 15, 2008. 3. Since 1990 Whatcom County has been meeting with the City of Bellingham and the Lake Whatcom Water and Sewer District (formerly known as Water District 10) to develop long-term management for Lake Whatcom. 4. Lake Whatcom was listed as an impaired water body in 1997 by the Department of Ecology, and put on the Federal Clean Water Act's 303(d) list. 5. By 1998, Whatcom County, City of Bellingham, and the Lake Whatcom Water and Sewer District formalized their joint commitment to protect and manage the lake through the adoption of an interlocal agreement concerning the joint management of the lake creating the Lake Whatcom Management Program (LW MP). 6. In 1999, the first LWMP Work Plan for the lake was developed, followed by five-year plans starting in 2000 with ten specific program areas focused on water quality protection. 7. From 1999 until present, Whatcom County has been implementing land use regulations to protect the water quality of Lake Whatcom through the development of the Water Resource Special Management Area, Water Resource Protection Overlay District, Special Stormwater District. 8. In 2004, the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Board of Natural Resources adopted the Lake Whatcom Landscape Plan, which provides additional protection on State managed lands within the Lake Whatcom watershed. 9. The Interjurisdictional Coordinating Team (ICT) is the committee of multi - jurisdictional staff coordinating on the Lake Whatcom Management Program Work Plans, and is assisting in the development,of a strategy to respond to the pollutant discharge requirements set forth in the TMDL. Page 2 714 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 10.The Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan should contain language to reflect the listing of Lake Whatcom on the 303(d) list of impaired water bodies, and the impacts of forestry and development on water quality of the lake. 11.A determination of non -significance (DNS) was issued under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) on April 3, 2009. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Whatcom County Council that the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan is hereby amended as indicated in Exhibit A of this ordinance. ADOPTED this ATTEST: day of Dana Brown -Davis, Clerk of the Council , 200_ WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Seth Fleetwood, Council Chair WHATCOM COUNTY EXECUTIVE WHATCOM COUNTY, WASH:INGTON APPROVED AS T��M: Civil �eputysecutor Pete Kremen, County Executive Page 3 ( ) Approved ( ) Denied Date Signed: 715 EXHIBIT A January 2006 Chapter Two - Land Use ** Rural Lands maintain acceptable traffic flow in terms of safety, capacity, and travel speed while still providing an appropriate level of access. Policy 2NN-7: Consider additional industrial development if there is a demonstrated community need, appropriate in -filling is occurring and a logical outer boundary can be established in accordance with RCW 36.70A.070(5). Policy 2NN-8: With citizen involvement, develop design criteria and appropriate uses along the Guide Meridian corridor (300 feet on each side of the right-of- way, excluding the road itself) that minimize impacts on local communities. Special Study Areas Lake Whatcom A ber of studieshavebeen dGRe on the —cCrk- +nom watershed. These +.�',,aoes —t CVCf-t7t y p. GGGUF OF �mag,rRitu 7e of thei iFnpaGt WO 'd be. I-1nwoveF, the general ^premise has been to errs tax.side of , 4GR h Ga , I=ake WhatGarn as the drinking water watershed for Bellingham and Water Dis F6inh h�ine rta p�atel�. ()Re half of the population in WhatG9FA GOURtY7 Lake Whatcom is the drinking water source for approximately half of Whatcom County_ Recent studies on Lake Whatcom indicate water quality in the lake has declined. Oxygen levels in Lake Whatcom are declining to lower levels, and are declining faster than in the past. In 1997, the Washington State Department of EcologV listed Lake Whatcom as an impaired water body, and placed Lake Whatcom on the Federal Clean Water Act 303(d) list because of low oxygen levels, The 303(d) listinq requires the establishment of a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) that designates loading capacity of the lake such that there will be no measurable change in oxygen levels from natural lake conditions. The TMDL goals will require a variety of planning. pollution prevention, pollution reduction and technical approaches. Meeting the TMDL goals will be required in order to stabilize water quality in Lake Whatcom. The primary cause of declining oxygen levels had been from residential development in the watershed. Past development permitted by the City of Bellingham and Whatcom County has led to increased phosphorus loading into the lake, which in turn has led to lower oxygen levels in the lake. Poorly managed forest practices can also lead to significant increases in phosphorus loading to the lake. In November/December 1992, a joint resolution was passed by the Bellingham City Council, Whatcom County Council, and Water District 10 Commissioners, which reaffirmed this position with six general goal statements and a set of specific goal statements in various categories. -rhe specific goal statements for urbanization were the following: • Prevent water quality degradation associated with development within the watershed. • Review and recommend changes in zoning and development potential that are compatible with a drinking -water reservoir environment. 716 January 2006 Chapter Two - Land Use `* Rural Lands • In addition to zoning identify and promote other actions to minimize potential for increased development in the watershed (i.e. land trust, development rights, cost incentives, etc.). • Develop specific standards which reduce the impacts of urbanization, such as minimal lot clearing; clustered development to reduce infrastructure; collection and treatment of stormwater before entering the lake. • Develop appropriate interlocal agreements with governing agencies to prohibit the potential for additional development once an agreed upon level is set. The joint resolution included goals for watershed management that extended beyond urbanization. Goals were included for stormwater management, on -site waste systems, conservation, forest management, spill response, hazardous materials transport and handling, data/information management, education/public involvement, and other topics. A joint strategy was agreed to for developing specific plans to meet the adopted goals. Eight high priority goals were selected first and plans have been completed and jointly adopted for each of the goals. In 1998, the City, County, and District 10 formalized their joint commitment to protect and manage the lake through the joint adoption of an interlocal agreement and allocation of funding toward protection and management efforts in the watershed. A five-year program plan was developed for ten program areas. Specific priority was placed on activities related to watershed ownership, stormwater management, and urbanization/land development. The watershed contains four urban areas: the City of Bellingham, which straddles the upper portion of the northern -most basin of the lake; Geneva, which is immediately south and east of Bellingham's city limits and is part of the city's urban growth area; Hillsdale, which is immediately north and east of Bellingham's city limits and is also part of the city's urban growth areas; and the Sudden Valley provisional urban growth area. In addition, it includes a variety of other zones, including resource, rural, and suburban zones. Over 75% of the watershed is in Forestry zoning and more than 73% of the current land use is forestry. In 2003, there were approximately 2,730 existing dwelling units in the Lake Whatcom watershed located outside of the Bellingham UGA. Under the zoning adopted in January 2004, the gross potential build -out in this area is about 6,507 total dwelling units. Therefore, even under the more restrictive zoning adopted in January of 2004, there could be a significant amount of new development in the watershed. Water and sewer service are provided by Water District 10. Capacity problems in the district's sewer line, which serves Geneva and Sudden Valley, have caused overflows into the lake in the past. An aggressive program to preclude stormwater infiltration has eliminated the overflow problems to a large extent. In addition, the district has a contractually limited flow capacity to Bellingham. The Lake Louise Road sewage interceptor was constructed in January 2003 to carry waste water from Sudden Valley and Geneva and serves as a complement to the Lake Whatcom Boulevard trunk line. The interceptor was designed to service full build -out of Sudden Valley and Geneva. Properties with septic tanks are required to connect to the sewer system within five years of completion of the project. There are several pending subdivisions in the area which are being proposed at less than full density but which will increase the overall development level outside of urban areas to a significant degree. 