This Topic: County moving forward with NMUGA

[Lou Malzone]

If you can attend the April 2nd Board of Island County Commissioners meeting to learn more about this, please take the time to do so.


Mike Shelton has been communicating with the Incorporation Committee about moving forward with the Freeland Sub Area Plan with a timeline for October of this year.

This interesting item is from the Board of Island County Commissioners meeting agenda for April 2, 2007 (tomorrow):

7) 10:30 a.m. Planning and Community Development
a) Waiver from Competitive Solicitation Procurement Procedure under ICC 2.29.03(B)(12) for planning services for Freeland Sub-Area Plan
b) Contract with BHC Consultants, LLC for planning services to assist in the completion of the Freeland Sub-Area Plan; Contract Amount: $50,000. (RM-PLAN-07-0044)
 
The link to the agenda is:

http://www.islandcounty.net/commissioners/documents/2007/Agenda040207.htm

ICC 2.29.03(B)(12)

Section B reads:

"Other Services: All service contracts, other than contracts for electronic data processing or telecommunication services covered above, shall be entered into pursuant to competitive solicitation except for:"

ICC 2.29.03(B)(12) is the best catch-all to avoid competitive bidding (read this as one of the “except for” clauses):

"Any service contract waived by the Board of County Commisiioners on a case by case basis."

So, it appears that the BICC has no intention of putting a $50,000 contract out for competitive bid. After no action for nearly 3 years, the BICC has decided to finally move on the Freeland Sub Area Plan. I have no idea why this is so and have no idea about BHC Consultants, LLC. except for this link to their website:

http://www.bhcconsultants.com/

The website is “under construction”. These are the members listed as people to contact:

Gary Bourne, PE – President
gary.bourne@bhcconsultants.com
 
Craig Chambers, PE – Director of Engineering
craig.chambers@bhcconsultants.com
 
Roger Wagoner, AIA, FAICP – Director of Planning
roger.wagoner@bhcconsultants.com
 
Their address is:

BHC Consultants, LLC
720 Third Avenue, Suite 1200
Seattle, WA 98104
Phone: 206.505.3400
Fax: 206.505.3406

If anyone can attend the BICC meeting tomorrow morning to watch and comment on the proceedings, please do so. Once again our County Commissioners are moving ahead with plans for Freeland with little or no participation by the people who live here.

[Jerry Lloyd]

LOU-That was very savvy picking up on that contract issue in the agenda for the commissioners meeting today. I read the minutes but not the agenda. Very telling indeed. Now, more than ever I stand by my comment of last Sept to someone on the Forum worried about Freeland becoming a "city". My comment then was "I would rather have that train controlled by an engineer that is on-board than someone far way and guiding it by remote control!" The remote control device is located in Coupeville!

All I want to add is THANKS to you and all the others working so hard on the Incorporation issue and keeping the info flowing on the forum so well.

[Lou Malzone]

We attended the Commissioners meeting and asked the following questions about this interesting item is from the Board of Island County Commissioners meeting agenda for April 2, 2007:

7) 10:30 a.m. Planning and Community Development
a) Waiver from Competitive Solicitation Procurement Procedure under ICC 2.29.03(B)(12) for planning services for Freeland Sub-Area Plan
b) Contract with BHC Consultants, LLC for planning services to assist in the completion of the Freeland Sub-Area Plan; Contract Amount: $50,000. (RM-PLAN-07-0044)

We asked the following questions during the public comment period:

1. What is the criteria used to determine that there is no competitive bidding?
2. What services are being performed?
3. Can we get a copy of the Risk Management Plan 07-0044?

Answer 1. The Planning Department received recommendations from various people for BHC Consultants and it was determined they have the expertise to do the job. When BHC presented a proposal for the work to be completed in November, Mike insisted on an October completion date.

Answers 2 and 3. We have a copy of the Plan and will scan it in and forward it to everyone if possible.

Commissioners Shelton and MacDonald commented further that since the Incorporation Committee was trying to get the vote on the November ballot that they wanted to pass the ordinance for Freeland to become an NMUGA in October, prior to the vote for incorporation. Their reason, and they were explicit, is that incorporation cannot be voted upon until Freeland is an NMUGA. When I said, “You are under the impression that Freeland must be an NMUGA prior to becoming a city”, Mac and Mike responded that it is not just an impression but that legal counsel advised them that incorporation can only occur in an Urban Growth Area. Further, and since there is a 60-day appeal period after passing the NMUGA ordinance, and assuming BHC actually completes the FSAP by October, the issue of incorporation appearing on the November ballot “would create complications” per Mike.

Mike further stated that the proposed city limit cannot be extended beyond the NMUGA boundary. It was very clear that the Commissioners, acting as a Boundary Review Board, will be following RCW 36.93.150, "A board shall remove territory in the proposed incorporation that is located outside of an urban growth area". The English is plain. Note the use of the word "shall". (This is from prior analysis by Mitch.)

Mike was very clear that the NMUGA boundary was very much cast in stone as a result of the years of planning that went into it and the unanimous decision by the FSAPC in submitting the FSAP. When I asked if the NMUGA boundary could be modified if the people in the area outside the NMUGA boundary wanted to be included, Mike said that would not be possible without reconvening the Freeland Sub Area Planning Committee. Mac briefly discussed that the city, once official, could expand through the appropriate review and annexation process.

