RECORD OF PROCEEDING OF CITY COUNCIL

CITY OF BELLINGHAM, WASHINGTON

COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL
Monday, June 15, 2009, 07:00 PM
Book: 63, Page: 1

Called To Order The meeting was called to order by Council President Barry Buchanan, who led the Pledge of Allegiance.

Roll Call
Present:

Jack Weiss, Council Member, First Ward
Gene Knutson, Council Member, Second Ward
Barry Buchanan, Council Member, Third Ward
Stan Snapp, Council Member, Fourth Ward
Terry Bornemann, Council Member, Fifth Ward
Barbara Ryan, Council Member, Sixth Ward
Louise Bjornson, Council Member, At Large

Excused:

ANNOUNCEMENT(S)

· On June 29^th in City Council Chambers there will be a Public Hearing regarding amendments to the land use and development codes related to the Infill Housing Toolkit.

· On June 29^th in City Council Chambers there will be a Public Hearing regarding amendments to the sewer, water and subdivision regulations related to the Infill Housing Toolkit.

· Bellingham City Council meets all requirements of the State of Washington Open Meetings Act.


APPROVAL OF MINUTES

BORNEMANN / SNAPP moved approval of the May 18, 2009 minutes of the regular Council Meeting as submitted. MOTION CARRIED 7-0

BORNEMANN / SNAPP moved approval of the June 1, 2009 minutes of the regular Council Meeting as submitted. MOTION CARRIED 6-0-1, KNUTSON ABSTAINED.


15 - MINUTE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD

Randy Elmore, Bellingham Chapter of Vietnam Veterans America, spoke in opposition to Bellingham being considered as a Sanctuary City.

Gary Lysne spoke in opposition to Bellingham being considered as a Sanctuary City.

George LaPold spoke in opposition to Bellingham being considered as a Sanctuary City.

Michael Chiavario addressed the Council with regard to development and the environment. He believes laws allowing private ownership of large parcels of land for the purpose of financial speculation tends to pit the developers and the conservationists against one another. He proposed that the city democratize the process of development decisions by putting all land into trusts locally administered by elected boards in order to eliminate the damage done by speculation.

Rick Chartrand requested that the council pass a resolution declaring that Bellingham is not a Sanctuary City.

Mike Gleeson Deming, reiterated his request [6/1/09] that the city use E-verify to validate a person's authorization to work in the United States. He requested a response from the city.

Lee Breakey, Chance Road addressed the Dewey Valley annexation [AB 18090] and said the developer did not hold up his end of the bargain after requesting six months to work with the local residents. Additionally, he said that city regulations do not fit rural areas, one of which, is the implementation of Stormwater Fees on every residence in the city. He checked with staff and said that he would be paying $220 bimonthly for stormwater. He has 21 acres of trees, field and grass and feels that his property treats far more stormwater than it produces.

Wendy Harris voiced concern regarding the failure of the city to update its' Shoreline Master Program which governs shoreline development, including development within the Lake Whatcom watershed. As a result, shoreline redevelopment of lakefront property occurs today without sufficiently protective environmental standards. The Shoreline Management Act designates Lake Whatcom and 200' of adjacent property as shorelines of statewide significance, in part, to ensure that the most protective standards are imposed on land use activities that have the greatest impact on the ecological health of a vital natural resource. The city has a Shoreline Master Program enacted in 1989 prior to our current understanding of the relationship between development and water quality; prior to Lake Whatcom being declared an impaired body of water and prior to the TMDL. The State imposed a deadline on the city to update its Shoreline Master Program, on or before December 2005, so the city has been in violation of this state law for several years. The city's outdated Shoreline Master Program makes the city noncompliant with the Shoreline Management Act, the Growth Management Act, the Clean Water Act and the city's current Comprehensive Plan.

Ms. Harris described a dock replacement, which was exempted from a Shoreline Development permit, SEPA review and public notice and comment because it was a “very small scale repair project”. She projected a picture of the project which involved a dredging barge, two pieces of earth moving equipment, a high powered hydraulic drill, power tools and a two to three work person crew. She asked the city council to take immediate steps to develop an updated Shoreline Master Program, which would provide sufficient protection of development standards that are crucial for the successful restoration of Lake Whatcom and for compliance with the TMDL.

