HomeMy WebLinkAboutPacket Special Council Jun 4 2025cop
CLERK OF THE COUNCIL°oM
Cathy Halka, AICP, CIVIC
3ZP 'yam
COUNTY COURTHOUSE
311 Grand Avenue, Suite #105
Bellingham, WA 98225-4038
ty �
a`SiiINC��o
(360) 778-5010
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
SPECIAL MEETING NOTICE
COUNCILMEMBERS
Barry Buchanan
Tyler Byrd
Todd Donovan
Ben Elenbaas
Kaylee Galloway
Jon Scanlon
Mark Stremler
Notice is hereby given that a quorum of the Whatcom County Council will attend
and participate in a Special Meeting on Wednesday, June 4, 2025 at 3:00 p.m.,
for the Annual Lake Whatcom Joint Councils and Commissioners Meeting.
This is a continuation of the April 2, 2025 meeting to allow time for questions.
Local leaders from the Bellingham City Council, Whatcom County Council, and the
Lake Whatcom Water and Sewer District Board of Commissioners will gather to
discuss progress made and future actions to protect and preserve Lake Whatcom.
This is a hybrid meeting with both in -person and remote attendance. Members of
the public can attend in -person at the Bellingham Pacific Street Operations
Center, 2221 Pacific Street, Bellingham, WA, 98225 (entrance off Carolina
Street), or remotely through Zoom.
For more information, please see the attached detailed agenda, including remote
participation join link.
For more information, please contact the County Council Office at 360.778.5010.
Notice Distribution Date: May 12, 2025
Whatcom County
Council (Special)
COUNTY COURTHOUSE
311 Grand Avenue, Ste #105
Bellingham, WA 98225-4038
(360) 778-5010
Meeting Agenda
Wednesday, June 4, 2025
3PM
Hybrid Meeting - Bellingham Pacific Street Operations Center, 2221
Pacific Street, Bellingham, WA (entrance off Carolina Street)
ANNUAL LAKE WHATCOM JOINT COUNCILS AND COMMISSION MEETING
(CONTINUED FROM APRIL 2, 2025)
COUNCILMEMBERS
Barry Buchanan
Tyler Byrd
Todd Donovan
Ben Elenbaas
Kaylee Galloway
Jon Scanlon
Mark Stremler
CLERK OF THE COUNCIL
Cathy Halka, AICP, CMC
Council (Special) Meeting Agenda June 4, 2025
See Attached Agenda
Whatcom County Page 2 Printed on 812612025
I
Lake Whatcom Cooperative Management Program
Annual Joint Councils and Commissioners Meeting
Wednesday, June 4, 2025
Meeting begins: 3:00 PM
This meeting will be a hybrid meeting, both in -person and via Zoom. Meeting location
is Pacific Street Operations Center, at 2221 Pacific Street, Bellingham, WA (entrance
off Carolina Street). Members of the public can access the meeting at
https:,//cob.org./lwicc, by phone at +1 (253) 215-8782, or attend in person.
Meeting ID: 882 7038 2335; Password: 8
Meeting Chair: Todd Citron, Lake Whatcom Water & Sewer District
Agenda Topic
1. Meeting Convened
Start Minutes
Time
3:00 0
2. Lake Whatcom Management Plan Discussion
3:00
60
3. Land Use Regulations County / City Presentation
4:00
20
4. Land Use Regulations Discussion
5. Adiourn
4:20
40
5:00
0
Lake Whatcom Joint Councils and Commissioners Meeting
RE: Questions from Council and response from staff ahead of June 4 JCC meeting.
Question 1: Report says that "Efforts to date have resulted in an annual reduction of over 200
pounds of phosphorus entering Lake Whatcom annually." But the Progress Toward TMDL
Progress shared by City staff on 1 /27/2025 shows that the City has nearly met its target of
reducing 368-507 lbs. of P/year. Why the difference?
Response: The 368 IbP/yr target is the amount calculated by the initial 2003 water year
modeling and published in the TMDL. Using those numbers shows the City removing
361 lbs. P per year. But the annual report uses the 2024 reassessment estimates which
incorporates 18 years of data. The original target (368 IbsP/yr) was a percentage
reduction that is now expected to be something in the range of 130-150 IbsP/yr for the
City but cannot be ascertained for certain until the Reassessment is approved and
published. The City estimates it would remove 145 IbsP/yr, (instead of 361) which meets
or exceeds that target. While the target and reduction numbers change, they don't
change relative to each other. The City is removing less P only because the data shows
there is less P to remove. That is the reason we use charts at the JCC to show
reductions in "Effective Developed Acres" which are not equivalent one-to-one with
pounds. In reality, one "Effective Developed Acre" is about 0.4-0.6 lbs. P but that
number varies widely in different portions of the watershed and the location where the
measurement is taken.
