HomeMy WebLinkAboutPublic Works February 24 2004DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Public Works and Safety Committee, 2/24/2004, Page 1
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL 1
Public Works and Safety Committee 2
3
February 24, 2004 4
5
Committee Chair Barbara Brenner called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. in 6
the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington. 7
8
Present: Absent: 9
L. Ward Nelson None 10
Sam Crawford 11
12
Also Present: 13
None 14
15
16
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL – 17
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 18
19
1. ORDINANCE ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE WHATCOM COUNTY 20
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING ORDINANCE RELATING TO 21
ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES (AB2003-075B) 22
23
24
Brenner moved to amend the second bullet point in policy 2XX-8(a), 25
“…except agriculture, commercial forestry and industrial zones.” Houses are on 26
agriculture and rural forestry lands. This still allows solid waste handling facilities 27
in those zones, but keeps the 1,500-foot buffer for those zones also. 28
29
Matt Aamot, Senior Planner, stated he has a map showing the existing 30
buffers. 31
32
Brenner stated her amendment wouldn’t change the map a whole lot. Aamot 33
agreed. 34
35
Motion carried 2-0 with Crawford absent. 36
37
Brenner moved to delete language from policy 2XX-8, “Solid waste 38
handling facilities in Whatcom County currently include two transfer stations, a bio-39
medical waste operation, a construction & demolition debris landfill…” and 40
“…outside of Whatcom County from these sites. The bio-medical waste operation is 41
collocated at one of the transfer stations sites. The construction & demolition 42
debris landfill….” 43
44
Motion carried 2-0 with Crawford absent. 45
46
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Public Works and Safety Committee, 2/24/2004, Page 2
Brenner moved to amend the second bullet point in policy 2XX-8(b), 1
“…except agriculture, commercial forestry and industrial zones.” 2
3
Motion carried 2-0 with Crawford absent. 4
5
Brenner asked about policy 2XX-9 about personal wireless communication. 6
Aamot stated they aren’t required by the State as essential public facilities. The 7
committee recommended that they be included. Collocation is addressed in 8
Whatcom County Code 10.13. The Council adopted rules for siting these things 9
already. The highest priority for siting is collocation. 10
11
Brenner referenced policy 2XX-10, and asked if they should treat water 12
treatment and sewer treatment plants individually. Water treatment plants may 13
offend fewer people. Aamot stated water treatment plants are addressed in policy 14
2XX-11. There aren’t as many policies for that reason. They tried to formulate 15
different policies for each. The policies are different for sewage and water 16
treatment plants. They both require a conditional use permit. 17
18
Brenner referenced policy 2XX-14(a), the first and second bullet points. 19
With public and private schools, location should be the same as correction facilities. 20
They don’t allow correction facilities within one mile of private and public schools. 21
This requirement will be for level III sex offenders. There will be a lot more kids in 22
public and private schools. 23
24
Nelson asked if there are certain things they can impose upon sex offenders 25
returning to the community. 26
27
Brenner stated it’s about the facility, not the offenders. 28
29
Wendy Jones, Chief of Corrections, stated the folks in these transitional 30
facilities are a small subgroup of the most high-risk sex offenders. The community 31
is routinely notified of their location. Because this is a special facility, there will be 32
a maximum of three folks living in this heavily regulated and supervised location. 33
34
Aamot stated the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) talks about local 35
governments having regulations. The County can’t have more restrictive 36
regulations than the State for these facilities. 37
38
Brenner moved to amend page 32, item D, Correction Facility 39
Recommendations, WCC 20.20.151, to prohibit correctional facilities in urban 40
residential zoning by deleting WCC 20.20.184. They don’t allow correctional 41
facilities in the urban zone now, and there’s no reason to do it in the future. If they 42
need to establish a correction facility, the County can do a rezone. 43
44
Crawford stated he is against the motion. It’s a conditional use that will go 45
through the hearing process. The process will allow that community to voice its 46
opinion and the Hearing Examiner to place restrictions on the facility. 47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Public Works and Safety Committee, 2/24/2004, Page 3
1
Nelson stated they have to take into consideration that if they are going to 2
honestly educate, treat, and get people back into the work force, then treat them 3
as human beings. If they’re going to be serious about reducing recidivism, then 4
treat people as equals in society. 5
6
Brenner amended her motion to delete subsection .184 in the urban 7