Johnny Grames commended the sculptures in the downtown area and would like to see more town meetings on BTV10.

Public Comment suspended until after the Public Hearing.


PUBLIC HEARING(S)

AB18463 1. A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT'S DENIAL OF GOVERNORS POINT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY'S (GPDC) REQUEST THAT THE CITY ENTER INTO A WATER RESALE CONTRACT TO PROVIDE WATER TO GPDC'S PROPOSED 141-LOT SUBDIVISION ON A PORTION OF GOVERNORS POINT.

Council President Buchanan noted that presentations would be made in advance of the public hearing.

Bob Tull, Attorney representing the Governor's Point Development Company explained that Chris Sahlin, Ron Jepson, Wayne Schwandt and Elaine Spencer would be making presentations on behalf of the Governors Point Development Company (GPDC).

Chris Sahlin, 1801 Roeder Avenue is a third generation member of the Sahlin family and explained that his family has owned Governors Point for many years and Governor's Point Development Company (GPDC) is owned by his father. He gave an historical perspective of his family's ownership of Governors Point and showed aerial photos and maps showing the property in question. He provided copies of records from 1953-1962 showing that the City of Bellingham was paid for water on Governors Point and utility bills showing that GPDC currently pays for water at 515 Pleasant Bay Road (the McCush residence) in addition to the water that they [the Sahlin Family] use within the 2-1/2 miles of pipe that is in the ground on their property. He clarified that the current plat they have proposed is 141 lots.

Ron Jepson, Engineer, 222 Grand Avenue has been the lead engineer on this project since the late 1960's. Mr. Jepson reviewed the city's continuous provision of water in the Chuckanut Area from the early 1900's, to date, and specifically to Governors Point. He said that the Water Board voted to serve water to Governors Point and to a 300 lot plat, which is commensurate with zoning. The current proposal, made in 1992, is for 141 lots.

Mr. Jepson then reviewed water service by the city in the Chuckanut area from pre-1940 to date along with water service areas as described in the 1993 Comprehensive Water Plan to the Ultimate Service Area and the 2009 Draft Comprehensive Water Plan to the Retail Service Area. He reviewed the history of ownership and water service to Governors Point including an excerpt from the proceedings of the Board of Water Commissioners in 1972 approving water service to Governors Pointe Subdivision. He concluded his remarks by suggesting two alternate ways to serve the project: 1) utilizing the current 4” tap with a reservoir on site and then 8” lines feeding gravity from that reservoir and, 2) the project going to 12” lines and bringing an 8” feeder line to the project, which would then be upsized making a lot of the substandard hydrants functional and meeting code.

Wayne Schwandt, Project Manager for Governors Pointe, 965 Grand Boulevard, addressed the following points:

· The project is asking that the resale water service that has existed since 1953 be formalized under a resale contract with the city.
· Explained terminology used by entities involved in the development:
o Governors Point (geographically) the peninsula that extends northward from the head of Pleasant Bay and does not include all the land mass waterward of the railroad tracks.
o Governors Point (property) property owned by the Sahlin family plus the parcel referred to as the McCush residence.
o Governors Pointe (development project) all of the property described less the McCush residence.
· Triple R Residential Construction Company is owned by the Sahlin's and is the developer of the property.
· Mr. Schwandt addressed, what he feels, are misrepresentations in submittals from Attorney Dean Brett and Alan Marriner, Assistant City Attorney.
· Documents show the city understood, from the very beginning, that it was providing water to GPDC for resale to others.

