Search toggle

What's our vision?

When she reached the first hills of the Italic Mountains, she had a last view back on the skyline of her hometown.

What kind of facilities do we have?

When she reached the first hills of the Italic Mountains, she had a last view back on the skyline of her hometown.

What's our working hours?

When she reached the first hills of the Italic Mountains, she had a last view back on the skyline of her hometown.

Real Briefings

Planning Commission (Joint with City Council)

BEL-PLN-2024-10-24 October 24, 2024 Planning Commission Meeting City of Bellingham 15 min
← Back to All Briefings
Oct
Month
24
Day
15
Min
Published
Status

The Bellingham Planning Commission and City Council held a rare joint work session to determine the city's preferred growth strategy for the 2025 comprehensive plan update. The meeting focused on selecting population, housing, and employment targets to submit to Whatcom County for inclusion in a multi-jurisdictional resolution that will guide environmental impact analysis. Staff recommended Alternative 2, which would accommodate approximately 27,555 new residents and 18,443 housing units by 2045 — representing about 53% of countywide growth. This represents a moderate increase from current planning levels and would require implementing multiple growth strategies including urban village development, transit-oriented corridors, infrastructure investments, and limited expansion into Urban Growth Area reserves. The discussion revealed tension between planning for adequate growth capacity and managing infrastructure costs. Several commissioners expressed concern about expanding into forested areas before completing environmental analysis, while council members emphasized the need to balance growth accommodation with fiscal responsibility. Despite these concerns, there was general consensus to support the staff recommendation, with the understanding that this represents a starting point for analysis rather than a final commitment. The meeting also included minor business, with the Planning Commission voting 5-0 to change regular meeting times from 7:00 PM to 6:00 PM beginning in 2025.

**Planning Commission Bylaw Amendment (Vote: 5-0)** - **Action:** Approved amendment to Articles II and V changing regular meeting time from 7:00 PM to 6:00 PM - **AB Number:** Not applicable (internal procedural change) - **Vote:** Unanimous approval (5-0) - **Staff Recommendation vs. Action:** Aligned - **Significance:** Procedural change to improve meeting efficiency and attendance **Growth Strategy Direction (Consensu…

About 49% shown — sign up free to read the rest Sign up free →
**Growth Alternative Selection** The central policy debate centered on choosing between three growth scenarios developed for environmental impact analysis. Alternative 1 (OFM Medium) would accommodate 24,158 new residents, Alternative 2 (Jurisdiction Request) would plan for 30,310 new residents, and Alternative 3 (Adjusted High) would target 36,462 new residents. Staff recommended Alternative 2 as a balanced approach that maintains Bellingham's historic share of regional growth while providing adequate housing capacity. Commissioner concerns focused on environmental impacts of expanding into the South Bellingham UGA Reserve area, which contains significant forest cover and potential landslide hazards. "I worry about the dense population going into somewhere like that when it comes to the urban forest interface and the possibility of landslides, fires," noted one commissioner. Staff responded that the Environmental Impact Statement would provide detailed analysis of these concerns before final decisions are made. **Urban Growth Area Expansion Strategy** The discussion revealed different philosophies about growth accommodation. Some commissioners favored maximizing density within existing city limits through urban villages and transit corridors before expanding boundaries. Others acknowledged that some expansion might be necessary to meet state requirements while provid…
About 50% shown — sign up free to read the rest Sign up free →
**Dan Luner (Birchwood Neighborhood)** Strongly advocated for the high growth alternative, arguing that under-planning forces residents to compete for limited housing and increases costs. Specifically promoted SRO housing as a proven affordable model, citing his personal experience paying $670/month for a room in a converted single-family home. Noted receiving "100 requests in a week" for a $640/month room, demonstrating demand for affordable options. **Rick Edgar (Whatcom Environmental Council)** Raised transparency concerns about selecting a preferred alternative before completing environmental analysis. Warned that premature selection "may cause public distrust" and emphasized missing climate resilience considerations. Specifically concerned about outward growth increasing vehicle miles traveled and reducing tree canopy in heavily forested South Bellingham areas. **Carrie Burnside (Silver Beach Neighborhood Association President)** Advocated for including inclusionary zoning in the comprehensive plan to ensure affordable units are included in mark…
About 50% shown — sign up free to read the rest Sign up free →
**Chris Behee, on the planning process:** "What we decide tonight will not be the preferred alternative for Bellingham — it's the ingredients that will go into that analysis when we get the draft EIS at the end of the year." **Dan Luner, on housing affordability:** "My rent is $670 a month... that is affordable for someone working 30 hours a week at Bellingham minimum wage. I think I got 100 requests in a week to see the property." **Rick Edgar, on transparency concerns:** "A prematurely sel…
About 50% shown — sign up free to read the rest Sign up free →

