Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout022811_ra02 Regular Agenda JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA REQUEST TO: Board of County Commissioners Philip Morley, County Administrator FROM: AI Scalf, Director of Community Development Stacie Hoskins, Planning Manager/Shoreline Administrator Michelle McConnell, Associate Planne(J{jv'S, , ------ DATE: February 28, 2011 SUBJECT: Review Staff Recommendation for Ecology Required and Recommended Changes; Shoreline Master Program (SMP) Comprehensive Update (MLA08-475) STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Last week, Department of Community Development (DCD) staff provided a recommendation on Ecology's required and recommended changes, along with some additional revisions proposed for clarification. Continued discussion is needed to review all 61 possible changes to the Locally Approved SMP, to determine which issues may require another public hearing, and to provide direction to staff on how to proceed in preparing a response to Ecology. ANALYSIS/STRATEGIC GOALS/PROS and CONS: Ecology's approval is regarding the December 7,2009 Locally Approved SMP, submitted to Ecology on March 1, 2010 as Exhibit A of Jefferson County Resolution 77-09 (erroneously referenced in Ecology documents as 'Ordinance Number 77-09') as the proposed amendments to the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan and Jefferson County Code. This SMP Comprehensive Update (MLA08-475) is required by law and must be completed by December 2011. In March 2010, the County submitted a Locally Approved Shoreline Master Program (SMP) to the Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) for final review and approval, per RCW 90.58 and WAC 173-26. After a public review process, Ecology considered the County's proposed SMP update for consistency with state statute and rules. On January 26, 2011 Ecology determined that the County has met the procedural and policy requirements of the Shoreline Management Act and the SMP Guidelines, pending some required changes. A letter from Ecology's director with three attachments outlines their conditioned approval, findings and conclusions, required and recommended changes. The County needs to consider the required changes and respond as to whether to accept or propose alternatives to those changes prior to final adoption by the state and by local ordinance. Staff has reviewed the required and recommended changes and provides the attached guidance to the Board on whether to agree, further study, decline or propose alternative changes. In addition, the Board's May 2010 comment letter to Ecology suggested addressing the issues of vesting and minor edits, and staff has identified numerous other minor edits that were not included in Ecology's decision. These 1 Regular Agenda items are included as 'revisions proposed for clarification' to correct various scriveners errors in the document prior to final adoption. The Board's discussion of the DCD Recommendation began on February 22 but was not completed, therefore continued discussion is needed. FISCAL IMPACT/COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS: Grant funding for the SMP Update ended in June 2009. Department of Community Development staff work is covered by the annual budget. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Board: 1. Review the documents and provide feedback on each of the DCD Recommendation's 61 possible SMP changes - either to: . Concur with staff's guidance; or . Propose alternative changes. 2. Determine which SMP changes require a public hearing. 3. Set a date for the public hearing. REVIEWED BY: Philip Morley, County Administrator Date 2