Question 2: Report says that over 100,000 square feet was improved through HIP and
Neighborhood Native Landscaping Program in 2024. How much for each program?
Response: In the City, the area improved by HIP projects was roughly 50,800 square
feet in 2024. In the County, 34,200 square feet were improved by the HIP program and
20,090 square feet were improved by the NNL program, for a total of 54,290 square feet
in 2024.
Question 3: On page 8, the report says that to date, these programs have worked with 96
property owners and converted over 335,000 square feet of existing lawns and landscaping into
native plant gardens and runoff filtering infrastructure that protects water quality. Again, how
does that break down for the 2 jurisdictions?
1
Response: The numbers are only for HIP/NNLP within the last five-year work plan. To
date, City HIP has worked with 180 property owners on 200+ projects (some people did
HIP in once and then again many years later, it's been around since 2011) and has
documented treatment and/or lawn removal for over 1,080,000 square feet. For the
reporting period (2020-2024), the County worked with 56 property owners and enhanced
approximately 195,000 square feet. In that same time period, the City completed 40 HIP
projects and improved approximately 140,000 square feet (with 20 projects/80,000 sf
partially complete at the end of 2024).
Question 4: The Reporting Metrics table shows a total of 7.92 lbs. of P/year reduced thru HIP
since the beginning. Why doesn't the County have data for NNLP? Can't they use the same
methodology?
Response: NNLP addresses enhancement of areas that have some existing native
vegetation, and also the conversion of lawns to native landscaping. Calculating
phosphorus reductions when enhancing areas that already have some native vegetation
is difficult, but it is accepted that the enhancement will provide additional phosphorus
reductions. When converting lawns to native landscaping, that is a more easily tracked
calculation. As NNLP continues to develop, staff will look at refining methods for
calculating and tracking phosphorus reductions for the program. Until then, square
footage is reported to indicate the amount of private property enhancement we know
helps protect water quality. The City has other stormwater best management practices,
such as rock trenches, rain gardens, and treatment systems in HIP, which provide
directly calculable phosphorus reductions making this calculation easier in the City's
program.
Question 5: Why are there negative values for HIP phosphorus reduction in 2022 and 2024?
Response: In 2022 we revised our mapping and the phosphorus numbers were
decreased as a result of new data showing a bit less P coming from residential sites
than originally calculated in 2010. In 2024, a number of large HIP projects were re-
developed by homeowners who rebuilt homes on previous HIP lots, created
subdivisions, or redeveloped the land under new owners. This meant that the
phosphorus reductions were calculated as "Land Use" reductions through the application
of code required improvements so we had to remove them from the HIP calculations as
to not double count. They are still reductions, we just don't get to count it in HIP. Also,
new data from the preliminary Reassessment study was incorporated in 2024 and we
revised the amount of P down just slightly enough to put the program in the negative for
the year.
Question 6: Report says that from 2020-2024, Whatcom County built 3 new stormwater
treatment projects, retrofitted 2 existing stormwater treatment facilities, and completed 1 riparian
and stream restoration project. If we look at the total need for stormwater treatment in the
County's portion of the watershed, how many more projects are going to be required, and what
is the timeline for getting these facilities online?
2
Response: Whatcom County's capital program focuses on potential future stormwater
treatment projects on approximately 3,200 acres of the 31,000 acres of the Lake
Whatcom watershed that are within the County's jurisdiction. The 3,200 acres represents
the urbanized areas where treatment facilities are most appropriately placed. The
remaining almost 28,000 acres are either rural lands or managed forests where
stormwater treatment facilities are typically not utilized. For the urbanized areas, the
County annually updates a Six -Year Water Resources Improvement Plan (WRIP) that
stages out projects for the upcoming six years with stormwater treatment projects with
the appropriate funding requests. Typically, one capital project goes online per year. If a
new one is not built during a certain year, then the focus is on smaller neighborhood
improvements and/or improvements to existing stormwater facilities. The number of
stormwater treatment projects for the entire watershed is difficult to determine when only
some can be placed in urban areas, whereas other tools must be developed to address
runoff from rural and forested areas. Both the City and County provide their Six -Year
Capital Plans to Ecology on an annual basis.