residential, urban residential medium density, and urban residential mixed use 8
zones. 9
10
Motion failed 1-2 with Brenner in favor. 11
12
Crawford moved to amend subsection .151 of urban residential, urban 13
residential medium, and urban residential mixed use zones, “…, excluding 14
correction facilities other than those listed in section .184 below. These uses 15
shall….” He doesn’t want to tell someone in one paragraph that they are excluding 16
all correctional facilities, which subsection .151 infers, and then in the next 17
paragraph say that certain correction facilities are allowed. 18
19
Motion carried unanimously. 20
21
Brenner moved to amend the residential rural and rural zones to delete 22
subsection .184 in those zones. Facilities listed in section .184 should be 23
prohibited, not conditional. They are far away. They want those facilities close in 24
to town. 25
26
Crawford asked how much acreage that would remove. Aamot stated that 27
out of 474,476 acres in the western part of the county, 4,777 acres are in the RR1 28
zone, 3,223 acres in the RR2 zone, 1,372 acres in the RR3 zone, 85,591 in the R5A 29
zone, 27,572 in the R10A zone, and 3,112 acres in the R2A zone. 30
31
Brenner stated rural residential zoning is a small percentage of the total 32
acreage, and doesn’t lend itself to having a major industry, which this is what it will 33
be. 34
35
Motion carried 2-1 with Crawford opposed. 36
37
Brenner moved to amend the residential rural and rural zones, “.151 …and 38
other similar noncommercial uses, excluding correction facilities.” 39
40
Crawford stated that if they are going to do that, he would like staff to study 41
the amendment and come back with any reasons why they don’t have subsection 42
.151 in those zones. Aamot stated subsection .151 exists in the residential rural 43
zone. He can put similar language in each of those zones. 44
45
Motion carried unanimously. 46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Public Works and Safety Committee, 2/24/2004, Page 4
Crawford stated the zoning code is written in terms of what someone can do, 1
not can’t do. He would like to have a code that says someone can do anything 2
except whatever is listed. However, that’s not how this code is written. 3
4
Brenner moved to amend page 38, the rural forestry zone, to delete WCC 5
20.42.187 in its entirety. They have houses in rural forestry zones. The use 6
should be in zones that don’t have housing. Type II and III handling facilities are 7
not allowed in agricultural zones, where there is housing. Allow type II, but not 8
type III facilities, which have the major stuff. It can be allowed in commercial 9
forestry. Aamot stated type III facilities are allowed in the zone currently. The 10
committee looked at the uses that are allowed under the existing zoning as a 11
rationale to change that zoning. The committee didn’t find any rationale. 12
13
Crawford asked if Councilmember Brenner also wants to eliminate it in 14
commercial forestry zones. 15
16
Brenner stated she does not. There’s no housing in commercial forestry. 17
18
Motion carried unanimously. 19
20
Brenner moved to amend pages 66 through 68, the Secure Community 21
Transition Facility Recommendations, to add subsection “.210 Secure community 22
transition facilities for sex offenders” and delete subsection .194, which will prohibit 23
these facilities, in the rural and rural residential zones. They should be in industrial 24
or commercial zones, not in anyone’s residential neighborhood. The location of one 25
of these facilities will also impact someone’s residential value. Aamot stated this is 26
a portion of the sex offender community that is civilly committed after they are 27
released from a correctional facility. 28
29
Crawford asked if they need to allow this use in residential zones. 30
31
(Clerk’s Note: End of tape one, side A.) 32
33
Jones stated the members of the community were assured that this use was 34
probably safer than just about any other offender because the other offenders don’t 35
have someone with them 24 hours per day. The rationale for putting a conditional 36
use for rural and rural residential zones was because those zones have smaller 37
densities with more space around, but the offenders would still be in an area where 38
other humans are around. This amendment will be a little more difficult for the 39
offenders and their caretakers, but it’s not a big problem. 40
41
Brenner stated that in a commercial or industrial zone, the offenders will be 42
close to services, but not too close to residents. 43
44
Jones stated there is no potential for the State to place a facility here for at 45
least six or seven years. This amendment is not a huge issue. Commercial zones 46
will have more access to transportation than in remote rural areas. 47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Public Works and Safety Committee, 2/24/2004, Page 5
1
Motion carried unanimously. 2
3
Aamot submitted a handout (on file) of a memo from him to the County 4
Council dated February 10, 2004 regarding opiate substitution treatment. He read 5
through the memo, including the rationale for each amendment suggestion. Take a 6