717 January 2006 Chapter Two - Land Use ** Rural Lands In 2004, the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Board on Natural Resources adopted the Lake Whatcom Landscape Plan. This plan provides additional protections on state managed lands within the Lake Whatcom watershed. The plan provides additional protections on streams and potentially unstable slopes not normally included in forest practices in Washington State. If the DNR exchanges land from the watershed, the protections provided by the plan would not be applicable to the new owner. In 2006 the Whatcom County Council approved funding to study reconveyance of DNR managed County Forest Board Lands, Chapter 11: Environment, contains more discussion of Lake Whatcom issues and includes additional goals and policies related to watershed management, stormwater, and water quality. GOAL 2PP: Prioritize the Lake Whatcom area as an area to minimize development, repair existing storm water problems, specifically for phosphorus, and ensure forestry practices do not negatively impact water quality. in establishing incentives- for appropriate development. Provide sufficient funding and support to be successful. Policy 2PP-1: Work with property owners to find acceptable development solutions at lower overall densities than the present zoning allows. Policy 2PP-2: Develop a storm drainage utility district or other funding mechanism to deal with the unique problems of development in a drinking water watershed. Policy 2PP-3: Recognize that all users of Lake Whatcom water have an interest in the resource and should share in the cost of its protection. Policy 2PP-4: Work cooperatively with the City and Water District 10 to identify, review, and, as appropriate, recommend changes to existing monitoring programs that will address the needs of the various jurisdictions. Place a particular focus on the information needed to evaluate the impacts of additional development in the watershed. Include an analysis of the diversion from the Middle Fork of the Nooksack. Coordinate effort with the Lake Whatcom Management Committee process. Policy 2PP-5: Evaluate and pursue, as appropriate, the use of incentives to encourage voluntary lot consolidation, transfer or purchase of development rights, current use taxation, and participation in open space conservation programs. Policy 2PP-6: Do not allow density bonuses within the Lake Whatcom Watershed. Policy 2PP-7: Work cooperatively with the City and Water District 10 to develop benchmarks to determine the effectiveness of management options; when goals have been achieved; or when additional actions are necessary. 718 January 2006 Chapter Two - Land Use ** Rural Lands Policy 2PP-8: Continue to develop and refine structural and non-structural best management practices (BMPs), both voluntary and required, to minimize development impacts within the Lake Whatcom watershed. Policy 2PP-9: Work to keep Whatcom County Forest Board and Forest Purchase lands within the Lake Whatcom watershed in public ownership, and support managing forestry on said lands in a manner that minimizes sediment and phosphorus yields from streams. 719 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. 2009-205 CLEARANCES Initial Date Date Received in Council Office Agenda Date Assigned to: Originator: Cathy Craver c •"' "a 4/14/09- �L�-- I C E � V E D (introduction Division Head: Oliver Grah 4128109 jig / Council LE APR - 7 2009 Dept. Head David � �^ Stalheim i HIAT, CON11 COUNTY Prosecutor: Royce -lam 3r Q _l Buckingham 1 1 COUNCIL Purchasing/Budget: Executive: Pete Kremen • �„ 0 TITLE OF DOC T: Ordinance amending the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan removing the "Provisional Urban Growth Area " designation from Sudden Valley. ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance SEPA review required? ( X ) Yes ( ) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing? ( ) Yes (X ) NO SEPA review completed? ( X ) Yes ( ) NO Requested Date: S UMMA R Y S TA TEMENT 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.) Ordinance amending the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan removing the `Provisional Urban Growth Area designation from Sudden Valley. COMMITTEE ACTION: COUNCIL ACTION: 4/28/2009: Forwarded to Council for approval 4/14/2009: Introduced 4/28/2009: Council forwarded to concurrency 6-1 Crawford opposed Related County Contract #: Related File Numbers: Ordinance or Resolution Number: 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.us/council. 720 WHATCOM COUNTY Planning & Development Services 5280 Northwest Drive, Bellingham, WA 98226-9097 360-676-6907, TTY 800-833-6384 360-738-2525 Fax MEMORANDUM David Stalheim Director J.E. "Sam" Ryan Assistant Director To: Whatcom County Council APR 0 3 2009 Through: David Stalheim PETS KREMEN COUNTY EXECUTIVE From: Cathy Craver, Planner II Date: April 3, 2009 Subject: Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the Provisional UGA designation for Sudden Valley The Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan currently includes text referencing Sudden Valley as a "Provisional Urban Growth Area". This designation has been rescinded by the County Council, and this proposed amendment would make the necessary changes to the Sudden Valley comprehensive plan designation. 1 721 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 SPONSERED BY: PROPOSED BY: INTRODUCTION DATE: ORDINANCE NO. AMENDING THE WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REMOVING THE 'PROVISIONAL URBAN GROWTH AREA' DESIGNATION FROM SUDDEN VALLEY WHEREAS, Lake Whatcom is the drinking water source for approximately half the residents of Whatcom County; and WHEREAS, the preservation and protection of drinking water is a high priority for Whatcom County; and WHEREAS, Washington State Department of Ecology has listed Lake Whatcom as an impaired waterbody and placed Lake Whatcom on the federal Clean Water Act 303(d) list because of low oxygen levels; and WHEREAS, through the Growth Management Act, counties must designate urban growth areas that encourage growth within them; and WHEREAS, the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan identified the Lake Whatcom watershed as an area where limiting development is desirable; and WHEREAS, the Provisional Urban Growth Area designation is given to encourage future urban levels of development, and contradicts the desire to limit development; and WHEREAS, Whatcom County's Comprehensive Plan Policy 2AA-2A states, "If incorporation has not been accomplished by the end of 2006, the Sudden Valley Provisional UGA will be designated as a "Recreational Subdivision". WHEREAS, RCW 36.70.795 requires the adoption of Findings of Fact to justify Council action, the Council makes the following Finding of Facts: 1. Notice of the Planning Commission hearing was published in the Bellingham Herald Sunday, June 29, 2008. 2. Notice of the subject amendment was sent to the Department of Community Trade and Economic Development (CTED) and other State agencies on June 4, 2008. 3. Lake Whatcom has continuing water quality degradation due in part by watershed development. 4. The "Urban Growth Area" designation would allow for potential incorporation of Sudden Valley. Page 1 722 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 5. Incorporation of Sudden Valley would lead to increased density and development within the Lake Whatcom watershed. 6. On February 28, 2006, the Whatcom County Council adopted an emergency ordinance to rescind Sudden Valley's designation as an Urban Growth Area. 7. On September 13, 2007, the Boundary Review Board passed a motion to not proceed with the Sudden Valley incorporation petition due to the rescinding of the urban growth area designation. 8. A determination of non -significance (DNS) was issued under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) on April 3, 2009. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Whatcom County Council that the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan is hereby amended as indicated in Exhibit A, B, and C of this ordinance. ADOPTED this day of , 200 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL ATTEST: WHATCOM COUNTY, WASH:i.NGTON Dana Brown -Davis, Clerk of the Council APPROVED AS TO_FOR Civil Deputy Prosecutor Page 2 Seth Fleetwood, Council Chair WHATCOM COUNTY EXECUTIVE WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Pete Kremen, County Executive ( ) Approved ( ) Denied Date Signed: 723 EXHIBIT A January 2005 Chapter Two - Land Use ** Urban Growth Areas Policy 2M-2: Ensure that existing land uses do not cause further degradation of habitat for threatened and endangered species. Policy 2M-3: Develop educational tools and incentives to encourage existing land uses to restore degraded habitat to properly functioning conditions, especially for threatened and endangered species. Policy 2M-4: Place a note on all permits issued by the County for clearing or development activity within %4 mile of the documented habitat of threatened or endangered species, as shown on the county fish Distribution Map, alerting the property owner to the presence of these species. Policy 2M-5: Require subdivisions and short plats to be designated in a manner to protect fish habitat and water quality when a fish bearing stream or river passes through the site. URBAN GROWTH AREAS - INTRODUCTION This section presents policies, map designations and rationale for the urban growth areas for Bellingham, Blaine, Everson, Ferndale, Lynden, Nooksack, Sumas, Birch Bay, Columbia Valley, S uddeR Valley, Cherry Point, and Custer. Map 8 shows designated urban growth areas. Purpose The purpose of this section is to establish areas within the County where growth will be directed. The boundaries, as defined, are an attempt to concentrate growth and provide urban areas in accordance with expected growth needs while ensuring the county's identified values to preserve private property rights and reduce unnecessary regulations. Process County Planning and Development Services staff used this information to develop specific boundaries for county unincorporated urban growth areas. Planning staff worked with representatives from each city through the Growth Management Oversight Committee to develop the most appropriate boundaries for each city. Boundaries were further refined through public hearings and work sessions and by referring to the comprehensive plans and recommendations from the cities. GMA Requirements The Growth Management Act requires the designation of urban growth areas (RCW 36.70A.110). These areas are to include cities and other areas characterized by urban growth or adjacent to such areas, and are to be designed to accommodate the projected population growth for twenty years. Any growth that occurs outside the areas cannot be urban in nature. The act further specifies that urban growth should, first, be located in areas that already have public facilities and service capacity and, second, in areas where such services if not already available, are possible. Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan 724 January 2005 Chapter Two - Land Use ** Urban Growth Areas URBAN GROWTH AREAS - BACKGROUND SUMMARY Each city provided information in their comprehensive plans, in work sessions with planning staff, and at public hearings and work sessions before the County Council to provide the data and assumptions used as a guide in setting Urban Growth Boundaries. The comprehensive plans for each city and the written and oral input provided by them at the public hearings and work sessions serve as background for establishing UGAs. Each city utilized different methodologies to determine their present land capacity and land use needs. Their analyses incorporated many factors, some of which are unique to individual cities. Such variables as service capability, average population per household, infrastructure and non-residential land needs, natural systems and critical areas constraints, ownership and development trends and appropriate market factors to assure adequate supply and affordable housing were considered. URBAN GROWTH AREAS - ISSUES, GOALS, AND POLICIES Overall The Growth Management Act assigns the responsibility of designating urban growth areas to counties. Growth is to be encouraged within urban growth areas and discouraged outside them. Urban Growth Boundaries are set in accordance with the policies established in Chapter 36.70A RCW and applicable regulations. Specific consideration is given to approved comprehensive plans for the municipalities and their supporting justification. Modifications have been incorporated into this plan based upon several criteria: - The need to assure logical service boundaries, - The need to avoid isolated pockets or abnormally irregular boundaries, -Consideration of land needs analysis of residential, commercial and industrial needs within urban areas, and - Identification of special needs with respect to unique non -city industrial sites (such as Cherry Point), and County areas for which the County will actively support incorporation as appropriate (such as Birch Bay, Sadden Valley, or Columbia Valley). County -Wide Planning Policies set guidelines for designating city urban growth areas including: - Small cities' UGAs shall be of an adequate size to allow them to become viable economic centers. - The size of cities' UGAs shall be consistent with their ability to provide services. - UGAs shall include contiguous areas with urban characteristics and zoning. Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan 725 January 2005 Chapter Two - Land Use ** Urban Growth Areas • Sufficient land shall be provided within UGAs to accommodate the 20-year urban growth projection, plus a reasonable land supply market factor. Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan 726 EXHIBIT B January 2006 Chapter Two - Land Use Unincorporated Residential/Recreational Urban Growth Areas and Recreational Subdivisions Birch Bay, Sudden Valley, and the Columbia Valley/Kendall area are unincorporated areas with sizable populations and substantial amounts of existing, residential/recreational development. These areas are characterized by a mix of permanent residents and second home use, which reflects both the population growth that has occurred in the unincorporated areas of Whatcom County and the resort/recreational nature of these areas. Birch Bay Birch Bay is a resort community which has the highest growth rate and the most potential for development of any unincorporated area in the county. The area has historically been a second -home resort area with a trend toward permanent, often retirement homes. A high proportion are still second homes. According to the 2000 U.S. Census, approximately 51% of the housing units in the Birch Bay Census Designated Place are vacant or seasonally occupied. The 2000 census counted 5,094 housing units in the Birch Bay Census Designated Place, including recreational units and RV sites. There are an estimated 2,353 acres of undeveloped residential land in the Birch Bay UGA. Approximately 942 of these acres are constrained by wetlands and other critical areas. Considering a 25% market factor and a deduction of land for infrastructure, utilities, shoreline and critical areas there is sufficient residential land for approximately 3,450 new residential or recreational units within the Birch Bay Urban Growth Area. Assuming that 50% of the units will be recreational and that the occupied units would have 2.33 residents per household, these housing units could house an additional 4,019 full-time residential and provide as many as 1,725 seasonal housing units or RV sites. Water and sewer are provided by Birch Bay Sewer and Water District which has a network of water lines throughout most of the district including the Birch Point area which was removed from the urban growth area in 2004. Birch Bay Water and Sewer District has the capability of providing sewer service to the entire urban growth area, but the present system covers a much smaller geographic area than the water distribution. The sewer service area also includes land which was removed from the Urban Growth Area, but there is no sewer service outside of the urban growth area. The district purchases water under a contractual agreement from the City of Blaine. In April 2002, the District entered into a 30 year contract with the City of Blaine to purchase water adequate to serve the Districts projected need for water through 2022. The District also has a pending application for groundwater rights to a well drilled by the District, and an application to transfer water from the Nooksack River, by means of a contract with Whatcom County PUD 1, to supply the longer term needs of the community. In 1992, an attempt was made to incorporate Birch Bay; however, it was defeated by the voters. One of the issues was whether a portion of the Cherry Point Industrial Area should be included within the boundaries for incorporation. The County Comprehensive Plan now includes a number of policies that would prohibit the inclusion of the Cherry Point area with the boundaries of a future incorporation of Birch Bay. In 2002, a citizen group competed a Community Plan for the Birch Bay Urban Growth Area and surrounding rural area. The Birch Bay Community Plan, as revised, was adopted as a Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan 727 January 2006 Chapter Two - Land Use Subarea of the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan in 2004 and provides more detailed background information and policy direction regarding growth and development within Birch Bay. Where there are conflicts between the Birch Bay Community Plan and the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan, The County Comprehensive Plan shall prevail. Columbia Valley/Kendall Located in the northeast region of the developed portion of the county, the Columbia Valley/Kendall UGA is the most populous area in the eastern part of Whatcom County. The Columbia Valley area, like many other areas in Whatcom County, was originally developed to cater to a seasonal population, primarily Canadians who are allowed to spend up to six months per year in the United States. 