Elaine Spencer, Attorney, 2801 Alaskan Way, Seattle, representing GPDC made the following points:

· At issue is whether the city should formalize a contract to sell water to GPDC.
· GPDC currently receives a bill from the city and therefore, receives city water.
· Council's discretion in this issue is quite narrow because the issue is governed by state law, which assumes that the question of how land will be developed gets decided by the applicable jurisdiction in which the land is located.
· State law provides that a city, that acts as a municipal water supplier, has a duty to provide water within its' Retail Service Area, unless there are engineering constraints or the proposal conflicts with the adopted comprehensive plan or development regulations.
· Ms. Spencer re-reviewed history of water service to Governors Point since 1953. She said Governors Point remains within the Ultimate Service Area of the city's current Water Comprehensive Plan and the Retail Service Area on file with the Department of Health.
· Ms. Spencer made clear that they are not asking for direct service. She said there is a long history of the city being a public utility willing to serve all who request it and for years, everyone in the Chuckanut area was given service.
· The Growth Management Act was specifically amended in 1997 to provide that domestic water service is a rural governmental service so water service is both an urban service and a rural domestic service.
· The Department of Health has exactly the same requirements of rural water districts as urban water purveyors.
· She feels that the city's Ordinance #2006-06-004 is in conflict with state law.

Ms. Spencer asked the city to consider state law, the state court decisions and the city's own ordinance and remand this to staff for preparation of the reports required by Section 15.36.090 and to bring forward a contract for council's review and approval.

Dean Brett, Attorney, representing Friends of Chuckanut. He noted that there are a substantial group of people prepared to support the decision of the Public Works Director, and instead of repetitive public testimony, he asked those people who came to support the Friends of Chuckanut and to oppose extension of city water to the Governors Point sub-division to stand up [a large group of people in the audience stood].

He made the following points:

· The City of Bellingham has no obligation to provide water to a new sub-division five miles outside of the city limits and established Urban Growth Area.
· This application is directly contrary to the Growth Management Act and all city ordinances adopted in compliance with it.
· Mr. Brett addressed what he feels, are misstatements in the direct appeal of the GPDC.

On behalf of the Friends of Chuckanut, he asked the council to accept the decision of the Public Works Director.

Alan Marriner, Assistant City Attorney, stated that the city provides water to three single family residences and continued by making the following points:

· Generally, the city has discretion in deciding whether or not to supply water beyond its' corporate limits and is a matter of contract between the city and property owners.
· There is a fundamental disagreement between city staff and the development company's counsel as to the amount of discretion the council has in this decision.
· Denial of service was based on staff's inability to find any evidence of an expressed or implied contract; and the city's formally adopted policy against extending or expanding water service outside of the Urban Growth Area.
· The Growth Management Act prohibition on the city extension of urban water service in rural areas.

Based on these factors, staff felt that it was not authorized to process the GPDC's application for a water resale contract.

Staff has reviewed the reasons given by the GPDC for claiming implied contract and has found that each claim was either overstated or factually incorrect. GPDC claims it is a bulk purchaser and reseller of city water but staff can find no documentation specifying terms of service that would be included in such a contract such as: maximum quantities, pricing, number of residential connections allowed and service area covered, nor are they listed on the Department of Health web site as a licensed water system.

Mr. Marriner referenced documentation where the city has continuously and repeatedly told either GPDC representatives or Whatcom County, or both, that the city is not providing water.

He highlighted the following events:

· In 1976 the city adopted a moratorium on water and sewer line extensions, which continued until the adoption of Ordinance 8728 in 1979.
· During the moratorium, GPDC requested they be put in the service area created by Ordinance 8728.
· On May 6, 1990 Whatcom County requested verification that the city would provide water and/or sewer service to a short plat application submitted by the development company for 41 acres on Governors Point peninsula. [Former] Public Works Director, John Garner stated that “water is not available to new lots in this area from the City of Bellingham. The property is outside our water service zone and outside the urban service area jointly set by the city and the county.”

Other factors considered by city staff when recommending denial of the request for a water resale contract include: that the city councils formally adopted policy restricts further extension or expansion of water outside of the city, Ordinance #2006-03-026, which repealed all water and sewer service zones inside and outside the city's Urban Growth Area and that the Growth Management Act does make a distinction between urban and rural services and prohibits water service in rural areas. Mr. Marriner reviewed other factors leading to the staff's decision to recommend denial of the agreement.

He reiterated that staff recommends affirming the decision to deny the request but if council does reverse the decision, then in accordance with BMC 15.36.090 the council should direct Public Works staff to complete a feasibility report looking at capacity issues and the best way to serve Governors Point and to also direct the Planning Department to prepare an impact report with recommendations addressing the criteria in BMC 15.36.110.