**Environmental Impact Statement:** Draft EIS expected by end of December 2024, with final analysis in January-February 2025 providing detailed traffic, climate, and environmental impact data. **Whatcom County Process:** County Planning Commission will consider the multi-jurisdictional resolution in November 2024, incorporating all jurisdictions' preferred alternatives. **Draft Plan Development:** City staff will develop draft comprehensive plan chapters for Planning Commission review beginning early 2025, with Council consideration by late sp…

About 50% shown — sign up free to read the rest Sign up free →
**Planning Timeline:** The Planning Commission meeting time officially changed from 7:00 PM to 6:00 PM for 2025, approved by unanimous vote. **Growth Target Clarity:** Bellingham moved from considering three alternatives to general consensus around Alternative 2 (27,555 new residents, 18,443 housing units by 2045). **Regional Positioning:** The city indicated willingness to accommodate approximately 53% of countywide housing growth, up from the historic 45% population share and 52% housing share. **Strategy Framework:** Established "all of the above" approach combini…
About 49% shown — sign up free to read the rest Sign up free →
# Joint Planning Commission and City Council: Charting Bellingham's Growth Future When Bellingham's Planning Commission and City Council met on October 24, 2024, they gathered to tackle one of the most consequential decisions facing the city: how much growth should Bellingham plan for over the next 20 years? The joint work session at the Pacific Street Operations Center was unlike their usual separate meetings—this was a rare convergence of the city's two main planning bodies to wrestle with fundamental questions about Bellingham's future. The atmosphere was serious but collegial as commissioners and council members filed into the conference room just after 6 p.m. Chair Mike Estes called both meetings to order, noting the unusual nature of the joint session. Before diving into growth projections and environmental impacts, the Planning Commission had one quick piece of business: changing their meeting time from 7 to 6 p.m., which passed 5-2. ## Public Voices: Affordable Housing and Environmental Concerns The public comment period revealed the tensions that would define the evening's discussion. Dan Luner, a Birchwood resident who described himself as "an enthusiastic reader of the Bellingham Municipal Code," made a passionate case for planning high. His own living situation—paying $670 monthly for a room in a converted single-family home—illustrated the kind of creative housing solutions the city might need. When they advertised a 150-square-foot room for $640, Luner said they received 100 requests in a week. "The downside to zoning to a lower potential growth is a deepening of the cost of living prices," Luner argued, "pushing Bellinghamers to spend greater portions of their income on housing and transportation, having more of our fellow citizens sleeping rough." He urged the city to consider single room occupancy (SRO) buildings, noting that such housing had been home to "all great American artists and writers" in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Rick Edgar from the Whatcom Environmental Council struck a different tone, expressing concern about transparency and timing. He argued that selecting a preferred growth alternative was premature without first seeing the Environmental Impact Statement analysis. "A prematurely selected preferred alternative may cause public distrust," Edgar warned, quoting from planning guidance documents. He highlighted missing elements from the discussion: climate resilie…
About 14% shown — sign up free to read the rest Sign up free →
null…
About 100% shown — premium members only Upgrade to premium →

Share This Briefing