Question 7: Report says that the County inspected and maintained 246 of the 904 catch basins
in their jurisdiction of the Lake Whatcom watershed. Was that just 2024? How many of these
were inspected and maintained over the last 5 years?
Response: The 246 inspections were just for 2024. Whatcom County owns and
maintains 904 catch basins in the Lake Whatcom watershed. Per the Western
Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit, the County is required to inspect and
maintain 764 of the 904 every other year. (704 being the number located in the more
urbanized areas and subject to the Phase II Permit requirements.) However, in 2015,
Whatcom County and the Department of Ecology mutually agreed that the County will
inspect and maintain the 764 catch basins and an additional 140 catch basin in the rural
portions of the watershed to an even higher standard of once every 18 months instead of
every 24 months. The number of inspections and maintenances will fluctuate every year
due to the varying inspection schedule, but all 904 get inspected and maintained every
18 months.
Question 8: Report says that from 2020-2024, Whatcom County issued 711 permits in the Lake
Whatcom watershed, including permits for new homes, additions, and miscellaneous projects,
with low -phosphorus development regulations applied. During the same period, the City issued
14 building permits for new structures and/or redevelopment in the watershed.
Response: Need additional clarify on question being asked
Question 9: On the Reporting Metrics table, it shows 280 new properties with completed
residential stormwater projects since 2011. Does that mean that the 711 from above was
primarily for additions and misc. projects? How do the land use rules apply to those smaller
projects? At what point does a small project become big enough to require compliance with new
regulations?
3
Response: An overview of land use regulations will be presented at the June 4th JCC
meeting.
Question 10: For lbs. of P reduced thru treatment and flow control capital projects, how much is
City and how much is County?
Response: The City reduction for capital projects is estimated to be 109 lbs. This does
not include the Academy facility (estimated 20lbs/yr removed) which is being monitored
and its performance confirmed. The County's current reduction through capital projects
is estimated to be 54 IbsP/year. This does not include the last project upgrade of the
Geneva Pilot Project that is being monitored to calculate overall reductions. Both
numbers are expected to increase when that monitoring data is included.
Question 11: For lbs. of P reduced thru operations and maintenance activities, why is the total
value not established by adding the amount reduced per year? Also, how much for each
jurisdiction?
Response: The reduction is an amount of P per year, and is not cumulative. The same
activities are repeated annually and the same amount of P is removed each year. The
City estimates it removes 8 lbs. of P per year through O+M activities, with more annual
reductions expected through the Enhanced Maintenance Plan under development in the
Phosphorus and Bacteria Optimized Operations and Maintenance (PBOOM) project.
The County estimates remove approximately 32 lbs. of P per year.
Question 12: Properties with completed residential stormwater projects, how much for each
jurisdiction?
Response: How much or how many? The City calculates 9 IbsP (34 lbs. per original
TMDL) are removed annually by the total number of residential retrofits completed since
2011. There have been 180 HIP projects and 63 new/redevelopment projects that
contribute to that estimate. The County completed 54 HIP projects from 2017-2024. This
estimates about 1.33 lbs P per year. Removal estimates for NNLP and SFR permits are
not calculated at this time.
Question 13: From homeowner surveys, it appears that the proportion of homeowners who are
aware of phosphorus -neutral development rules is going in the wrong direction. What is the plan
to fix that problem?
Response: Addressing this is reflected in our 2025-2029 Work Plan. Objective 3.1.4
commits us to 'Provide outreach to watershed residents to increase understanding of
and compliance with land use and stormwater regulations,' which includes phosphorus -
neutral development requirements.
Our current efforts to promote phosphorus regulations, including those related to
development, include:
Distributing the 'Stewards of the Lake: A Guide to Living in the Watershed' to new
homeowners annually which contains information about development
regulations.
• Maintaining information on phosphorus neutral development regulations on the
Lake Whatcom Management Program (LWMP) website.
• Featuring information on phosphorus regulations in the Lake Whatcom Lowdown
newsletter.
Building on our existing communication channels, we will develop an outreach plan to
increase homeowner understanding of these vital regulations. This plan will identify and
pursue additional focused efforts to bridge this knowledge gap
Question 14: Why are only City staff trained in spill prevention and response? Does the County
plan to develop a similar program? If not, why not?