2000 U.S. Census data indicates that approximately 52% of the existing housing is either seasonal or vacant. However, portions of the area, particularly Paradise Lakes, have become attractive for permanent residents, with this trend expected to increase to 60% in the 20 year planning period. The lots are affordable and the current and projected development will provide an available work force for economic development. Columbia Valley refers to two large subdivisions, Paradise Lakes and Peaceful Valley, which are located along both sides of Kendall Road (SR547). These developments include a golf course, a large pond and wetland complex along Kendall Creek, and some undeveloped land. There are approximately 2,000 platted lots, with an estimated 1,615 current dwelling units consisting of recreational cabins, manufactured homes, and permanent residences. Since designation of the Columbia Valley/Kendall UGA in 1999, dwelling units have increased by approximately 17%. Accounting for some buildout of undeveloped land, summertime populations could reach 5,000 people within the 20 year planning horizon. Paradise Lakes has public roads and continues to utilize septic systems for sewage disposal. The Evergreen Water -Sewer District provides public water service (formerly provided by the Paradise Lakes Country Club) to residential and camper lots within the Paradise Lakes divisions. Peaceful Valley has private roads and a water and sewer system managed by Water District 13 which has ample capacity. The district has gone through bankruptcy because of the need to carry the capital debt and operating costs of a system that is under- utilized. Public transit service is provided to the Columbia Valley/Kendall area by the Whatcom Transportation Authority (WTA). Local east -county law enforcement is provided by a full time resident Sheriffs Deputy that is based out of Kendall. The small town of Kendall has a commercial district, fire station, and an elementary school. Sudden Valley Prev' Recreational Subdivision Sudden Valley was established in the early 1970s as a recreation/resort area located in the Lake Whatcom Watershed. But over the last thirty years it has developed into an Urban Residential area. Sudden Valley has private paved roads, all underground utilities (electricity, gas, cable and telephone), and a public water and sewer system provided by Lake Whatcom Water and Sewer District. Fire District #2, strategically located in Sudden Valley, provides fire Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan 728 January 2006 Chapter Two - Land Use and ambulance service. Sudden Valley's 1,724 total acres originally included 4,648 platted single-family lots/condominiums, a limited commercial area, community facilities, a marina, and a golf course. Of the 1,545 acres, 835 acres of open space and 140 acres of golf course (63%) are community association owned. The remaining 749 acres (43%) are private property. 2000 US Census data indicates that approximately 26% of the existing housing in Sudden Valley is either seasonal or vacant. Sudden Valley contributes to a high volume of vehicle trips on Lake Whatcom Boulevard and Lake Louise Road. Right-of-way and alignment studies have been proposed for the 6-year TIP to study alternatives, cost and location relative to addressing the growing volume of vehicular trips on Lake Whatcom Boulevard and Lake Louise Road. Public transportation services are provided by the Whatcom Transportation Authority (WTA). Sudden Valley lies within the Lake Whatcom Watershed where limiting development has been identified as desirable. The Sudden Valley Community Association (SVCA) has a Board of Directors mandated lot consolidation program with a targeted density reduction of 1,400 lots, reducing the total lots for development from 4,648 to 3,248. To date approximately 75% (1,047 lots) have been placed into density reduction of which 452 are voluntary private lot consolidation. SVCA funding has been set aside to purchase additional lots for density reduction. In accordance with the 2000 Lake Whatcom Management Program, the County and lake Whatcom Water and Sewer District have also assisted Sudden Valley with their density reduction program through several joint agreements and exchanges of property and restrictive covenants. To date, the SVCA, County, and Lake Whatcom Water and Sewer District have acquired 115 undeveloped lots in Sudden Valley at annual tax foreclosure auctions. The Lot Consolidation Covenant to Bind process has, also, increased voluntary private lot consolidation. The County Council has exempted Sudden Valley from the Lake Whatcom Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program because Sudden Valley's density reduction plan meets the intent of the TDR program. Since 1985, Sudden Valley has mandated the use of appropriate stormwater best management practices through standards for individual stormwater detention for all new construction. Any new building permits on existing lots must be able to demonstrate that stormwater detention is included on the plan as a precondition to issuance of a permit. Sudden Valley is also subject to additional regulatory protections that apply to the Lake Whatcom watershed under the Water Resource Protection Overlay District, Stormwater Special District, and Water Resource Special Management Area requirements. Under the provisions of these special districts, potential impacts from impervious surfaces, stormwater runoff, and clearing activities are required to be addressed on -site. Sudden Valley has implemented a 10-year Forest And Wildlife Stewardship (FAWS) plan with the State of Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR). This plan provides environmental education and guidance to the Sudden Valley community, on a continuing basis, to assure sound environmental health and safety for plants, animals, and residents with an emphasis on properly managing flora and fauna indigenous to the region. GOAL 2AA: Recognize Birch Bay Sudden Vanity Provisional U:ban GromA Afea, and the Columbia Valley/Kendall area as county urban growth areas, not associated with existing cities. Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan 729 January 2006 Chapter Two - Land Use Policy 2AA-1: Work with the Birch Bay Water and Sewer District to amend the District service area boundaries to be consistent with the revised Urban Growth Area and establish policies for provision of water service to portions of the District that were removed from the UGA. Policy 2AA-2: Work with Birch Bay Water and Sewer District and the City of Blaine to resolve the issue of jurisdiction north of Lincoln Road and east of the long term planning area until a master. plan has been completed to identify traffic impacts and infrastructure/utility/service needs, and appropriate mitigation measures. Policy 2AA-13: Preclude additional commercial zoning within the urban growth area until the Small Town Commercial district in Kendall is fully developed and a land supply study demonstrates a need for additional commercial land. Policy 2AA-14: Facilitate meeting the unique needs of Sudden Valley due to its location within the Lake Whatcom Watershed. Policy 2AA-15: Recognize the existing parcelization and the commitment for development of the remaining multi -family parcels in Sudden Valley. Policy 2AA-16: Work with the Community Association towards achievement of the density reduction target of 1,400 lots within -Sudden Valley Policy 2AA-17: If the county acquires lots through tax foreclosure, consider selling them as non -buildable lots. Policy 2AA-18: Support Lake Whatcom Water and Sewer District's effort to maintain adequate sewer capacity and control stormwater run-off in keeping with appropriate environmental controls and the Sudden Valley Community Association's density reduction goal. Policy 2AA-19: Explore alternatives for traffic impact mitigation including: • enhanced bus service to Sudden Valley consideration of some additional commercial and limited light industrial development within existing Neighborhood Commercial and Resort Commercial zones to create a fuller service community to limit shopping and journey to work trips Policy 2AA-20: Recognize Sudden Valley as a ^^urt„ , rbaR growth area not ,.c.soGiated with aR exlstin ,.,t„ "Recreational Subdivision". Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan 730 January 2006 Chapter Two - Land Use Policy 2AA-22: Work with all parties to maintain, and appropriately plan for infrastructure, public services, and stormwater retention so that Sudden Valley can develop to its appropriate potential. Policy 2AA-24 If incorporation has not been accomplished 2006, the Sudden Valley Provisional UGA "Recreational Subdivision." Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan by }"n� a February 26, will be designated as a 731 January 2006 Chapter Two - Land Use Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan 732 EXHIBIT C January 2006 Appendix C-County-Wide Planning Policies maintain proper buffers from natural resource areas to minimize conflicts with natural resources and industries based on them. D. CITY URBAN GROWTH AREAS The Urban Growth Areas for the small cities shall be of an adequate size to allow them to become viable economic centers with a balance of jobs and housing. The small cities shall do appropriate planning to ensure adequate distribution of land uses and services at a range of urban densities and zoning classifications. 2. Urban Growth Areas for cities shall include those areas contiguous to cities and with urban characteristics as defined by the Act. The Geneva area in Bellingham's UGA is characterized by urban development, but is also identified by the city and county as a Water Resource Protection UGA because of its location in the Lake Whatcom Watershed. Lake Whatcom is the drinking water source for much of the Bellingham urban area. Geneva is appropriate to include in an urban growth area, but is not an area where additional urban development is desirable. 3. Cities shall develop a plan to provide urban level water and sewer services within their Urban Growth Areas. This plan should be developed in cooperation with existing water purveyors and other municipal corporations providing water or sewer services within each city's Urban Area, and should be implemented through interlocal agreements. Short term and long term boundaries may be used to facilitate provision of urban levels of service and to not preclude future urban densities as defined within the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan. 4. Existing cities should absorb additional population at a range of densities appropriately responsive to the city's community vision before extending city Urban Growth Areas into areas where growth would adversely impact critical areas and resource lands. In those small cities entirely surrounded by flood plains, critical area and resource lands or within Shellfish Protection Districts, the county and the city shall seek to negotiate a balance between protection of resources and the allocation of adequate land area to meet the growth needs of the city and to maintain the desired character of the community. 