Mr. Marriner concluded, that regardless of the council's action, staff will return with a written decision that reflects that action.

Council President Buchanan opened the public hearing.

Art Hyatt, 2318 Northshore Road spoke in opposition to the extension of water services to Sahlin's development on Governors Point.

Gale Gropp, 745 Chuckanut Shore Road supports comments by Attorney Dean Brett representing Friends of Chuckanut.

Wendy Harris, Silver Beach supports the Public Works denial of the request for water services to GPDC.

Laura Leigh Brakke, 585 Pleasant Bay Road supports the Public Works denial of the request for water services to GPDC.

Robin DuPré, 2203 22nd Street supports the Public Works denial of the request for water services to GPDC.

Tim Volwiler, 1050 Larrabee Avenue supports the Public Works denial of the request for water services to GPDC.

Todd Donovan, 247 Cherry Street supports the Public Works denial of the request for water services to GPDC.

Michael Lilliquist supports the Public Works denial of the request for water services to GPDC.

Cathy Lehman supports the Public Works denial of the request for water services to GPDC.

There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed.

Bob Tull, Attorney representing the GPDC made the following points in wrap up:

· It is being overlooked that the pipe needed is in the ground and has been for decades.
· The city is being asked to carry out a 50 year old decision.
· His client would pay the current capital facilities charges.
· The 1” service has been restored to full fire flow.
· Projects like this will more than pay their way.
· LAMIRD (Limited Area of More Intense Rural Development) issue is very misleading.
· The GPDC has a vested application for a plat.
· The zoning in place today allows this project.
· Requested that this go back to staff for a technical review called for by the ordinance, and evaluate economic impacts.

Mayor Pike, commended staff on bringing materials forward consistent with council's stated direction and made the following points:

· Pipes don't equate to water and not all pipes are the city's pipes.
· There have been a lot of changes in how development is done since the 1950's.
· The city has repeatedly asserted its intent, for over 30 years, to not serve this property and other properties outside the service area.
· This use of city water would be inconsistent with the GMA and the stated intent of this council and its' predecessors.

He feels the staff has made the appropriate recommendation and supports that recommendation.

Council Member Weiss asked Chris Sahlin to explain the water bills provided to council:

Mr. Sahlin explained that those bills are for water that is flowing through the pipe at the connection with the city which includes the McCush property and the water in their [Sahlin] 2-1/2 miles of pipe and the 14 standpipes that are used for fire suppression. With regard to discrepancies in water usage, he explained that it could be from flushing the system or meter errors.

BORNEMANN / WEISS moved to affirm the Public Works decision to deny the request from the Governors Point Development Company to enter into a water resale contract. MOTION CARRIED 7-0.

BREAK
Council President Buchanan called the meeting back to order at 9:52 p.m.

AB18464 CB 13529
2. AN ORDINANCE RELATED TO LAND USE PLANNING AND ZONING, AMENDING THE TITLE 20 ZONING TABLES FOR THE GUIDE MERIDIAN / CORDATA, KING MOUNTAIN, MERIDIAN AND MT. BAKER NEIGHBORHOODS TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS THAT ALLOW PAYMENT OF A FEE TO THE LAKE WHATCOM WATERSHED PROPERTY ACQUISITION PROGRAM IN EXCHANGE FOR DENSITY BONUSES IN SPECIFIC TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS RECEIVING ZONES

Greg Aucutt, Senior Planner reviewed process to date and current procedure for Transfer of Development Rights (TDR). The program currently requires a property owner in the receiving zone to seek out a property owner in the Lake Whatcom watershed who is willing to sell development rights. He said this program has not been successful.

In 2008 the city hired Greg Easton of Property Counselors to review the existing program and provide recommendations. His report is included in the agenda packet, pps. 73-97.

Mr. Easton found that there are six common factors that are present in all of the TDR programs around the state that have been successful. Those features are described in full on page 77 of the agenda packet and include: having suitable receiving sites, cooperation between governmental entities, favorable market conditions, financial incentives to use the program, a TDR (governmental) banking function and community support for higher densities in the receiving zones.