Response: County staff across all departments are trained in spill response, specifically
those who are in the field. Each department coordinates their own training, and the
frequency of staff trainings vary by department and are tracked differently and
separately. Since County forces respond to incidents throughout the entire County and
not just Lake Whatcom, the number of staff that are trained and may respond to LWMP
incidents will fluctuate. For the purposes of answering the question of responses to spills
and incidents in the Lake Whatcom watershed, there are upwards of 50+ staff in
Maintenance & Operations, Stormwater, Natural Resources, Sheriff, and Planning staff
who respond depending on the type and level of severity of the incidents. Whatcom
County also has contractors on call for large-scale clean up events if necessary. Staff
will be looking at having a more consistent tracking method for spill response trainings.
Question 15: What can we be doing better, and what do you need from us in order to address
these items?
Response: Each organization's support of implementation of the 2025-29 Work Plan
through allocating sufficient resources is critical to our combined success.
Question 16: Are we bringing codes up to the most rigorous standard between the two
jurisdictions? What are the areas of discrepancy and the reasons for it?
Response: A presentation on June 4th at the JCC will cover land use regulations and
policy.
Question 17: When is the new out of season/ after hours gate at Bloedel installed and how is it
being assessed for improvement?
Response: Construction is set to begin 6/9 and go for 3-4 weeks. The gate will not be
used for it's intended purpose until after the AIS season concludes in mid October. Staff
will monitor and report out on gate use throughout the off-season.
Question 18: Do we have a program to inspect vessels entering the lake from private property?
Response: Yes, the on -site inspections administered by the AIS program dispatches
staff to residents around the lake to ensure proper permitting and compliance. Residents
call the inspection hotline to schedule appointments. The AIS program makes further
efforts to ensure permit compliance through a contract with Whatcom County Sherriffs
office to increase patrols and check for AIS permit compliance along the shoreline and
around boat launches.
Question 19: With 135 acres managed for invasive species, are there particular known target
areas needing to be addressed, how many acres, and what is the timeline for both the City and
County?
Response: Yes, there are known target areas that need to be addressed for invasive
plant control. This includes areas we are actively restoring with native plants, and areas
we know to contain certain populations of Whatcom County listed noxious weeds. We
prioritize invasive plant control at active restoration areas as invasive plants can easily
outcompete newly installed native plants. A majority of the 135 acres of invasive plants
we are actively managing falls under this category. We also control populations of
invasive plants scattered around the Lake Whatcom Watershed that are listed as
noxious weeds in Whatcom County. Noxious weeds are categorized by classifications
depending on the seriousness of the threat they pose to the environment. These
classifications have legal obligations of control which we abide by.
Question 20: With only 12 wildfire risk assessments completed, how many more properties that
interface with wildlands still need to be assessed? What are the needs to meet these needs?
Response: The amount of Home Ignition Zone inspections mostly reflects the amount of
willing participants. We can expand the contract maximum, but the limiting factor is
participation from adjacent landowners. Outreach has been carried out through the
contract with Whatcom Conservation District.
Question 21: Being dependent on DNR for a large wildfire, what are our training opportunities
for both the City and County to cross train for fire response? Are we pursing these
opportunities?
Response: We are looking at different consultants currently to help with improvement of
rapid response in the event of a fire in the Lake Whatcom watershed. The scope will
likely be investigation of incident command and the infrastructure to support fire
suppression in the Lake Whatcom watershed, and what opportunities there may be to
make improvements as a a first step. WCPR: We have reached out to Whatcom County
Emergency Management Division to ensure participation of Parks in the development of
the County's Community Wildfire Protection Plan. This would be an appropriate venue to
discuss cross training opportunities.
Question 22: Do we have a plan in place (DNR agreement) to protect our drinking water from
aerial application of fire retardant? Do we have a restoration plan, slope runoff prevention in
place should we have a large wildfire in the watershed?
Response: I (Mike Parelskin) spoke with DNR NW Region. They recognize the Lake
Whatcom watershed as a non -retardant area. DNR has a map they reference for where
flame retardant chemicals are allowed, Lake Whatcom watershed is mapped as a non -
retardant area as it triggers a "sensitive watershed" designation for their internal
purposes. DNR stated they only use water, and they dip from Squalicum Lake before
they use Lake Whatcom.