5. All cities should grow in an efficient manner while maintaining their character and, where reasonable, shall provide for adequate open space between cities to prevent strip development. 6. Cities should be encouraged to provide positive incentives for in -fill. E. NON -CITY URBAN GROWTH AREAS Urban Growth Areas may also be established in areas that are not contiguous to existing cities, and are already characterized by urban growth where adequate facilities and services can be provided and which are intended to meet needs not met by cities and their Urban Growth Areas. Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan C-1 733 January 2006 Appendix C-County-Wide Planning Policies 2. Non -city urban growth areas, for already urbanized unincorporated residential areas shall be encouraged to infill in a way that will facilitate efficient provision of facilities and services consistent with the scale of development. 3. Cherry Point shall be designated as an unincorporated industrial urban growth area in recognition of existing large scale industrial land uses. Additional large scale development shall be encouraged consistent with the ability to provide needed services and consistent with protecting critical areas along with other environmental protection considerations. The Cherry Point industrial area is an important and appropriate area for industry due to its access to deep water shipping, rail, all-weather roads, its location near the Canadian border, and its contribution to the County's goal of providing family wage jobs. 4. The County shall assure that there are plans to provide appropriate levels of urban facilities and services within non -city Urban Growth Areas. These plans should be developed by special purpose districts, water associations and private service providers within each of these Areas, and should be implemented, where appropriate, through interlocal agreements. Short term and long term boundaries may be used to facilitate provision of urban levels of service. 5. Th,P. k/aIlov Drnvicinnnl I li`_A is nhnro n+oriznrJ by rhnn do rolnnmen+ but is also identified as a Water Res9WFGe PreteGtien area beGause of its location in, f�e Lake of- �t }hie Bellingha � rrban .� .�_�r� t�/�n[.11�o,1r i. r�ri n+o for Jotro lenLuvon} nr ex4&# try ''q I!' —i i -GG'-where expaRSinn OF innraased Pd �o��n`"c'ity ma's de F. CONTIGUOUS, ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING IN URBAN GROWTH AREAS* Cities, the county and special districts shall execute interlocal agreements to coordinate plans for and manage growth in Urban Growth Areas prior to annexations. Interlocal agreements shall acknowledge and implement the County -wide Planning Policies. 2. Interlocal agreements shall incorporate clear and reasonable criteria for orderly annexation. The county and the cities shall establish a process to incorporate representative citizen input into interlocal agreement and encourage appropriate districts to participate. If adequate procedures are developed to replace it, the Boundary Review Board may be replaced. 3. All urbanized areas currently within urban growth boundaries associated with cities should be encouraged to annex to cities. Orderly annexations with logical boundaries shall be encouraged. Interlocal agreements shall specify guidelines on size, timing of annexations and urban levels of development, and tax revenue sharing when appropriate. 4. Within Urban Growth Areas, cities shall not extend water and sewer utilities without an adopted program for annexation and an adopted Capital Facilities Plan. Exceptions may be made in cases where human health is threatened as determined by the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan C-2 734 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL NO. AB2009-120 CLEARANCES Initial Date Date Received in Council Office Agenda Date Assigned to: Originator: Superior Court FFR p� 2 V L, FEB 17 2009 gWHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL n 2/24/09 Finance/Council Division Head: N/A N/A N/A Dept. Head: N.F.�N, F. Jackson Prosecutor Purchasing/Budget: 219100 Executive: J►^' SUBJECT. 2009 Guardian ad Litem Contract ATTACHMENTS: Contract & Cover Memo SEPA review required? ( ) Yes ( X ) NO SEPA review completed? ( ) Yes ( ) NO Should Clerk schedule a hearing ? ( ) Yes (X ) NO Requested Date: SUMMARY STATEMENT: This a fixed-rate contract for 2009 guardian ad litem services for minors the subject of juvenile dependency and termination of parental rights cases in the Whatcom County Superior Court. Distribution Request Indicate those who should receive a copy after Council action. List specific names to the right. ADS Facilities Management ADS Finance ADS Human Resources ADS Info Services Assessor Auditor Cooperative Extension District Court Executive Health Hearing Examiner Jail COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN. Juvenile Parks Planning Prosecutor Public Works Sheriff Superior Court Related County Contract #: Treasurer Other Related File Numbers: Ordinance or Resolution Number (this item): 735 WHATCOM COUNTY CONTRACT INFORMATION SHEET Whatcom County Contract No. Originating Department: Superior Court Contract Administrator: N.F. Jackson Contractor's I Agency Name: Whatcom Guardian ad Litem Services, LLC Is this a New Contract? If not, is this an Amendment or Renewal to an Existing Contract? Yes X No Yes _ No If yes, previous number(s): Is this a grant agreement? Yes No X 'If yes, grantor agency contract number(s) CFDA number Is this contract grant funded? Yes No X If yes, associated Whatcom County grant contract number(s) Is this contract the result of a RFP or Bid process? Yes X No If yes, RFP and Bid number(s) 09-07 Contract Amount: (sum of orig contract If a Professional Services Agreement is more than $15, 000 or a Bid is amt and any prior amendments) more than $35, 000, please submit an Agenda Bill for Council $310, 000. 00 approval and a supporting memo. Any amendment that provides This Amendment Amount: either a 10% increase in amount or more than $10, 000, whichever is $ greater, must also go to Council and will need an agenda bill and Total Amended Amount: supporting memo. If less than these thresholds, just submit to $ Executive with supporting memo for approval. Scope of Services [Insert language from contract (Exhibit A) or summarize; expand space as necessary] 2009 Contract for guardian ad litem services in the Juvenile Division of the Whatcom County Superior Court. Term of Contract: 311109—12131109 Expiration Date:12131109 J. As rcnance reviewea: m aiawea 4. IT reviewed if IT related 5. Corrections made: 6. Attorney signoff. •� Z Contractor signed: T 8. Submitted to Exec Office 9. Reviewed by DCA 10. Council approved (if necessary) 11. Executive signed: 12. Contractor Original 13. Returned to dept; 14. County Original to Council Ironic] Ironic] vate_ziyiuy___jeiectronic] Date [electronic] Date [electronic] hard copy printed Date �[4 Date Date „ ,/D-Oc/ [summary via electronic; hardcopies] Date Date Date Date Date this form may need to expand to more than one page 736 Superior Court of the State of Washington For Whatcom County 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington 98225 4, STATE Chambers of t� ° (360) 738-2457 CHARLES R. SNYDER FAX (360) 676-6693 Judge csnyder@co.whatcom.wa.us MEMO TO: Whatcom County Council FROM: Charles R. Snyder, Presiding Judg FE'DiD 10 2,0111 l DATE: February 9, 2009 4 SUBJECT: 2009 Dependency GAL Contract Attached is the Court's recommended contract for 2009 guardian ad litem (GAL) services for pending and new juvenile dependency cases. Under the leadership of the administration the Court has worked diligently for months to seek to contain and hopefully reduce costs. The administration has provided keen analysis and research, in constant dialogue with us to find cost -saving alternatives to the conduct of the Court's business. It has been and remains the Court's duty to assure that quality of justice is preserved. The focus of the good work has been in the areas of indigent legal services and guardian ad litem services, heretofore provided by staff and hourly -rate contractors. The focus has been on juvenile dependency cases which saw a significant increase in filings (and costs) in 2007 and 2008. Late in October of 2008 the administration decided to consider the Public Defender's recommendation that that office cease providing legal representation for indigent parents in dependencies, in favor of contracted, fixed-rate contractors. The Council recently approved the contract with a group of qualified and experienced attorneys to provide 100% of those services, with a fixed-rate cost -capping contract. The next matter addressed deals with guardian ad litem (GAL) services in juvenile dependency cases. The Court has worked with the administration for a number of months, seeking ways to contain hourly -rate contractor GAL costs that approached $500,000 in 2008, primarily due to the significant increase in case filings in 2007. The Court has implemented a Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA) program, with state monies, to begin to recruit, train and use volunteer GAL's for juvenile dependency cases. That program now has nine volunteers and is presently handling 19 cases. State standards tell us that the Coordinator can manage about 30 volunteers, able to handle 90 cases. Another training for more volunteers will commence at the end of February. At the present there are approximately 366 pre-2009 cases still pending. It is anticipated that the State will file another 150 cases in 2009. For approximately 18 years the GAL's for juvenile dependency cases have been contracted, to Whatcom Guardian ad Litem Services (WCGAL), handling all pending and all new cases. That agency is still representing all pending cases, under 2008 contract extensions through February of 2009. 