look at the chart on Exhibit page 89. Be consistent. Crisis facilities are those 7
facilities with the most impact. Next is the outpatient facilities, and last is the 8
residential facilities. He doesn’t recommend that outpatient facilities be allowed in 9
residential zones, for example. 10
11
Brenner asked why they don’t allow substance abuse and mental health 12
facilities larger than residential uses or facilities similar to residential use in the 13
light impact industrial zones with a conditional use permit. Aamot stated these are 14
residential facilities. Columns two, three, and four deal with residential settings. 15
The committee felt it was important to allow siting in residential areas. The 16
committee also wanted to preserve industrial lands for industrial uses. If they 17
dump every type of land use in industrial lands, they use the land for what it isn’t 18
intended. He recommends that the outpatient substance abuse facilities be a 19
conditional use for general commercial, small town commercial, Point Roberts, light 20
impact industrial, and rural zones. It’s probably not appropriate they be in 21
residential facilities, but crisis facilities are in residential areas. 22
23
Brenner agreed that they shouldn’t be in residential zones. 24
25
Crawford moved to amend WCC 20.97.232, mental health facilities and 26
WCC 20.97.433, substance abuse facilities as suggested in Amendment #1 of Mr. 27
Aamot’s memo dated February 10, 2004 to the County Council. 28
29
Motion carried unanimously. 30
31
Brenner moved to amend Appendix C, the outpatient substance abuse and 32
opiate substitution treatment facilities column, as suggested in Amendment #2 of 33
Mr. Aamot’s memo dated February 10, 2004 to the County Council. 34
35
Motion carried unanimously. 36
37
Brenner moved to amend Policy 2XX-13 as suggested in Amendment #3 of 38
Mr. Aamot’s memo dated February 10, 2004 to the County Council. 39
40
Crawford moved to amend the motion to amend Policy 2XX-13(a) to 41
remove the bullet item “Churches, synagogues, temples, or mosques.” 42
43
Motion to amend the amendment carried unanimously. 44
45
Crawford stated he is aware that they have to consider these religious places 46
as things that involve kids. He is aware it would have to be a consideration for 47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Public Works and Safety Committee, 2/24/2004, Page 6
location. These facilities are all conditional uses. If the church is nearby, it can 1
state its case in front of the Hearing Examiner if it doesn’t want these services 2
around the church and its kids. 3
4
Motion to amend Policy 2XX-13 as amended carried unanimously. 5
6
Aamot stated that in some of the zones, such as the residential zones, where 7
outpatient facilities are not allowed, there is a generic category for social and health 8
rehabilitation centers. In urban residential zones, there’s a preexisting zoning 9
category that allows social and health rehabilitation centers as a conditional use. 10
Include in those zones a specific prohibition of “outpatient treatment facilities, 11
including opiate substitution treatment facilities.” 12
13
Brenner moved to amend all residential zones that allow social and health 14
rehabilitation centers, specifically exclude “outpatient treatment facilities, including 15
opiate substitution treatment facilities.” 16
17
Motion carried unanimously. 18
19
Aamot stated crisis centers, in the first column on appendix C, have more of 20
an impact. For the sake of consistency, consider that they’re being allowed in 21
these areas even though they have more impact. 22
23
Brenner moved to prohibit substance and abuse mental health crisis 24
facilities from urban residential, urban residential medium density, and urban 25
residential mixed zones. 26
27
Motion carried unanimously. 28
29
Aamot asked to schedule a public hearing before the full Council on March 9. 30
31
32
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL 33
34
1. DISCUSSION REGARDING WHATCOM COUNTY SOLID WASTE 35
ADVISORY COMMITTEE’S REQUEST FOR DIRECTION REGARDING THE 36
DRAFTING OF PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE MANDATORY 37
COLLECTION ORDINANCE (AB2004-085) 38
39
Jeff Monsen, Public Works Director, stated there is a question of whether to 40
repeal section five in the interlocal agreement on Council packet page 243. A 41
repeal of the code would be contrary to the interlocal agreements. 42
43
Brenner stated WCC 8.10.040(A) alludes to the County allowing some people 44
to opt out of the collection service. WCC 8.10.050(A) also implies a voluntary 45
aspect to the collection service. In WCC 8.11, either eliminate the sentence with 46
the word ‘mandatory’ in it or changed the word ‘mandatory’ to ‘voluntary.’ 47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Public Works and Safety Committee, 2/24/2004, Page 7
1
Brenner moved to eliminate second sentence in WCC 8.11.010(C). That 2
sentence is absolutely not true. They’ve had this regulation for 13 years. Curbside 3
and other source separation must be feasible if it’s still working, and it’s not 4
mandatory now. Monsen stated at the time this ordinance was adopted, the 5
pressure was to push garbage haulers into rural areas. Making it mandatory was 6