Staff had Mr. Easton specifically look at the areas that the city has recently annexed and his conclusions/recommendations are shown in full on pps. 96-97 of the agenda packet. In summary they are:

· The Transfer of Development Rights program, as currently constituted, isn't likely to be successful in the recently annexed areas given current economic conditions.
· There is no market in the receiving zones for the higher densities.
· Most of the areas are zoned for a base of six units per acre, which could be allowed to increase density to twelve (or ten in some cases) with purchase of TDR's.
· It might help to lower the base densities in the receiving zones, which may cause other implications.

Mr. Easton recommendations include:
· Uncoupling the costs of purchasing TDR's from the watershed, from the value at the receiving end, when economic conditions improve.
· The city create a TDR banking function to buy and sell rights over time.
· The city help facilitate a demonstration project in the receiving zones to show how this can work.
· The city provide incentives, such as public funding of improvements, to help kick-start the program.

Mr. Aucutt explained that these would require staff and resources that are not available at this time.

Mr. Easton suggested, and staff concurs, that the city try the Old Town model in these areas, which includes a bonus option that allows a developer to increase the square footage that they can build in Old Town by paying a fee – instead of actually buying development rights, they pay a fee to the city which goes to the Lake Whatcom Watershed Property Acquisition Fund and the city uses the money to buy development rights in the watershed.

Mr. Aucutt explained that the proposed ordinance is very similar to the Old Town model and is proposed in the following neighborhoods: Guide Meridian / Cordata, King Mountain, Meridian and Mt. Baker. The amount of the fee would be set by city council and the city would continue to look for other opportunities to create TDR receiving zones, such as other urban villages in the city or the Urban Growth Area. The proposed ordinance includes language that would be added to the zoning in these areas that would make this an option for property owners.

The Planning Commission and staff support the proposed ordinance.

Council President Buchanan opened the public hearing.

A citizen [name not provided] asked if there are offsets being purchased in the Mt. Baker Neighborhood regarding the Lake Whatcom watershed and how that would affect the Mt. Baker Neighborhood.

Mr. Aucutt replied that there are two areas in the Mt. Baker Neighborhood where this could apply: in the area adjacent to the Northern Heights Elementary School on the south side of Sunset Drive and in an area west of the Irongate industrial area.

There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed.

Council Member Weiss asked if there are receiving areas, in addition to those listed.

Mr. Aucutt replied that other receiving zones have been identified that are in areas that are proposed to be annexed but are not included at this time.

Council Member Weiss, Mr. Stewart and Mr. Aucutt discussed the different densities as described in the zoning tables.

Mr. Aucutt indicated that the current relationship is 1:1; the developer pays a fee for one unit and receives one additional unit.

Council Member Weiss requested that staff consider being more creative to accommodate the council's overall goal of infill and providing incentive for developers to provide smaller units to accommodate affordable housing opportunities and a better mix of housing

Mr. Stewart noted that the Interlocal agreement with Whatcom County requires the city to annex at equivalent zoning. That would not prohibit the city from, in the future, changing the zoning to accommodate other forms of densities. He did reiterate that the issue at hand, is just consideration of the TDR proposal. The current zoning doesn't talk about other goals the council might have for more compact development or affordable housing; it simply provides for those higher densities that a developer might choose to utilize when they go through the permitting process.

Council Member Weiss wondered if when establishing the fees, the inclusion of square footage of the buildings or some other sort of mechanism would help promote affordable housing.

Mr. Stewart said that this would theoretically be possible but to include a building size into part of the equation would make it much more complex to administer and much more constraining in terms of market.

BARBARA RYAN / KNUTSON moved approval for first and second reading. MOTION CARRIED 7-0.

Council President Buchanan reopened the public comment period

Ric Wilson, spoke in support of the Mt. Baker / Dewey Valley annexation.

Gail Hanna, spoke in opposition of the Mt. Baker / Dewey Valley annexation.

Lynn Breakey Clark read a letter from her father in opposition of the Mt. Baker / Dewey Valley Annexation.

Shar Sarté Prince, G Street spoke in opposition of the Mt. Baker / Dewey Valley annexation.

Jim Higginson spoke in opposition of the Mt. Baker / Dewey Valley annexation.