737 At the request of the administration the Court issued a RFP seeking bids for juvenile dependency GAL services, under fixed-rate terms. While a number of bidders had good credentials, none of them have any dependency experience and no dependency training. A former DSHS/CPS social worker may be the exception. Each of the new bidders asked for between 4 and 50 cases maximum at any given time. The total of the requests came to 136 cases, while the pending and expected 2009 case load of 516 pending and new cases. WCGAL bid a flat rate of $341,000 to handle all pending and new cases for 2009, for eleven months. The bid of $341,000 is $67,326. less than the comparable eleven -month actual costs in 2008. We are recommending that we continue the relationship with WCGAL for 2009, at the significantly reduced and fixed -price contract bid amount, for the following reasons: 1. The quality of representation by the staff of WCGAL is well known and excellent, whereas the effectiveness of the CASA volunteers or the new bidders with no dependency experience is undetermined. 2. It is expected that the CASA volunteers will perform effectively, because they have received specialized training and are constantly supervised by the staff CASA Coordinator. However, there is no similar supervision of untrained contractors, raising elements of risk to the welfare of the children assigned to them. 3. The juvenile dependency program is already undergoing significant challenges to its operations. Legal representation of indigent parents has been shifted from Public Defenders to contractors. Over 250 cases are undergoing the shift to new attorneys. The State is reducing services to parents and children as the result of budget cuts. 4. Nurturing families through state intervention in parenting requires constant and vigilant assessment of needs and consistently applied programs to protect children and give parents the life skills to reunite their families. With temporarily disquieting changes in attorneys and the risk of losing services necessary to protect children and give them permanency in stable environments we feel strongly that we should not add unproven GAL's to the already unstable dependency portion of the court's business. In such an era, it is more important than ever that there be some stability, and that the children should remain stable. While we feel it imperative to maintain quality protection and advocacy for the children, we will continue to work with the administration to preserve that goal by seeking alternative and hopefully less expensive means: 1. Expansion of the CASA program. One CASA Coordinator may supervise up to about 30 volunteers, handling about 90 cases. State money for the Coordinator may disappear. We cannot expand the program without additional Coordinators and support. A CASA program able to handle 85-90% of all pending and new cases is the goal (and the experience in counties heavily relying on CASA programs). 2. Exploration of hiring staff GAL's. The administration has suggested that we explore one or more part time or full time staff GAL's. While the suggestion is one that the court has recommended over the years, coming late in January it is thought to be too late to implement, if desired, soon enough to tend to the immediate needs of the children involved. We will continue to explore this additional potential resource not as an alternative to the CASA program, but as an enhancement to it. cc: Pete Kremen, County Executive 738 Whatcom County Contract No. av090ao0 CONTRACT FOR SERVICES AGREEMENT 2009 Guardian ad Litem Contract WHATCOM GUARDIAN AD LITEM SERVICES, LLC, hereinafter called Contractor, and Whatcom County, hereinafter referred to as County, agree and contract as set forth in this Agreement, including: General Conditions, pp. 3-8, Exhibit A (Services), p. 9, Exhibit B (Consideration), p10, Copies of these items are attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if fully set forth herein. The term of this Agreement shall commence on the 1stday of March, 2009, and shall, unless terminated or renewed as elsewhere provided in the Agreement, terminate on the 31It day of December 2009. The general purpose or objective of this Agreement is to provide guardian ad litem services in the juvenile division of the Whatcom County Superior Court, as more fully and definitively described in Exhibit A hereto. The language of Exhibit A controls in case of any conflict between it and that provided here. The Contract Number, set forth above, shall be included on all billings or correspondence in connection therewith. Contractor acknowledges and by signing this contract agrees that the Indemnification provisions set forth in Paragraphs 11.1, 21.1, 30.1, 31-.2, 32.1, 34.2, and 34.3, if included are totally and fully part of this contract and have been mutually negotiated by the parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement this day of 20 CONTRACTOR: WHATCOM GUARDIAN AD LITEM SERVICES, LLC (Type in Name & Title of Signatory) STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ) On this day of 20 before me personally appeared to me known to be the (title) of (Company) and who executed the above instrument and who acknowledged to me the act of signing and sealing thereof. CONTRACTOR INFORMATION: Whatcom Guardian ad Litem Services, LLC 1155 North State Street, Suite 519 Bellingham, Washington 98225 (360)647-5492 NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington, residing at . My commission expires 2009 GAL Contract.doc Page 1 of 10 739 WHATCOM COUNTY: Recommen d or Approval: !� Dep ent Director Date Ap rov as t form: P osecuting Attorney Date Approved: Accepted for Whatcom County: By: Pete Kremen, Whatcom County Executive STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss COUNTY OF WHATCOM ) On this day of , 20 _, before me personally appeared Pete Kremen, to me known to be the Executive of Whatcom County, who executed the above instrument and who acknowledged to me the act of signing and sealing thereof. NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington, residing at . My commission expires 2009 GAL Contract.doc Page 2 of 10 740 GENERAL CONDITIONS The method of numbering used below is designed to achieve an organized, uniform format for contracting language in the various County contracts. To maintain serial numbering when an otherwise standard contract clause is not used, the number itself will appear, followed by the term "Not applicable." Series 00-09: Provisions Related to Scope and Nature of Services 0.1 Scope of Services: The Contractor agrees to provide to the County services and any materials as set forth in the project narrative identified as Exhibit "A", during the agreement period. No material, labor, or facilities will be furnished by the County, unless otherwise provided for in the Agreement. Series 10-19: Provisions Related to Term and Termination 10.1 Term: Services provided by Contractor prior to or after the term of this contract shall be performed at the expense of Contractor and are not compensable under this contract unless both parties hereto agree to such provision in writing. The term of this Agreement may be extended by mutual agreement of the parties; provided, however, that the Agreement is in writing and signed by both parties. 10.2 Extension: Not Applicable 11.1 Termination for Default: Not Applicable 11.2 Termination for Reduction in Funding: Not Applicable 11.3 Termination for Public Convenience: The County may terminate the Agreement in whole or in part whenever the County determines, in its sole discretion, that such termination is in the interests of the County. Whenever the Agreement is terminated in accordance with this paragraph, the Contractor shall be entitled to payment for actual work performed at unit contract prices for completed items of work. An equitable adjustment in the contract price for partially completed items of work will be made, but such adjustment shall not include provision for loss of anticipated profit on deleted or uncompleted work. Termination of this Agreement by the County at any time during the term, whether for default or convenience, shall not constitute breach of contract by the County. Series 20-29: Provisions Related to Consideration and Payments 20.1 Accountin__, and for Contractor Services: Payment to the Contractor for services rendered under this Agreement shall be as set forth in Exhibit "B." Where Exhibit "B" requires payments by the County, payment shall be based upon written claims supported, unless otherwise provided in Exhibit "B," by documentation of units of work actually performed and amounts earned, including, where appropriate, the actual number of days worked each month, total number of hours for the month, and the total dollar payment requested, so as to comply with municipal auditing requirements. Unless specifically stated in Exhibit "B" or approved in writing in advance by the official executing this Agreement for the County or his designee (hereinafter referred to as the "Administrative Officer") the County will not reimburse the Contractor for any costs or expenses incurred by the Contractor in the performance