During a brief recess, Mike spoke with us about the coordination between the work to be done on the Freeland Sub Area Plan and the incorporation effort. He asked more than once if we are serious about the November ballot date and I assured him that the date is the one we are trying to meet. Like the FSAP process, there are numerous events that have to transpire that could delay the vote. Mike went on to say that he didn’t understand why the IC wants to extend the city boundary beyond the NMUGA as the expense of road maintenance or replacement is quite high. This is in regard to including the Mutiny areas in the city. We spoke about the Main Street study performed by OTAK and the price tag for it. Mike is of the impression that the Main Street improvement after sewers are in would be an excellent candidate for Transportation Improvement Project funding. In any event, it is an expense that may have funding available for the city.

To summarize, unless we can prove otherwise, Freeland must be declared an NMUGA prior to incorporation and the boundary for the City of Freeland cannot exceed that set for the Non Municipal Growth Area as defined by the Freeland Sub Area Plan.

If Commissioner Shelton sends us any correctins we will post them here.

[Lou Malzone]

This is Commissioner Shelton's reply to the issue of becoming a city before becoming an NMUGA. Essentially we must become an NMUGA first.

"I think that Lou accurately depicts what we have been told by legal counsel. If the NMUGA is established by October the major issue for the November vote would be the appeal period which occurs after the adoption of the plan and extends for 60 days. Up to a point there is no reason the incorporation effort and the NMUGA effort cannot occur simultaneously."

It would appear that there is a conflict between the November vote and the appeal period of the NMUGA adoption, assuming that the county can even complete the adoption of the NMUGA by October. They are aiming for it as they awarded the $50,000 contract to the consultants to complete the Freeland Sub Area Plan and take the remaining steps in order to have adoption complete by October. The ordinance adopting the NMUGA won't be official until the end of the appeal period as someone can appleal the NMUGA up to the 59th day of the appeal period. Since we cannot be a city until we are an NMUGA, then the vote for incorporatiuon needs to be put off until the spring at the earliest.

Please read the Freeland Sub Area Plan and see what the planning was all about over the years. It does not have Freeland being the center for condos/townhouses, etc., but has an average density of about 3.7 dwelling units per acre. The amount of high density is at a minimum and medium density is also not too dominant, but both high and medium are in the core area – look at Freeland Hill in the NMUGA map. That will probably hold true even if we become a city.

Look at the part of Freeland already built out and I think you will see that there will not be a predominance of dense pack. Within the NMUGA there is ample property for condos/townhouses and retail below and housing above. The retail below and housing above concept has actually been done quite attractively and to good end in a number of communities. Main Street will be rebuilt when sewers come in, so that gives us an opportunity to have correct traffic flows and walk-ability, but it will take community activism for that to happen as we want it to. Along with getting an attractive commercial core.

We all need to turn the page and realize that the County is going to make the next move and turn us into a Non Municipal Urban Growth Area. Will we become a city as soon as next Spring? Will we push for a vote as soon as we are an NMUGA? What is out strategy? The County is going to be in control and we are going to have to react to the “dreaded yellow permit signs”.

No one really knows what becoming an NMUGA will mean (let alone a city) as the building codes are not written yet. Jeff Tate told me that exercise will take a year. We also should study the Transmittal Letter to the Freeland Sub Area Plan as it strongly recommends a commercial building review committee made up of people from Freeland.

At the League of Women Voters meeting next week we should all prepare a list of questions for the Commissioner. Here’s a start.

I understand that no development can occur to the new land use categories defined in the Freeland Sub Area Plan until urban services are actually available to that property.

1. Since the sewers are a number of years off but the new building code will be written before that occurs, how will the county handle developments on land before sewers are installed?

2. How will the County prevent a developer from building a house in such a way as to prevent future development on a parcel to NMUGA density?

3. Will the County accept and approve building permits to NMUGA densities on properties before urban services are available to those properties?

4. Will the permits in #3 be “grandfathered” and the City will be stuck with them?

5. Will the County put a permit moratorium on if it knows an incorporation vote is about to happen?

6. Will the County appoint a building review committee as requested by the FSAP Transmittal Letter? How do we submit nominees?

7. How will the County involve residents in the code rewrite?

8. Will it be county policy to not allow expansion of the maximum building size of 27,000 sq ft in Freeland until urban services are available to a property?

9. What happens if sewers are voted down by the Phase 1 participants in the sewers (essentially the commercial core)?

Mike Dolan stated “So, in the event this is what we will have as a city boundary, let's look at the commercial core as not just for business, but as a place for business, mixed use (business below/residential above) and dedicated housing (apartments/condos/town houses) to build a living downtown. It takes people to give a community 'vibrancy' and 'sustainability'. And, we protect our rural heritage by keeping growth at the edge of the city to a minimum.”

Wasn’t this the goal of a City? What were we all expecting? The City would have the same density as the NMUGA, so if the land use categories in the NMUGA map are also valid for a city, than what other conclusion is there? At least as a city we would be in control and could at least try to preserve Freeland Hill in some way such as trading density there for some other location. But in reality the city will be faced with the same challenges as the Freeland Sub Area Planning Committee was in drawing up the land use categories for the NMUGA.

I don’t totally agree with Mike’s view, but it does fit in with the Freeland Sub Area Plan. It will take a lot of work to even begin to get the County to “allow” residents of the NMUGA to participate in the development of Freeland. The property owners in the commercial core already have ideas along the lines that Mike has stated, so the reality is that his vision may not be too incorrect but is definitely dependent on sewers.

The event that will have the residents control where growth happens and what it looks like will be to incorporate the NMUGA as soon as possible after Freeland is made an NMUGA.

I think we should have a meeting of the IC and discuss strategy and what we want to accomplish at the League meeting.

[Dean Enell]

The next meeting of the Freeland Incorporation Committee is Wed evenning at 7pm in the Freeland Chamber Office. The agenda can be found at www.freelandcity.com

All citizens of Freeland are more than welcome as usual

Dean Enell