Kendra Schlenbaker spoke in opposition of the Mt. Baker / Dewey Valley annexation.

Debbie Breakey, Chance Road spoke in opposition of the Mt. Baker / Dewey Valley annexation.

James Stanford spoke in support spoke of the Mt. Baker / Dewey Valley annexation.

The public comment period was closed.

By consensus of the Council, the Planning & Development committee was moved to this point in the meeting.


REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

COUNCIL STANDING COMMITTEE MEETINGS:

PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
MEMBERS: TERRY BORNEMANN, CHAIR; BARBARA RYAN; JACK WEISS; LOUISE BJORNSON

AB18090 1. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE ANNEXATION OF APPROXIMATELY THREE HUNDRED AND TWO ACRES OF UNINCORPORATED PROPERTY ADJACENT TO THE NORTHERN BOUNDARY OF THE BELLINGHAM CITY LIMITS AND COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE DEWEY VALLEY / MOUNT BAKER HWY. ANNEXATION; ASSIGNING CITY LAND USE AND ZONING DESIGNATIONS AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE

Council Member Bjornson expressed concern about environmental impacts on Squalicum Creek and the affects of the extraordinary flooding last winter. She asked how the city's protections compare with the county's protections.

Mr. Stewart feels that the city's ordinances are more rigorous and more protective than the county ordinance. The city also has the stormwater utility that would deal with some of the stormwater issues.

Council Member Ryan feels that this area is a bit far away from a lot of the services that people need. They would be using their cars to get to work and services as there are no commercial areas there. And, there is some question about whether there could be commercial areas given all of the environmental constraints. In addition the analysis of the financial impact of this annexation is that in 2031 this annexation will have resulted in a net cost to the city of $3.2 million. That alone is not enough reason to say no as the city does not have the privilege of simply annexing only the areas that will provide a return for the city. At the same time, the city does have financial concerns and it is not the time to make commitments for providing services that we can't afford. For the reasons stated, she does not feel it is the right time for Bellingham to annex an area with significant environmental constraints as well as significant financial commitments.

BARBARA RYAN / SNAPP moved to reject the ordinance relating to the annexation petition commonly known as the Dewey Valley / Mount Baker Hwy. Annexation.

Council Member Snapp is troubled about fire protection. There is not a plan for fire protection after the three year agreement, which would be automatically triggered with annexation. Another concern is with the arterial, which is laid out over a very steep grade. It would be very expensive to build and he doesn't see the need for trucking and heavy use of an arterial in that area.

The Mt. Baker Highway area as opposed to the Dewey Valley area has very different demographic and land areas and it has been confirmed that this annexation cannot be re-defined within the current process. He concluded that, at this time, the council either needs to reject or approve the annexation. The documentation doesn't indicate that anything has really changed, and with no plan in place to provide fire protection, he will not support the annexation.

Council Member Bornemann pointed out that recently the city made a case to the county about not pulling areas from the urban growth zones and now council is considering not allowing this annexation. This is conflicting and based on policies and criteria used for other annexations, it makes it hard to reject this application. He will support the annexation, but if it does not pass, then he thinks the council should tell the county council to pull this from the Urban Growth Area. He said it would be easy to look into the faces of the people and say yes but from a public policy standpoint, he must follow staff's recommendation and move forward with the annexation.

Council Member Knutson asked if the petition stands, even though there have been changes in property ownership subsequent to the petition.

Mr. Stewart and Alan Marriner, Assistant City Attorney concurred that once the petition is signed, it is locked in, even if there is a change in ownership.

Council Member Knutson indicated that he would like to see, if the people who really want to go forward with this, can re-petition and re-divide the boundaries.

Council President Buchanan agreed because the demographics are so different in these two areas.

Mayor Pike reiterated that Bill Boyd, the Fire Chief, made it clear during committee that the city can provide adequate fire protection. If this annexation is approved, there would actually be higher levels of police and fire protection in the area because of the greater service the city provides.

Council Member Bjornson recounted her concerns of flooding, wetlands and fish in Squalicum Creek and protecting these valuable areas. She feels that those concerns would be better serviced if this land was in the city.