of this contract. Where required, the County shall, upon receipt of appropriate documentation, compensate the Contractor, no more often than monthly, in accordance with the County's customary procedures, pursuant to the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit "B." 2009 GAL Contract.doc Page 3 of 10 741 21.1 Taxes: The Contractor understands and acknowledges that the County will not withhold Federal or State income taxes. Where required by State or Federal law, the Contractor authorizes the County to withhold for any taxes other than income taxes (i.e., Medicare). All compensation received by the Contractor will be reported to the Internal Revenue Service at the end of the calendar year in accordance with the applicable IRS regulations. It is the responsibility of the Contractor to make the necessary estimated tax payments throughout the year, if any, and the Contractor is solely liable for any tax obligation arising from the Contractor's performance of this Agreement. The Contractor hereby agrees to indemnify the County against any demand to pay taxes arising from the Contractor's failure to pay taxes on compensation earned pursuant to this Agreement. The County will pay sales and use taxes imposed on goods or services acquired hereunder as required by law. The Contractor must pay all other taxes, including, but not limited to, Business and Occupation Tax, taxes based on the Contractor's gross or net income, or personal property to which the County does not hold title. The County is exempt from Federal Excise Tax. 22.1 Withholdinq Payment: Not Applicable 23.1 Labor Standards: The Contractor agrees to comply with state and federal requirements, as applicable, pertaining to payment of wages and working conditions, in accordance with RCW 39.12.040, the Prevailing Wage Act; the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990; the Davis -Bacon Act; and the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act providing for weekly payment of prevailing wages, minimum overtime pay, and providing that no laborer or mechanic shall be required to work in surroundings or under conditions which are unsanitary, hazardous, or dangerous to health and safety as determined by regulations promulgated by the Federal Secretary of Labor and the State of Washington. Series 30-39: Provisions Related to Administration of Agreement 30.1 Independent Contractor: The Contractor's services shall be furnished by the Contractor as an independent contractor, and nothing herein contained shall be construed to create a relationship of employer -employee or master -servant, but all payments made hereunder and all services performed shall be made and performed pursuant to this Agreement by the Contractor as an independent contractor. The Contractor acknowledges that the entire compensation for this Agreement is specified in Exhibit "B" and the Contractor is not entitled to any benefits including, but not limited to: vacation pay, holiday pay, sick leave pay, medical, dental, or other insurance benefits, or any other rights or privileges afforded to employees of the County. The Contractor represents that helshelit maintains a separate place of business, serves clients other than the County, will report all income and expense accrued under this contract to the Internal Revenue Service on a Schedule C, and has a tax account with the State of Washington Department of Revenue for payment of all sales and use and Business and Occupation taxes collected by the State of Washington. Contractor will defend, indemnify and hold harmless the County, its officers, agents or employees from any loss or expense, including, but not limited to, settlements, judgments, setoffs, attorneys' fees or costs incurred by reason of claims or demands because of breach of the provisions of this paragraph. 30.2 Assignment and Subcontracting The performance of all activities contemplated by this agreement shall be accomplished by the Contractor. No portion of this contract may be assigned or subcontracted to any other individual, firm or entity without the express and prior written approval of the County. 2009 GAL Contract.doc Page 4 of 10 742 30.3 No Guarantee of Employment: The performance of all or part of this contract by the Contractor shall not operate to vest any employment rights whatsoever and shall not be deemed to guarantee any employment of the Contractor or any employee of the Contractor or any subcontractor or any employee of any subcontractor by the County at the present time or in the future. 31.2 Patent/Copyright Infringement: Not Applicable 32.1 Confidentiality: The Contractor, its employees, subcontractors, and their employees shall maintain the confidentiality of all information provided by the County or acquired by the Contractor in performance of this Agreement, except upon the prior written consent of the County or an order entered by a court after having acquired jurisdiction over the County. Contractor shall immediately give to the County notice of any judicial proceeding seeking disclosure of such information. Contractor shall indemnify and hold harmless the County, its officials, agents or employees from all loss or expense, including, but not limited to, settlements, judgments, setoffs, attorneys' fees and costs resulting from Contractor's breach of this provision. 33.1 Right to Review: This contract is subject to review by any Federal, State or County auditor. The County or its designee shall have the right to review and monitor the financial and service components of this program by whatever means are deemed expedient by the Administrative Officer or by the County Auditor's Office. Such review may occur with or without notice and may include, but is not limited to, on -site inspection by County agents or employees, inspection of all records or other materials which the County deems pertinent to the Agreement and its performance, and any and all communications with or evaluations by service recipients under this Agreement. The Contractor shall preserve and maintain all financial records and records relating to the performance of work under this Agreement for three (3) years after contract termination, and shall make them available for such review, within Whatcom County, State of Washington, upon request. Contractor also agrees to notify the Administrative Officer in advance of any inspections, audits, or program review by any individual, agency, or governmental unit whose purpose is to review the services provided within the terms of this Agreement. If no advance notice is given to the Contractor, then the Contractor agrees to notify the Administrative Officer as soon as it is practical. 34.1 'Proof of Insurance: The Contractor shall carry for the duration of this Agreement professional liability insurance with the following minimums: $300,000 34.2 Industrial Insurance Waiver: With respect to the performance of this agreement and as to claims against the County, its officers, agents and employees, the Contractor expressly waives its immunity under Title 51 of the Revised Code of Washington, the Industrial Insurance Act, for injuries to its employees and agrees that the obligations to indemnify, defend and hold harmless provided in this agreement extend to any claim brought by or on behalf of any employee of the Contractor. This waiver is mutually negotiated by the parties to this agreement. 34.3 Defense & Indemnity Agreement: The Contractor agrees to defend, indemnify and save harmless the County, its appointed and elective officers and employees, from and against all loss or expense, including, but not limited to, judgments, settlements, attorneys' fees and costs by reason of any and all claims and demands upon the County, its elected or appointed officials or employees for damages because of personal or bodily injury, including death at any time resulting therefrom, sustained by any person or persons and on account of damage to property, including loss of use thereof, whether such injury to persons or damage to property is due to the negligence of the Contractor, its subcontractors, its successor or assigns, or its agents, servants, or employees, the County, its appointed or elected officers, employees or their agents, except only such injury or damage as shall have been occasioned by the sole negligence of the County or its appointed or elected officials or employees. It is further provided that no liability shall attach to the County by reason of entering into this contract, except as expressly provided herein. 2009 GAL Contract.doc Page 5 of 10 743 35.1 Non -Discrimination in Employment: The County's policy is to provide equal opportunity in all terms, conditions and privileges of employment for all qualified applicants and employees without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, disability, or veteran status. The Contractor shall comply with all laws prohibiting discrimination against any employee or applicant for employment on the grounds of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, disability, or veteran status, except where such constitutes a bona fide occupational qualification. Furthermore, in those cases in which the Contractor is governed by such laws, the Contractor shall take affirmative action to insure that applicants are employed, and treated during employment, without regard to their race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, disability, or veteran status, except where such constitutes a bona fide occupational qualification. Such action shall include, but not be limited to: advertising, hiring, promotions, layoffs or terminations, rate of pay or other forms of compensation benefits, selection for training including apprenticeship, and participation in recreational and educational activities. In all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by them or on their behalf, the Contractor shall state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color religion, sex or national origin. The foregoing provisions shall also be binding upon any subcontractor, provided that the foregoing provision shall not apply to contracts or subcontractors for standard commercial supplies or raw materials, or to sole proprietorships with no employees. 