The City of Bellingham has determined a controversial housing development proposed on the bay in south Bellingham will not have adverse environmental impacts as long as the developer follows required conditions. But an opposition group says the city has failed to adequately consider the impacts.

The proposed development, a 38-lot subdivision on approximately 37.7 acres known as the Woods at Viewcrest, abuts the Mud Bay Cliffs and sits above the North Chuckanut Bay estuary. It’s been in the works since 2022, as city planners go back and forth with developers.

On Friday, July 25, the city issued a mitigated determination of non-significance, or MDNS, saying the project “does not have a probable adverse impact on the environment,” based on review of a completed environmental checklist, and therefore the city will not require an environmental impact statement, or EIS. An EIS is a detailed document that requires significant public input, lays out a project’s potential effects on the natural and human environment and identifies possible mitigation measures.

Protect Mud Bay Cliffs is a large volunteer group that formed in 2021 to advocate against the adverse environmental impacts of the development. The group is concerned about stormwater runoff impacting water quality, traffic, degradation of high-quality habitat and coastal forest, and the possibility of landslides and other geologic hazards, among other worries, and has repeatedly called for the city to require an EIS.

The concerns of Protect Mud Bay Cliffs have been echoed by other organizations like the Sierra Club, RE Sources and the Whatcom County Marine Resources Committee.

Project attorney Jon Sitkin wrote in a December 2024 letter to the city that environmental factors had been considered sufficiently to support the issuance of an MDNS.

According to Sitkin’s letter, the project design limits clearing and grading, preserves much of the tree canopy, avoids and minimizes impacts to critical areas, maintains a large shoreline habitat corridor, treats stormwater runoff, and mitigates for other impacts to wildlife and habitat.

A Saturday, July 26 post on the Protect Mud Bay Cliffs website says the group will file an appeal of the determination to the hearing examiner before the Friday, Aug. 8 deadline. PMBC says the city “failed to protect the public’s interest” by not requiring an EIS. The group is fundraising $50,000 to cover its legal costs.

The city will accept public comment online in response to the determination through Aug. 8. A public hearing on the development application will be scheduled before the city hearing examiner after written public comment has been reviewed.

Julia Tellman writes about civic issues and anything else that happens to cross her desk; contact her at juliatellman@cascadiadaily.com.