Council Member Weiss considered the overall comprehensive look at all annexations and the cumulative impact to the entire area. He expressed concern about how traffic, infrastructure, fire and police will be dealt with. He said the Cost of Service study was not clear, about costs to the city, with this particular annexation.

MOTION CARRIED 5-2, BJORNSON, BORNEMANN opposed.


PUBLIC WORKS / PUBLIC SAFETY
MEMBERS: LOUISE BJORNSON, CHAIR; GENE KNUTSON; STAN SNAPP

AB18465 1. NOISE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR INTERSTATE 5 CABLE BARRIER AND GUARDRAIL REPLACEMENT

BJORNSON / KNUTSON moved approval of a noise variance request to BMC 10.24.120(4) to allow cable barrier and guardrail replacement on Interstate 5. MOTION CARRIED 7-0.

AB18466 2. BID AWARD SUNSET DRIVE, PHASE II WETLAND MITIGATION, ES-236, BID NO. 42B-2009

BJORNSON / BARBARA RYAN moved to award Bid No.42B-2009 for Sunset Drive, Phase II/Wetland Mitigation ES-236 to Colacurcio Brothers, Inc. of Blaine, WA as the lowest responsive, responsible bidder and to authorize the Mayor to enter into a contract with them for the amount of their bid, which is $377,505.13, which includes WSST. MOTION CARRIED 7-0.

AB18467 Resolution #2009-18
3. A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE CITY OF BELLINGHAM'S COMPREHENSIVE SEWER PLAN

BJORNSON / KNUTSON moved final approval of Resolution #2009-18. MOTION CARRIED 7-0.

AB18468 4. UPDATE ON THE CHUCKANUT VILLAGE MARSH RESTORATION PROJECT

Information only.

AB18469 5. INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BELLINGHAM AND WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY FOR A FEASIBILITY STUDY AND DESIGN OF NEAR SHORE RESTORATION ACTIONS FOR THE LITTLE SQUALICUM CREEK SHORELINE

BJORNSON / WEISS moved to authorize the Mayor to enter into an Interagency Agreement with the Washington State Department of Ecology regarding Little Squalicum Creek Shoreline. MOTION CARRIED 7-0.


FINANCE & PERSONNEL
MEMBERS: GENE KNUTSON, CHAIR; LOUISE BJORNSON; STAN SNAPP

AB18470 CB 13530
1. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE 2009 BUDGET RECOGNIZING AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BELLINGHAM AND THE WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY, APPROPRIATING $50,000.00 OF EXPENDITURES IN THE STREET FUND TO PAY FOR A FEASIBILITY STUDY AND DESIGN NEAR SHORE RESTORATION ACTIONS FOR LITTLE SQUALICUM CREEK SHORELINE

KNUTSON / BARBARA RYAN moved approval for first and second reading. MOTION CARRIED 7-0.

AB18471 CB 13531
2. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE 2009 BUDGET APPROPRIATING AN ADDITIONAL $225,000 FROM ESTIMATED ENDING UNDESIGNATED RESERVES IN THE WATER FUND TO BE USED FOR A SETTLEMENT PAYMENT TO THE MOUNT BAKER SCHOOL DISTRICT

KNUTSON / SNAPP moved approval for first and second reading. MOTION CARRIED 7-0.


PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT – By consensus of the Council, this item was moved to follow the Public Hearings and the re-opened Public Comment period.

LAKE WHATCOM RESERVOIR COMMITTEE
MEMBERS: STAN SNAPP, CHAIR; BARBARA RYAN; GENE KNUTSON

AB18472 CB 13532
1. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO LAND USE CONTROLS WITHIN THE LAKE WHATCOM WATERSHED AND ADOPTING LIMITS ON PERMITTED USES, IMPERVIOUS AND PARTIALLY PERVIOUS AREAS, LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITIES AND RELATED WATER QUALITY PROTECTION MEASURES (AMENDING BMC 16.80)

SNAPP / BARBARA RYAN moved approval for first and second reading. MOTION CARRIED 7-0.

