HomeMy WebLinkAboutPublic Works June 13 20001
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Public Works and Capital Projects Committee
June 13, 2000
The meeting was called to order at 1:30 p.m. by Committee Chair Barbara
Brenner in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
9
10
11
12
13
Also Present: Absent:
Marlene Dawson None
Dan McShane
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
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION
1. DISCUSSION WITH RON BRONSEMA REGARDING THE CURRENT AND
FUTURE FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT WORK PROGRAM (AB2000-
236)
Ron Bronsema, Flood Control Zone District Advisory Committee Chair, gave
background on the committee work program. When the County formed the flood
district in 1991, it started out with a staff of three. Today, the Advisory Committee
is looking for direction. The committee works in all areas of the County. They had
a fisheries biologist from the state for a while. The County is advertising for a
position for a planner/fish biologist. There is a shared position with the flood
district and the roads. Because of the expanded scope of work and increased
permitting difficulties, it takes four times as long to get a permit, and it takes the
flood engineer much longer to do a project. They need another flood engineer.
The County is spending $250,000 on a computer model for lower Nooksack. Now,
they need to maintain the model with a computer modeler on staff. Canadians
pressure the County about the Everson overflow problem through Sumas. The
new bridge at Everson is 25 feet wider than the older bridge. If one is downstream
from the Everson bridge, there will be more flood problems in the future. That
equates to the Lynden sewage treatment plant intake. Ferndale really has a
problem with all their development in the flood plain. They have to identify those
things. The Comprehensive Plan is complete. Now, they need to work on
implementation. If this model identifies that more water is going downstream, then
they will have to work on that. Part of the plan is for overflow areas. Too much
water going downstream will require flood storage areas. To find flood storage
areas, they will have to buy out some people. These people are already being
flooded.
Brenner stated the County would partly use Federal Emergency Management
Administration (FEMA) money to do the buyouts. Bronsema stated that for the
implementation of overflow areas and storage, FEMA would not be involved.
Paula Cooper, Special Projects Engineer, stated that under the old program
where FEMA would fund whole projects, they would have been more interested.
Public Works Committee, 6/13/2000, Page 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
Now, since the Mississippi River failure, they are looking at an acquisition to take
structures out of the flood plan. Whether or not that would be high on FEMA's
priority is a gray area. She invited the man from the state to the Canyon Creek
discussion at the next meeting.
McShane stated this is an overview of what is going on in the flood district.
They are not specifically talking about Canyon Creek.
Bronsema stated other agencies have funds available. A lot of the areas are
developing habitat. Funds may be available from habitat funding sources.
Brenner stated she was concerned because there would be many competing
interests for that money. As they make more and more regulations restricting what
can be done, there is going to be more and more necessity to buy things.
McShane stated he is more optimistic. The County applied for Salmon
Recovery Fund (SRF) money for salmon recovery. The concern at the County level
was that they were asking for more than they should get, but both proposals
received money. Tying in with flood could provide good opportunities.
Bronsema stated the rumor is that Seattle is getting very expensive for
residences for buyout. Buying two residences in Seattle equals five residences in
Whatcom County.
Cooper stated the state representative from the man coming to the
presentation in two weeks told her that Seattle is pricing itself out of the buyout
program.
Dawson asked if there is a place that a person could get a list of applications
for salmon habitat restoration. Cooper stated the County has done some research
on different funding resources, but she didn’t know of one source.
Bronsema stated the County engineering technician spends half and ¾ of the
time working on building permits because people are building on flood areas.
Brenner asked if the County requires people to have flood coverage if they
build in flood area. Cooper stated that if they have a mortgage, it is required.
Brenner stated they should mandate that if a person builds in the flood plain,
he or she has to have flood insurance. Cooper stated she would ask legal counsel
about that.
Brenner stated the County should not have to take the responsibility.
Bronsema stated the engineering technician spends half and 75 percent of
his time certifying building permits in the flood plain, so he is not working in the
flood district. They've had a request from a flood control zone district for a plan
development. There are roughly 17 diking districts in the County. Flood staff has
Public Works Committee, 6/13/2000, 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
done things for the diking districts, which will eventually needs plans for each
district. He questioned who would do that. There are four diking districts the staff
is supposed to help. There are also three flood sub-zones to staff.