35.2 Non -Discrimination in Client Services: The Contractor shall not discriminate on the grounds of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, disability, or veteran status; or deny an individual or business any service or benefits under this Agreement; or subject an individual or business to segregation or separate treatment in any manner related to his/her/its receipt any service or services or other benefits provided under this Agreement; or deny an individual or business an opportunity to participate in any program provided by this Agreement. 36.1 Waiver of Noncompetition: Not Applicable 36.2 Conflict of Interest: If at any time prior to commencement of, or during the term of this Agreement, Contractor or any of its employees involved in the performance of this Agreement shall have or develop an interest in the subject matter of this Agreement that is potentially in conflict with the County's interest, then Contractor shall immediately notify the County of the same. The notification of the County shall be made with sufficient specificity to enable the County to make an informed judgment as to whether or not the County's interest may be compromised in any manner by the existence of the conflict, actual or potential. Thereafter, the County may require the Contractor to take reasonable steps to remove the conflict of interest. The County may also terminate this contract according to the provisions herein for termination. 37.1 Administration of Contract: This Agreement shall be subject to all laws, rules, and regulations of the United States of America, the State of Washington, and political subdivisions of the State of Washington. The Contractor also agrees to comply with applicable federal, state, county or municipal standards for licensing, certification and operation of facilities and programs, and accreditation and licensing of individuals. The County hereby appoints, and the Contractor hereby accepts, the Whatcom County Executive, and his or her designee, as the County's representative, hereinafter referred to as the Administrative Officer, for the purposes of administering the provisions of this Agreement, including the County's right to receive and act on all reports and documents, and any auditing performed by the County related to this Agreement. The Administrative Officer for purposes of this agreement is: Whatcom County Superior Court Administrator 311 Grand Avenue Bellingham, Washington 98225 2009 GAL Contract.doc Page 6 of 10 744 37.2 Notice: Except as set forth elsewhere in the Agreement, for all purposes under this Agreement except service of process, notice shall be given by the Contractor to the County's Administrative Officer under this Agreement. Notice to the Contractor for all purposes under this Agreement shall be given to the address provided by the Contractor herein above in the "Contractor Information" section. Notice may be given by delivery or by depositing in the US Mail, first class, postage prepaid. Series 40-49: Provisions Related to Interpretation of Agreement and Resolution of Disputes 40.1 Modifications: Either party may request changes in the Agreement. Any and all agreed modifications, to be valid and binding upon either party, shall be in writing and signed by both of the parties. 40.2 Contractor Commitments, Warranties and Representations: Not Applicable 41.1 Severability: If any term or condition of this contract or the application thereof to any person(s) or circumstances is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other terms, conditions or applications which can be given effect without the invalid term, condition or application. To this end, the terms and conditions of this contract are declared severable. 41.2 Waiver: Waiver of any breach or condition of this contract shall not be deemed a waiver of any prior or subsequent breach. No term or condition of this contract shall be held to be waived, modified or deleted except by an instrument, in writing, signed by the parties hereto. The failure of the County to insist upon strict performance of any of the covenants and agreements of this Agreement, or to exercise any option herein conferred in any one or more instances, shall not be construed to be a waiver or relinquishment of any such, or any other covenants or agreements, but the same shall be and remain in full force and effect. 42.1 Disputes: a. General: Differences between the Contractor and the County, arising under and by virtue of the Contract Documents, shall be brought to the attention of the County at the earliest possible time in order that such matters may be settled or other appropriate action promptly taken. Except for such objections as are made of record in the manner hereinafter specified and within the time limits stated, the records, orders, rulings, instructions, and decisions of the Administrative Officer shall be final and conclusive. b. Notice of Potential Claims: Not Applicable c. Detailed Claim: Not Applicable d. Arbitration: Not Applicable 2009 GAL Contract.doc Page 7 of 10 745 43.1 Venue and Choice of Law: In the event that any litigation should arise concerning the construction or interpretation of any of the terms of this Agreement, the venue of such action of litigation shall be in the courts of the State of Washington in and for the County of Whatcom. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Washington. 44.1 Survival: The provisions of paragraphs 11.1,11.2,11.3 if utilized, 21.1, 22.1, 30.1, 31.1, 31.2, 32.1, 33.1, 34.2, 34.3, 36.1, 40.2, 41.2, 42.1, and 43.1, shall survive, notwithstanding the termination or invalidity of this Agreement for any reason. 45.1 Entire Agreement: This written Agreement, comprised of the writings signed or otherwise identified and attached hereto, represents the entire Agreement between the parties and supersedes any prior oral statements, discussions or understandings between the parties. 2009 GAL Contract.doc Page 8 of 10 746 EXHIBIT,"A" (SERVICES) Contractor WHATCOM GUARDIAN AD LITEM SERVICES, LLC, agrees to provide professional services in performing Guardian ad Litem duties for all pending and newly referred cases in the Juvenile Division of the Superior Court and in other Superior Court matters as required. These services apply to those cases wherein the party to be represented is a minor who is the subject of a juvenile dependency or termination of parental rights matter. Guardian ad Litems will: • Investigate, collect relevant information about the child's situation, and report to the court factual information regarding the best interests of the child; • Meet with, interview, or observe the child, depending on the child's age and developmental status, and report to the court any views or positions expressed by the child on issues pending before the court; • Monitor all court orders for compliance and bring to the court's attention any changes in circumstances that may require a modification of the court's order; • Report to the court information on the legal status of a child's membership in any Indian tribe or band; • Make recommendations based upon an independent investigation regarding the best interests of the child, which the court may consider and weigh in conjunction with the recommendations of all of the parties; and • Perform such other duties to represent and be an advocate for the best interests of the child as necessary. Referrals to the Contractor will be made at the discretion of the Superior Court Administrator with the approval of the Presiding Judge. Employee or contracted guardians ad litem of WHATCOM GUARDIAN AD LITEM SERVICES, LLC, must be pre -approved by the Superior Court Administrator before performing any services hereunder. Referrals to the Whatcom County Court Appointed Special Advocate program volunteers shall be made at the discretion of the Superior Court Administrator and are not included in this agreement. 2009 GAL Contract.doc Page 9 of 10 747 EXHIBIT "B" (CONSIDERATION) In consideration for the services described above, the County agrees to pay to the order of the Contractor as follows: BASIC SERVICE: This is a fixed rate contract as outlined below, not to exceed $310,000.00. This fixed rate agreement includes guardian ad litem representation and any and all supplies, materials, travel and any other expenses pertaining to the representation. 1. The Contractor shall be paid the sum of THREE HUNDRED THIRTY-ONE THOUSAND AND NO/100THS DOLLARS ($310,000.00) for services performed hereunder representing minors the subject of pending and new juvenile dependency and/or termination of parental rights cases, payable in TEN (10) monthly installments of THIRTY-ONE THOUSAND AND NO/100THS DOLLARS ($31,000.00). 2. The Contractor shall submit to the Administrator a monthly invoice for services performed in the preceding month, on or before the 5th of each month. Said invoice shall be in the form, manner and detail specified by the Administrator. 2009 GAL Contract.doc Page 10 of 10 WV