Question 23: Permits outline development regulations (page 9), do we go back to make sure
the installations for low phosphorus conditions are still in place, maintained, and not damaged?
If not, what would it take to have a monitoring system?
Response: The City of Bellingham and Whatcom County have included inspections
and/or technical assistance to owners of private stormwater facilities and document
performance toward water quality improvements for properly maintained systems (task
2.2.4) in the 2025-2029 Lake Whatcom 5-Year Work Plan. Both jurisdictions are also
planning to provide resources and staff support to educate owners of private stormwater
facilities about system needs and maintenance (task 2.2.5). Progress reports during the
2025-2029 Work Plan period will include: the pounds of phosphorus reduced per year
through voluntary residential improvements, the number of properties with completed
residential stormwater projects per year, the number of square feet of private property
improved through voluntary residential projects per year, and the number of private
stormwater facility inspections completed per year. These can be reported for each
jurisdiction. Also, specific to the City, the City monitors newly established Native
Vegetation Protection Areas (NVPA) for five years to ensure success, as required by
City code. Regarding monitoring the performance of privately owned and operated
stormwater water quality systems, there is no plan to monitor the performance of these
systems. Just like the standards for other stormwater water quality treatment systems
evaluated and approved by the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) for
use (development regulations require the use of Ecology approved systems), if a
stormwater water quality treatment system is selected, designed, constructed, and
maintained according to Ecology's approval for use, then the facility should remove the
evaluated/studied amount of phosphorus from stormwater. Permitting ensures that a
stormwater treatment facility is selected and designed according to Ecology standards.
Construction inspections ensure the facility is constructed according to Ecology
standards. Planned periodic inspections verify facilities are being maintained according
to Ecology standards.
7
Question 24: What is the plan for chapter 9 of the Silver Beach Neighborhood Plan (Lake
Whatcom) once it is decoupled from the Comp Plan? How will the objectives be followed and
met? Where will the contents live?
Response: During the drafting of the 2025-2029 LWMP, Planning and Public Works
staff reviewed the goals and policies from Chapter 9 of the Silver Beach Neighborhood
Plan to ensure that, conceptually, they were included within the 12 program areas of the
Management Plan. Staff's determination is that they are captured in the draft LWMP.
The City continues to evaluate the future of all the neighborhood plans and how they
relate to their specific topics of interest via the Bellingham Plan effort. Final decisions on
this have not been made.
9
legulati-C
rtcnm Wi
rl
- ; �= ' t •.�
-�
..fir
•- .. . -
_ , ,�
�� '�►�`' �-:�` ,- .. --�.�..�
�;
7 '� •
_
� ..�. _ �.:.��r -. r r r'. �=-
' � .�/rJ ... ....m .'Y�.'.
��+." •i�'��-�r.f. ��: n.. ..r� .i �. i .'
..- .�.�.-..... '..�:L1i�Y.¢%•`
Land Use Regulations in the Lake Whatcom Watershed
• History & Timeline
• Watershed Management,
Development and the
TMDL
• General Comparison of
Codes
• Future Considerations
• Questions and Discussion
Watershed Management Tools for the Built Environment
Management Tools for Public Property
• Capital Projects
• Stormwater Conveyance
• Operations and Maintenance
Management Tools for Private Property
• Land Use Regulations
• Voluntary and Incentive Programs
• Property acquisition
Education and Outreach
• Website information on codes
• Events/campaigns
• Newsletters
• Technical support
JLGA
Gryof �
aellingham � 11
r uGA '
' Y
d take Whatcom Watershed l r
a �
i Watershed Protected Properties
Existing Residential if Vacant -�-�
Non -Residential use
Public
Public - DNR
3
History & Timeline
1992:Joint Resolution adopted to establish common goals for Lake Whatcom watershed Initial actions for
1992: City stormwater capital improvement program began private
1993: Sudden valley Community Association began density reduction program to remove development
1,400 potential dwelling units management by
1998: Lake Whatcom Management Program (L1+ MP) established by Interlocal Agreement Sudden Valley.
1998: Lake Whatcom placed on Washln ton's list of polluted water bodies due to low dissolved
oxygen levels; Tributary creeks listed for high bacteria levels; Total Maximum Daily Load
(TMDL) process began • County designation
1999: County ~Water Resource Protection Overlayaistrict and Stormwate r5pecial District of Lake Whatcom
established needing special
1999: LWMP 1999 Work Plan adopted
protections.