Dawson questioned whether they could use flood funds.
Bronsema stated that is the question. Things are not being done because
there are no people to do the job. Fisheries and Department of Ecology (DOE) keep
coming back with more design requests. Acquiring a permit takes years when it
used to take a few months. To be done timely, it takes more staff. The flood
district needs direction.
On the south fork, during the process of developing the plan, part of the
recommendation was to have plans for the upper Nooksack. It was originally
thought that doing the entire river, including all the forks and the lower stem, was
too much at once. It was divided into smaller pieces. They have the lower
Nooksack done. Now, they are starting on the south fork, but it is being done in-
house by staff.
Bob Knutson, Whatcom County Flood Control Zone District Advisory
Committee Member and Acme/Van Zandt Sub-Flood Committee Chair, stated he
worked in a high-stress job for years. Whatcom County has the best engineers.
There is more pressure put on the staff from permitting and the timeline. The
same amount or more requests are coming in, but they can’t do anything with
them. It is hard on people. He was afraid of hitting a burnout level. The County
needs to protect the staff. The water problems are not going to go away. The first
time he tried to get Saxon project going, it was in the organizational phase of the
countywide flood zone eleven years ago. They actually started doing something
two years ago. They still don’t have an answer about whether it will go. This is a
lot of time to push paper.
Dawson stated it is not right to take that long. These agencies are
intentionally doing this. She was told they have to have a paperwork trail, find out
what has to be done, give the agencies a deadline for a response and assume no
response is approval, or sue them. That is what the County has to do. Federal and
state agencies are making their own rules.
McShane stated that in order to work with the agencies and be able to deal
with them is to have in place highly qualified and enough staff to deal with it,
particularly if they are going to do a lawsuit. There is a staff problem.
Knutson agreed. They need a layer of administrative protection between the
various agencies and the flood engineers. The countywide flood committee funded
the south fork plan. None of the diking districts or sub-zones can do anything soon
unless a plan is in place that can be backed up with scientific information and staff.
Brenner stated she is convinced about the need for more County flood staff.
They can still have plenty of staff and still run up against the agency brick wall.
Public Works Committee, 6/13/2000, 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
McShane stated staff, who would have the time to understand the
relationships and individuals and know when to back out of projects, would address
it. People work on projects. There are others who deal with the negotiation end.
The County has been asking too much.
Brenner stated she agreed about needing staff, but disagreed about catering
to the personalities.
Knutson stated it is not catering to personalities, it is getting to know how to
work individually with the individuals. If that is catering, fine, as long as it gets the
job done.
Bronsema stated they are working on development of the plan on the South
Fork, a recommendation for plans for the North and Middle forks, and formation of
two more sub-zones and another diking district. The recommendation is for one
sub-zone above Welcome on the North Fork. The second sub-zone is recommended
for below Welcome on the North Fork and the Middle Fork. Canyon Creek may
become a diking district. The advisory committee is unanimous on the
implementation of the Comprehensive Flood Hazard Management Plan. They have
to maintain the progress on the modeling so they can identify the overflow areas
and flood storage areas.
Art Anderson, Flood Control Zone District Advisory Committee Vice-Chair,
stated he joined the committee in 1992. Today they need some help from the
Council. They need some direction as to the Council’s priorities. After the 1990
flood, they knew exactly that the scope of work was to fight floods, save people,
property, and infrastructure. The scope has done a 180-degree turn. He has
learned a lot about what they cannot do in today’s world. As an engineer, he builds
stuff. The County has an excellent staff. They need a priority list with deadlines.
He wanted the committee to complete some of the tasks they took on years ago
and are in the Comprehensive Flood Hazard Management Plan. A key issue is how
much water they can send to Sumas without flooding, and how much can safely go
down the channel. They need to answer that before leapfrogging along the issues.
He has some concerns about the coastal flooding issue because it is opening a
Pandora’s box, but those people also pay into the flood fund. When he started on
the committee in 1992, that wasn’t the scope. The committee is at a critical point
and needs priorities.