AB18473 CB 13533
2. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BELLINGHAM, WASHINGTON, AMENDING BELLINGHAM MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 15.42 (STORMWATER MANAGEMENT) RELATING TO IMPLEMENTING BEST PRACTICE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND MANAGING STORMWATER WITHIN BASIN ONE OF LAKE WHATCOM

SNAPP / KNUTSON moved approval for first and second reading. MOTION CARRIED 7-0.


COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
MEMBERS: BARRY BUCHANAN, CHAIR

1. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND/OR SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES

None submitted at evening meeting.

2. OLD/NEW BUSINESS

Council President Buchanan announced that the Council had agreed to approve the purchase of a fourth camera for council chambers.


EXECUTIVE SESSION

1. POTENTIAL PROPERTY ACQUISITION: Staff provided information on a potential property acquisition. Council provided direction. No action taken.


MAYOR'S REPORT

AB18474 1. MAYOR'S APPOINTMENT OF DANNE NEILL TO THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION

Information only.

Mayor Pike read a news release that, due to the lack of measurable rain, the city would begin an odd/even voluntary outdoor watering schedule.


CONSENT AGENDA
All matters listed on the Consent Agenda are considered routine and/or non-controversial items and may be approved in a single motion. Committee review has taken place during the afternoon session on most of these items. A member of the Council may ask that an item be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.

AB18475 1. CITY OF BELLINGHAM – WHATCOM COUNTY TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT

AB18476 2. MODIFICATION OF INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT ALLOWING CITY FIRE AND POLICE TO USE PORT OF BELLINGHAM PROPERTIES TO CONDUCT TRAINING EXERCISES

AB18477 3. BID REJECTION REGARDING REPLACEMENT OF FLEET SHOP OVERHEAD DOORS, BID #52B-2009

AB18478 4. BID AWARD FOR VARIOUS WATER DISTRIBUTION VALVES, ELBOWS, TEES, ADAPTORS AND REDUCERS, BID # 41B-2009

AB18479 5. AUTHORIZATION OF CHECK ISSUE FOR ACCOUNTS PAYABLE FROM MAY 22, 2009 TO MAY 29, 2009.

AB18480 4. AUTHORIZATION OF CHECK ISSUE FOR ACCOUNTS PAYABLE FROM MAY 29, 2009 TO JUNE 05, 2009.

KNUTSON / BARBARA RYAN moved approval of the Consent Agenda in its entirety. MOTION CARRIED 7-0.


FINAL CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES

AB18454 1. CB 13527
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE 2009 BUDGET RECOGNIZING RECEIPT OF A FEDERAL GRANT TO THE PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $227,522.00 AND APPROPRIATING RELATED EXPENDITURES IN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUND AND INCREASING THE GENERAL FUND ESTIMATED ENDING RESERVES.

KNUTSON / BJORNSON moved approval for third and final reading. Upon motion, said bill was placed on final passage and approved by the following roll call vote:

AYES: BJORNSON, BORNEMANN, BUCHANAN, KNUTSON, BARBARA RYAN, SNAPP, WEISS
NAYS:
ABSTENTIONS:

MOTION CARRIED 7-0 and was thereafter named Ordinance #2009-06-035

AB18405 2. CB 13528
AN ORDINANCE ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 6.34 TO THE BELLINGHAM MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 6, FIREARMS RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS, AND ESTABLISHING A REQUIREMENT THAT FIREARMS RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS SHALL NOT BE LOCATED WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE OF A SCHOOL

BARBARA RYAN / WEISS moved approval for third and final reading. Upon motion, said bill was placed on final passage and approved by the following roll call vote:

AYES: BJORNSON, BORNEMANN, BUCHANAN, KNUTSON, BARBARA RYAN, SNAPP, WEISS
NAYS:
ABSTENTIONS:

MOTION CARRIED 7-0 and was thereafter named Ordinance #2009-06-036


ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 11:42 p.m. Barry Buchanan, Council President

ATTEST: Linda D. Anderson City Clerk Representative
APPROVED: 07/13/2009

This is a digital copy of an original document located at Bellingham's City Hall. The City of Bellingham specifically disclaims any responsibility or liability for the contents of this document. The City of Bellingham does not verify the correctness, accuracy, or validity of the information appearing in this document.