2000: LW MP 2000-2004 Work Plan adopted Dedicated and
2000: City stormwater capital improvem-ent program expands to address phosphorus comprehensive
2000: interjurisdictional Coordinating Team {ICT) created to coordinate activities and regulations for
programs between jurisdictions development in City
2001: City adopted first land use regulations for new development on properties that drain portion of
to Basin 1 (Lake Whatcom Reservoir Regulatory Chapter [BMC 16.801) watershed.
2001: City stormwater utility established; provides funding for Lake Whatcom protection 2001:
City Lake Whatcom Watershed Land Acquisition and Preservation Program began 2001: City
Watershed Advisory Board established County downzone to
2002: County rezone reduced 1,800 potential dwelling units reduce substantial
2004: Lake Whatcom Landscape Plan adopted by State Legislature that provides additional development.
protections for harvesting on Department of Natural Resources lands in the watershed Extensive
public process.
Lake Whatcom Management Program 2025-2029 Work Plan -page 54 & 55
History & Timeline
2-005: LWMP 2005-2009 Work Plan adopted
2-005: City and County passed phosphorus fertilizer ban
2005: City and County banned boats with carbureted 2-stroke engines
2006: County stormwater capital improvement program with focus on phosphorus
treatment began
2008: Lake Whatcom Joint Policy Group formed
2008: City Residential Stormwater Retrofit Program began
2009: City amended the Lake Whatcom Reservoir Regulatory Chapter
2010: LWMP 2010-2014 Work Plan adopted
2011: Homeowner I ncentive Program launched
2012: Aquatic Invasive Species Prevention Program began
2013: County amended Title 20 to create the Lake What-com Watershed Overlay District
to reduce impacts from development and land use activities
2014: Sudden Valley Community Association joined Joint Policy Group
2014: Depa rtment of Natural Resources (DN R) finalized reconveyance of 7,300 acres in the
watershed to Whatcom County Parks
• City initiating tools
for private
property
management.
• City adopting
phosphorus
loading limitations
into code to meet
TMDL reduction
targets.
• County adopting
phosphorus loading
limitations.
• Extensive
stakeholder
involvement
with
Engineering
community.
Lake Whatcom Management Program 2025-2029 Work Plan -page 54 & 55
History & Timeline
2015: LWMP 2015-2019 Work Plan adopted
2016: Lake Whatcom TMDL for phosphorus and fecal coliform approved by Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA)
2016: New phosphorus loading model developed
2017: Homeowner Incentive Program revised and expanded
2019: Update of lake response model initiated
2019: County Lake Whatcom Stormater Utility established to provide funding for Lake
Whatcom protection
2019: City and County National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal
Stormater Perm its issued {TDL response requirements included in the new permit)
2020: LWIVIP 2020-2024Work Plan adopted
2021: City -developed PhosphGrus-Optirnized .Stormwater Treatment (POST) system
formally approved for use by the Department of Ecology's Technical Assessment program
2021: Malcom County Sheriff's Office implem-ents regular boat patrols on Lake Whatcom
and Lake Samish to enforce compliance with AIS permits and regulations
2022: Neighborhood Native Landscaping Program launches in unincorporated Whatcom
County
2022: Park Place Water Quality Facility rebuilt to fneet highest -known phosphorus
reduction performance using POST media system
2023: City of Bellingham Water Resources Advisory BoaLdaUlblished
2024: City and County National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal
Stormwater Permits issued
• New phosphorus
management
guidance for
Sudden Valley.
• Continued
implementation of
adopted land use
regulations with
ongoing
adjustments. (E.g.
development
thresholds, tree
canopy, etc.)
Lake Whatcom Management Program 2025-2029 Work Plan -page 54 & 55
Lake Whatcom Watershed -Acreage
Lake Whatcom Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)
k Legend
} r�` WLA, 6ELLINGHAM
� r WLA., VVH ATC O M
" pWLA, M.ATCOM
. LA, COUNTY
I
t
}r
2016 Lake Whatcom Watershed Total Phosphorus
and Bacteria Total Maximum Daily Loads : Volume 2
GREEN: Zoned commercial
Forestry (not managed
under TMDL).
DARK ORANGE: city of
Bellingham
LIGHT ORANG':
Whatcom County urbanized
areas regulated under
Western Washington Phase II
Municipal Stormwater
Permit (NPDES).