Dawson asked the committee to create a list of priorities and asked for the
Council’s critique.
Brenner agreed. The committee has the inside track on all of these issues.
It would be helpful to her to have a priority list. The Council can go through it and
make a determination.
Bronsema stated he agreed with Anderson. Part of the problem is they don’t
have the staff to complete implementation.
Public Works Committee, 6/13/2000, 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
Brenner stated priority one may be staffing.
Bronsema stated that if they take on new responsibilities, such as the in-
house plan for the South Fork, it takes staff time for oversight and administration.
Brenner stated they need more staffing. She wanted to know the shape of
the flood fee resources. The flood money has been used for the Water Resources
Division.
Bronsema stated there is around $7.9 million in the flood fund. He asked
how far they want to go.
Brenner stated she wanted to see a priority list from the Advisory Committee
scheduled for the Public Works Committee.
Anderson stated that the concern to him is the amount in the flood fund.
There are many targets on that pile of money from various groups. He challenged
the Council to keep an eye on the expenditures from the fund. When they start
doing buyouts and other programs, the funds will be depleted quickly. He asked
the Council to fulfill the priorities they come up with rather than divert the priorities
to other things.
Dawson asked if there are any projects in which the advisory committee has
to do all the work, but is not receiving an answer on.
Knutson stated the South Fork Saxon project is such a project. The Rohr
project is the title on the paper. They started two years ago and are down to the
last one.
Cooper stated everything was submitted in the beginning of this year. The
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) will look at it tomorrow.
Knutson stated that Fisheries changed their minds three times on what had
to be done. The project is as environmentally and fish friendly as one can get.
Everyone says it is a great idea. Now, the project is with the Army Corps of
Engineers and NMFS.
McShane stated they have staff problems also.
Anderson stated there is a process of going through the permits. There is a
statewide association for councilmembers. There may be some technical schooling
to go through the process of applying for various permits. If they’ve exhausted
every avenue in a peaceful way, may need to draw the line in the sand.
Brenner stated they need to make sure there is adequate staffing in the
County before thinking about a legal challenge. It could be that the squeaky wheel
gets handled first and that other entities have better staffing and are more efficient.
Public Works Committee, 6/13/2000, Page 5
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
Anderson asked how to find that out.
Cooper stated everyone is waiting on the agencies. When the County
received a permit to do the bank stabilization, that was the first project that was
permitted in the state, according to the Army Corps of Engineers. A lot of what is
going on is that the rules are changing as they figure out how to deal with all of
this.
McShane stated the agencies also have a fear of being sued. He questioned
whether the County is serving the community by gnashing its teeth about the
agency responses.
Brenner asked that the advisory committee include a wish list for staffing in
addition to the priority list.
McShane stated the road list is flexible. The County does need more staffing
and to retain the current staff. The County has very good people and a good
committee. He would hate to see them get too frustrated.
Dawson asked which agencies are holding up South Fork project. Cooper
stated the Corps of Engineers does the consultation with National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS). It has been in their hands for a long time.
Dawson asked who oversees the Army Corps of Engineers. Cooper stated
someone named Colonel Rigsby is in charge.
Dawson asked if it would help to write a letter to the colonel asking for an
expected timeframe for response.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.)
Dawson moved to write to Colonel Rigsby and get guidelines for a reasonable
timeline and the Corps's expectation of what needs to be included in the
application.
Roland Middleton, Land Use Manager, stated the colonel would like to make
general someday, and with the Endangered Species Act making the takings a
criminal violation, they will be careful on what they agree to. It is not just a
problem with Public Works. There is a delay for every project that deals with fish
habitat. He agreed with the notion of looking at staffing levels. He also pressures
Paula Cooper. Applicants come in and want to build their dream home, and
approval of the plan could take many weeks.
McShane stated there would be a Comprehensive Flood Hazard Management
Plan. Building on the floodplain will meet the plan. Cooper stated they have to do
an elevation certificate, foundation requirements, and reviewing the flood code.