necessary to make the businesses willing to go to the rural areas. There was a 7
business incentive to go there. The businesses are comfortable with their 8
operations right now, compared to needing more subscribers. 9
10
The committee concurred. 11
12
Brenner stated the point is that it’s feasible just the way it is. This sentence 13
doesn’t work anymore and doesn’t need to be there. 14
15
Crawford stated that’s fine. It doesn’t have anything to do with the first 16
sentence anyway. 17
18
Dan Gibson, Senior Civil Deputy Prosecutor, asked the anticipated funding 19
mechanism for solid waste activities, if any. 20
21
Brenner stated the funding is just like it is now. 22
23
Gibson stated the State excise tax is on the privilege of living in the district. 24
Practically speaking, the excise tax is levied on those who have garbage collection. 25
They have some argument that the way they’re doing it presently is legitimate 26
because there is abstract language between mandatory collection and payment of 27
the excise tax. If they have a purely voluntary system, they shed any pretense 28
that there is a generally applicable excise tax. The excise tax, as authorized by 29
State law, is not the privilege of participating, but of living in the district. 30
31
Monsen stated that if they eliminate the district, they eliminate the excise 32
tax. 33
34
Nelson asked why they don’t collect the excise tax at drop-off. Monsen 35
referenced section D of the interlocal agreement on Council packet page 239. The 36
cities agreed to allow the collection of the excise tax. If the County doesn’t collect 37
the excise tax, a surcharge is okay. The surcharge was eliminated because of 38
federal arbitration with RDS. At that time, the County determined that trying to 39
impose an excise tax collection at drop-off may have the same vulnerability as the 40
surcharge. The alternative to an excise tax is to reopen whether they can collect 41
an excise tax at the disposal site. Legally it has not been tested. RDS refuses to 42
collect an excise tax for the County. 43
44
Gibson stated the excise tax also covers generating commercial garbage. 45
46
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Public Works and Safety Committee, 2/24/2004, Page 8
Brenner asked if they can put the excise tax on the property tax instead of 1
collection. Gibson stated they cannot. 2
3
Brenner asked if it should be a fee instead of a tax. Gibson stated it is not a 4
real property tax. It is a tax on the privilege of living in the district, which leads to 5
administrative challenges that haven’t been ironed out in State law. 6
7
Brenner asked how this can work. She asked if they can have the 8
mandatory service with exemptions, but base the exemption on the property 9
instead of the resident. 10
11
Gibson stated one option is to impose the excise tax on every resident of the 12
county for the privilege of living there. The residents would either choose to or not 13
to participate in collection. 14
15
Crawford asked the cost of the excise tax. Monsen stated the excise tax is a 16
percentage of the bill, but there is a formula each hauler goes through to make it 17
equivalent to $8.50 per ton. 18
19
Gibson stated it works out to about $1 per month. 20
21
Crawford asked if they could leave the system the way it is, and then not try 22
to follow the exemptions. He asked the problem that currently exists, or if there is 23
just a perception by the Solid Waste Advisory Committee that they don’t know 24
where the exempted trash is going. Monsen stated he doesn’t recommend repeal 25
or enforcement. 26
27
Crawford stated they should respond to the Solid Waste Advisory Committee 28
in some way. 29
30
Brenner stated the committee will suggest to the full Council that the 31
committee has explored the options, and it is more complicated and difficult to 32
either throw out the mandatory collection requirement or try to enforce collection. 33
34
Crawford asked if the County is liable for an environmental hazard if it 35
doesn’t enforce the exemptions. Monsen stated the County code says the County 36
‘may’ enforce. 37
38
Gibson stated there isn’t a liability. 39
40
Brenner stated they should recommend leaving things the way they are. 41
There’s no way the Prosecutor’s Office can enforce it. The other options are too 42
complicated and costly. Gibson stated they must think about the practical 43
ramification of enforcement. 44
45
Crawford stated the Council should draft a letter to the Solid Waste Advisory 46
Committee, which he will do in the next two weeks. 47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Public Works and Safety Committee, 2/24/2004, Page 9
1
Brenner stated this will be held in committee for two weeks to discuss the 2
letter. 3
4
5
OTHER BUSINESS 6
7
There was no other business. 8
9
10
ADJOURN 11
12
The meeting adjourned at 3:00 p.m. 13
14
15
______________________________ 16
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription 17
18
19
ATTEST: WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL 20
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON 21
22
23
24
______________________________ ___________________________ 25
Dana Brown-Davis, Council Clerk Barbara Brenner, Committee Chair 26