YELLOW: Whatcom
County "rural" areas not
under Permit, but still needs
management options for
phosphorus reductions.
9
2023 Lake Whatcom Watershed Buildout Analysis
Watershed Development and
the TM DL
1L _
CIG14�' • �— '
5
City of�
•Ilingham
t J _
IJGA
Sudden
e. , valley
9
Q Lake Whatcom Watershed
Watershed Protected Properties
Existing Residential
Vacant
Non -Residential Use
Public
Public- UNR
General Comparison of City and County Codes
Land Disturbing Restrictions: When and how much?
Surface Types:
• Hard Surface
• Pervious Pavement
• Partially Pervious Surfaces
Phosphorus Loading Limitations: How much phosphorus can leave a parcel?
Post Construction Requirements: What happens after construction is complete?
Keep in mind...
• Both jurisdictions follow the BMPs and definitions from Ecology's
Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington.
• Whatcom County land use regulations do not apply to parcels developing
for forest practices. (E.g. commercial forestry)
General Comparison of City and County Codes
City: BMC 16.80.120 County: WCC 20.51.410
No land disturbing activities from No land disturbing activities for more
October 1-May 31. than 500 square feet during October
1-May 31.
• If less 500 square feet of land
disturbance occurs during seasonal
closure, the site must still adhere to
erosion and sediment control
measures.
• Disturbance cannot occur
incrementally to equal more than
500 square feet.
Summary:
• Same seasonal clearing restriction dates.
• Different restrictions for exposed soils of less than 500 square feet.
General Comparison of City and Codes
City: BMC 15.42.060
120-300 square feet of new and/or
replaced hard surface:
• 10:1 ratio of onsite mitigation, or
• Phosphorus and flow -limiting
projects
Greater than 300 square feet of new
and/or replaced hard surface surface:
• Engineered Method
0 30% Native Vegetation
Protection Area (NVPA),
o Engineered Stormwater
System, or
• Forested Method: 75% NVPA
Summary:
• Similar hard surface thresholds.
County: WCC 20.51.420
More than 200 square feet of new
and/or replaced hard surface:
• Full dispersion-65% protected
native growth area (PNGA), or
• Full infiltration, or
• Fully engineered stormwater
system
• Both utilize engineered systems and/or vegetated areas approved for
stormwater treatment defined by the Ecology manual.
13
General Comparison of City and County Codes
City: BMC 15.42.060
120-300 square feet of new and/or
replaced pervious surface:
• 10:1 ratio of onsite mitigation, or
• Phosphorus and flow -limiting
projects
Greater than 300 square feet of new
and/or replaced pervious surface:
• Engineered Method
0 30% NVPA
o Engineered Stormwater
System
• Forested Method: 75% NVPA
County: WCC 20.51.420
More than 200 square feet of new
and/or replaced hard surface:
• Full dispersion-65% PNGA, or
• Full infiltration, or
• Fully engineered stormwater system
Summary:
• Similar pervious pavement thresholds.
• Both utilize engineered systems and/or vegetated areas approved for
stormwater treatment defined by the Ecology manual.
General Comparison of City and County Codes
City: BMC 15.42.060 County: WCC 20.51.420
120-300 square feet of new and/or
replaced partially pervious surface:
• 10:1 ratio of onsite mitigation, or
• Phosphorus and flow -limiting
projects
Greater than 300 square feet of new
and/or replaced partially pervious
surface:
• Engineered Method
0 30% NVPA
o Engineered Stormwater System
• Forested Method: 75% NVPA
*Exemption: 500 square foot garden or 5%
Summary:
Land disturbing activities of more than
51000 square feet:
• Full dispersion-PNGA, or
• Full infiltration, or
• Fully engineered stormwater system
* Typically addresses landscaping
projects not associated with new
development.
• Different partially pervious surface thresholds.
• Both utilize engineered systems and/or vegetated areas approved for
stormwater treatment defined by the Ecology manual. 15
General Comparison of City and County Codes
City: BMC 15.42.060
New Development:
• Engineered Method
o 30% NVPA
o Engineered Stormwater System
• 0.15 Ib/ac/yr of phosphorus
• Forested Method: 75% NVPA
Redevelopment: If more than 300
square feet, entire site must be
retrofitted to forest condition.