There is not a good set of floodplain maps for the Nooksack. They consult with
Public Works Committee, 6/13/2000, Page 6
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
many resources and go with the most conservative right now. That is what gets
tricky. It is difficult to give this to someone else to do. It is tricky to know the
regulations and where to look for the best available data.
McShane stated they need to address the high turnover rate.
Dawson moved to work with Paula Cooper to draft a letter.
Brenner stated they could do that without a motion.
Bronsema stated that if they don’t have a plan for an area, the fish-friendly
projects are the only thing they will get a permit for. If there is a problem with
erosion that is threatening someone's house, they won't get a permit for it. People
don’t feel safe when the home is there and the only thing that can be permitted to
protect the bank is woody debris. It is a safety issue.
Brenner stated people have to accept some responsibility for where they
build and where they live. Many people are building now in the flood plain. She
didn't have a lot of sympathy for those people. Until the next event, it wouldn't
take long to deplete the flood fund money by doing buyouts now. She was more
interested in finishing projects and getting adequate staffing on board.
Bronsema stated the plan is multi-objective, not just a buyout. There should
be multiple funding sources to do this. They lost the institutional knowledge of
staff. Cooper is still trying to grasp the knowledge.
Brenner stated part of that is the County’s fault. Her recollection was that
John Matzinger did not leave by choice.
Bronsema stated they need to maintain a balance of staffing to absorb the
turnover. He asked when to have the priority list ready.
Brenner stated she would schedule it in four weeks.
McShane suggested that they add the timeframe for the priority items and
the staff time it would take.
Brenner asked also for the types of positions and skills needed.
McShane stated he wanted to know what amount of money they need to
keep for a flood emergency.
2. DISCUSSION REGARDING A POSSIBLE AMENDMENT TO THE CUP
PROCESS TO EXEMPT SMALL SIGNS (LESS THAN 24 SQUARE FEET)
FOR EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES (AB2000-237)
Brenner stated this is in response to a call she received from the Whatcom
Day Academy. They have a traveling reader board. They want to put up a sign,
Public Works Committee, 6/13/2000, 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
but have to go through a conditional use permit (CUP) process for a sign. The CUP
costs $500 to apply to the process. Her first thought was to do a lesser rate for
educational facilities and non-profit organizations. Planning and Development
Services Director Sam Ryan responded that it still takes staff time to process it and
it is better to exempt certain types of things. The Council needs to give direction.
Roland Middleton, Land Use manager, stated Sam Ryan was not aware that
the most recent Conditional Use Permit applied for by the photographer on Aldrich
was denied by the Hearing Examiner and was upheld by the County Council. That
decision denied the conditional use. He didn’t understand it. He is still trying to
understand why it was denied. It was a very similar situation to the Whatcom Day
Academy. Before the Whatcom Day Academy moved in, he informed them about
the CUP, but allowed them special permission to hold back prosecution in requiring
them to take out the reader board sign and hope they come back in with the
permitted sign. What is permitted is very small, about four square feet. It would
be better to tie the amendment to the type of use. The fee schedule is nailed down
as best as possible, but it is still difficult to administer. He would rather take a look
at the uses that are innocuous and determine if a CUP is needed.
Brenner asked if all signs below a certain size should be exempted.
Middleton stated it is zone specific. They would do it zone by zone, like all the
others.
Brenner asked what would happen to the photographers if they exempt it
zone by zone. She questioned whether that photographer would be able to put up
the sign. Middleton stated she would be allowed a sign if the Council exempted a
certain size for a certain zone.
Brenner questioned whether it would help if Council provided direction.
Middleton stated he would appreciate it.
Brenner moved to recommend to the full Council to give direction to staff and
the Planning Commission to work on sign size limitations zone-by-zone under which
a CUP would not be required.
Middleton recommended that they look through the zoning code. The
intention would be exemption or allowing them as a permitted use.
Brenner stated the small sign the school has now does not seem intrusive.
She questioned the current zoning. Middleton stated it is Rural zoning. They have
been non-conforming for a long time. He needed to know the size and the level of
review that should apply. They could be outright permitted, an accessory use, an
administrative approval, or a conditional use.
