📋 Committee Meeting
Bellingham Hearing Examiner
← Back to All Meetings
Meeting Summary
Day four of the Protect Mud Bay Cliffs SEPA appeal hearing continued with testimony focused on stormwater management and regulatory compliance for the proposed Woods at Viewcrest development. The session opened with a discussion about site visit logistics, with Hearing Examiner Rice indicating her intention to visit the project site during the writing period, though debate emerged about whether she should be accompanied by party representatives.
The primary witness was Jason Porter, the City of Bellingham's Surface & Stormwater Manager, who provided extensive testimony about stormwater regulations, treatment requirements, and the preliminary stormwater plan review process. Porter, who has 25 years of experience in stormwater management and helped draft Bellingham Municipal Code 15.42, testified that the city found no probable significant adverse impacts from the proposed stormwater management approach.
Central to the testimony was the question of flow control requirements. Porter explained that the project qualifies for an exemption from flow control measures because it discharges to Mud Bay, which is classified as a saltwater body under state regulations. This exemption means the project does not need to install detention structures to mimic pre-development flow conditions, as would be required for discharge to freshwater systems.
However, significant questions emerged during cross-examination about the adequacy of information provided at the preliminary stage. Appellant attorney Claudia Newman challenged whether sufficient hydrologic modeling and flow analysis had been conducted to support the SEPA determination, noting that no modeling data exists to show the volume and velocity of stormwater that will enter Mud Bay.
The session concluded with applicant attorney Tim Shermetzler beginning the applicant's case-in-chief, calling property owner Rogan Jones as the first witness to provide background on the family's long connection to the property, which was originally acquired from the historic Larrabee family.
Study Guide
## MODULE S1: STUDY GUIDE
**Meeting ID:** BEL-HEX-2026-01-15
### Meeting Overview
The Bellingham Hearing Examiner conducted day four of a SEPA appeal hearing for the Woods at Viewcrest project on January 15, 2026. The city presented testimony from stormwater manager Jason Porter while discussing site visit logistics for the appeal.
### Key Terms and Concepts
**SEPA Appeal:** A legal challenge to the State Environmental Policy Act determination made by the city, in this case regarding the Woods at Viewcrest development project.
**MDNS:** Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance - the city's finding that the project will not have probable significant adverse environmental impacts with mitigation measures.
**TDA (Threshold Discharge Area):** Separate drainage areas on a development site that drain in different directions and don't rejoin within a quarter mile, each requiring independent stormwater analysis.
**Flow Control:** Stormwater management technique using detention ponds or vaults with metering devices to store water and release it slowly to mimic pre-development conditions.
**6-PPD-Q:** An emerging tire wear pollutant (6-PPD-quinone) that forms when tire preservatives react with ozone and has been shown to be acutely toxic to coho salmon in freshwater.
**Modular Wetland System:** A proprietary stormwater treatment device described as a "rain garden in a box" - precast concrete structures with filters for water quality treatment.
**NPDES Permit:** National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit that regulates stormwater discharges under the Clean Water Act.
**Mud Bay:** The saltwater receiving body adjacent to the project site that is exempt from flow control requirements under state regulations.
### Key People at This Meeting
| Name | Role / Affiliation |
|---|---|
| Hearing Examiner (Speaker 1) | Bellingham Hearing Examiner conducting the appeal |
| Mr. Erb (Speaker 2) | City of Bellingham attorney |
| Ms. Newman (Speaker 3) | Attorney for appellant (Protect Mud Bay Cliffs) |
| Mr. Ray (Speaker 4) | Attorney for appellant |
| Mr. Shermetzler (Speaker 5) | Attorney for applicant |
| Jason Porter (Speaker 4 in testimony) | City of Bellingham Surface and Stormwater Manager |
| Rogan Jones (Speaker 6) | Property owner/applicant |
### Background Context
This hearing represents day four of an ongoing SEPA appeal of the city's environmental determination for a residential development project called Woods at Viewcrest. The appellants, Protect Mud Bay Cliffs, are challenging the city's finding that the project will not cause significant environmental harm. The project involves developing lots on a steep, geologically complex site that drains to Mud Bay. Key environmental concerns center around stormwater management, impacts to the marine environment, and the adequacy of environmental review. The hearing examiner must determine whether the city's environmental review was adequate and whether the project meets applicable regulations.
### What Happened — The Short Version
The hearing began with discussion about whether the hearing examiner should conduct a site visit alone or accompanied by representatives from all parties. The examiner indicated intent to visit but expressed preference for an unaccompanied visit to avoid potential ex parte communication issues. The main testimony came from Jason Porter, the city's stormwater manager with 25 years experience. Porter explained the city's review of the preliminary stormwater management plan, including proposed treatment systems and outfall design. He testified that the project qualifies for exemption from flow control requirements because it discharges to Mud Bay, a saltwater body. Under cross-examination, Porter acknowledged that no hydrologic modeling showing actual flow quantities had been provided, and that complete stormwater site plans would be required later in the permitting process. The city concluded its case, and applicant's counsel called the property owner to begin their presentation.
### What to Watch Next
- Site visit coordination and timing to be determined via email among parties
- Continued testimony from applicant's witnesses in upcoming hearing sessions
- Hearing examiner's final written decision on the SEPA appeal after all testimony concludes
---