• Engineered Method
o 30% NVPA
o Engineered Stormwater System
• 0.15 Ib/ac/yr of phosphorus
• Forested Method: 75% NVPA
•ld
County: WCC 20.51.420
New Development and redevelopment:
• Full dispersion-PNGA
• Fully engineered option
• 0.1875 Ib/ac/yr of phosphorus
• For new development, the whole
site must meet phosphorus
calculation.
• For redevelopment, only the newly
added or redeveloped portion of
project has to meet the phosphorus
calculation.
Summary:
• The "forested condition" loading rate of phosphorus is 0.15 Ib/ac/year. The City adopted this
loading rate into code.
• Whatcom County utilizes 25% above "forested condition" loading rate of 0.1875 Ib/ac/yr.
• City requires retrofitting if more than 300 sq ft; County requires only newly added or
redeveloped to meet phosphorus calculation.
16
General Comparison of City and County Codes
City: 16.80 and 15.42.070 County: WCC 20.51.420.(a-c)
• Required Conservation Easement; Required Declaration of Covenant
• 5-years required monitoring for Grant of Easement (DCGE) for all
the NVPA permanent stormwater BMPs.
• Financial surety for success of Requires maintenance of BMPs
plantings. and PNGAs.
• Requires maintenance of
engineered systems and NVPAs.
Follow-up inspections occur resulting Follow-up inspections occur resulting
from staff observations and/or from staff observations and/or
outside inquiries. outside inquiries.
Summary:
• Both require easements that are recorded with the title of the property.
• Both utilize observations and complaint -based enforcement.
Supplemental Plan Pertaining to Sudden Valley
The Lake Whatcom Watershed Overlay
District (WCC 20.51) allows for a
homeowners' association to develop:
"...a stormwater runoff management
and phosphorus mitigation plan that
provides at least the same level of
overall protection from and/or
treatment of phosphorus runoff to
Lake Whatcom..."
Sudden Valley has unique parcel
limitations for a managed community
versus a neighborhood HOA.
Sudden Valley submitted the
phosphorus mitigation plan in April
2016. Whatcom County and the
Sudden Valley Community Association
signed a Memorandum of
.1
- ?*01
Sudden Valley
SUDDEN VALLEY COMMUNITYASSOCIATION
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
AND PHOSPHORUS MITIGATION
PLAN
Preparad for
SADDEN VALLEY COMMIT NITY ASSOCIATION
Bellingham, Washington
Prepared by
®W.Ison
s u Wilson EDgmeeringrLL C. x a
8O5 Dupoirt Suite] Be sham, Washinaon 7`3
ref.I360j]336100 Fa[. 36o]Cd]-90fi1
April 2016
m
Understanding in June 2016.
Future Considerations
• Policy Discussion based on Lake Whatcom Watershed Land Use
Regulations Overview.
• 2025-2029 Work Plan Task 3.1.1: Coordinate with Lake Whatcom
partners when developing or revising development regulations and
create consistent development regulations between jurisdictions
where feasible
• 2025-2029 Work Plan Task 3.1.5: Evaluate how effectively changes to
development regulations preserve and restore land is currently
available for development or other land disturbance and use this
evaluation to inform future revisions to regulations.
• Whatcom County is assessing resources, timing, and process for
gathering data to inform an in-depth code analysis.
4$k
oo. Z- -o
'L
CITY Zoning (Allowed Density) #of Vacant Parcels Potential Units Percentage
RS ( 7200 sf/unit density) 28 39 40% 1
K2�� iuuwsT/urntaensiryj
a
n
�
RS( 12000 sf/unit density)
14
17
17%
RS( 15000 sf/unit density)
1
1
1%
RS ( 20000sf/unit density)
27
27
29%
TOTAL:
84
98
IGC%
UGA Zoning (Allowed Density
#of Vacant Parcels
Potential Units
Percentage
UR (217800sf density)
86
86
100%
TOTAL:
86
86
10O%
SUDDEN VALLEY
RR3 (14520 sf density}
420
449
100%
RR2 (21780 sf density}
1
1
O1a
R5A (217800 sf density)
1
1
O1a
TOTAL:
422
451
100%
RURAL Zoning (Allowed Density) #of Vacant Parcels Potential Units Percentage
RR2 (2175O sf density) 10 10 1%
R5A (217800 sf density)
521
610
93%
RRSA (217800sf density)
RF (871200sf density)
18
70
19
88
3%
12
TOTAL: 627 735
10ma
2023 Lake Whatcom Watershed Buildout Report