Brenner suggested an administrative approval. They may need Mr.
Middleton to come back with a recommendation of when it becomes intrusive in the
various zones.
Public Works Committee, 6/13/2000, Page 8
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
Middleton stated he recommended administrative approval because notice
goes out to the neighbors.
Brenner asked what sizes they would totally exempt. Middleton stated they
would want to look at past Hearing Examiner decisions.
Brenner stated the direction would be to a certain level for exemption, a
certain level for administrative approval, and a certain level for a CUP.
McShane asked for more background on why this is coming forward.
Someone wants a sign and doesn’t want to pay $500.
Brenner stated it is unfair to pay more for a permit than the cost to buy and
install a sign, especially if it is not intrusive and is a benefit to the community.
McShane asked what sign they wanted.
Brenner stated the sign is a name sign for the school. People go by quickly
on the road because it is a wider road.
Middleton stated the photographer wanted the same sign that is on
Northwest Road, but was denied. The reason for denial was not on conditional use
criteria, but on a legal precedent and a reading of the way the code is written. If
that holds true, then they would need to recommend denial of the Whatcom Day
Academy sign because of the reading of the code, opposed to whether or not it
makes sense. The code needs some revision and for the zone they are in, it may
need to be a conditional use. It may be too bad for the Whatcom Day Academy,
but they need to look at the entire zone. This is an issue.
Brenner stated it would save staff time and sources if they allowed some
exemptions and administrative approval. Every time they create more complicated
stuff, it creates more need for staff, time, and money. They need to decide if small
signs are an issue they want staff to deal with.
Middleton stated the administrative approval process is fairly new and
working well.
McShane stated that it should be an administrative process. He hesitated
about what they are asking staff to take on at this point.
Brenner asked staff to put on the agenda the possibility of exempt or
administrative approval to exempt signs under a certain size in certain zones. It is
important to not put everyone at the back of the bus because of the huge projects.
She didn’t think this would take a lot of time.
Brenner so moved to bring that recommendation to the full Council.
McShane asked for specific direction.
Public Works Committee, 6/13/2000, Page 9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Brenner stated Middleton didn’t want it specific. The motion is to look at a
small size for exemption, a middle size for administrative approval, and large size
for a CUP.
Middleton stated that would work. He started quoting from the committee
minutes to make sure they are not going astray. Sometimes the code is unclear.
They have one substantive change every week and a half to two weeks. When he
first came to work with Whatcom County, they could go every three or four years
without a change. He is not a fan of changing the code unless an issue comes up.
Brenner stated this would benefit the small, locally-owned businesses.
Motion carried unanimously.
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
OTHER BUSINESS
DISCUSSION REGARDING WALLA WALLA ORDINANCE NO. 219, AN
ORDINANCE COORDINATING COUNTY, FEDERAL, AND STATE
GOVERNMENT ACTIONS AFFECTING LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCE
USE (AB2000-201)
Brenner stated she was not interested in the substitute ordinance at all,
except to pull out certain parts. This is all about private property rights. They
should find the time to put together the County Council’s own draft of what it
should be. She asked Dawson to put a draft together, and she will also. There are
some good portions, but she didn’t want to piece most of it together.
Dawson stated the property issue is critical.
Brenner stated all they are dealing with are property rights. She saw no
emphasis on environment. Her biggest concern is health and safety.
Dawson stated they are talking about working with the state and federal
agencies. When they come in and affect local resources, they are talking about the
environment.
Brenner stated the environment they talked about was the environment in
which they live. She didn’t like it the way it is.
Dawson stated she would put it in Natural Resources Committee in two
weeks.
Brenner suggested beginning Natural Resources Committee at 10:00 a.m.
McShane stated he needed the time as it is.
Public Works Committee, 6/13/2000, Page 10
Public Works Committee, 6/13/2000, Page 11
1
ADJOURN 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
The meeting adjourned at 2:57 p.m.
______________________________
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
ATTEST: WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
______________________________ ___________________________
Dana Brown-Davis, Council Clerk Barbara Brenner, Committee Chair