HomeMy WebLinkAbout2961-24
G rnA
9& &, Sh-w.
Michelle McConnell
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Peter Brockman [pbrockman2@earthlink.net]
Monday, January 05,20095:54 PM
Michelle McConnell
Re: SMP Public Comment 1/5/09
Zt1 (p I
(3
Michelle:
Re: 1/5/09 Public Comment to Planning Commission on SMP update
Thank you for letting us know the "side-by-side" review of the existing SMP and the Preliminary Draft SMP proposal will
be available on Jan. 7. This will also be very helpful to private property shoreline owners (those that are aware ofthe
draft SMP release)...... who are working on providing feedback and trying to clearly understand what is being proposed
during this important public comment period. Although it would seem to be important to have provided this prior to
the time of the Dec. 3rd release for public comment rather than half way through the public comment period in order to
give the public the full information with adequate time to be actively involved in the drafting and to give feedback to
Planning Commission.
In addition, there were 4 pages of major changes to the May/June 2008 draft SMP that were not released until Nov.
14th to the public on the website without full wording that had no general public involvement in the drafting --- these
included maior changes for private property owners-- who could not have been involved in the drafting of these changes
prior to the formal release because these changes were not discussed in any open public forum or presented. The last
STAC/SPAC meeting of Nov. 18th was not noticed on the website to the public until 2 working days prior which they were
discuss the 4 pages of major changes released on Nov. 14th (without full wording available) since the last version of
May/June 2008. In addition the meeting minutes to this meeting of Nov. 18th as of today Jan. 5th are still unavailable to
the public....during this important open public comment period. Just one example of one of these major changes was
that the definition of "appurtenance" was noted added on Nov. 14th (as it was missing from the earlier drafts) m
without the wording available to the public until formal release of Dec. 3. This is an important definition to private
shoreline owners and their feedback should have been involved in the drafting.
This gave no public involvement on these changes prior to the formal release to planning commission in order to have
received the mandated active general public involvement in the drafting. What would have been reasonable was that all
private property shoreline owners, realtors and all business operators in the shoreline which includes building
contractors (which a list could have been easily obtained in the county's database of what contractors were on permits
granted in last 3 years) should have been noticed by mail of an open house which presented what was actually now
been proposed, presented this new "side by side" comparison requested their feedback and allowed adequate time for
them to ask questions and comment to be actively involved in the drafting prior to the planning commission
release......not during the formal public comment period which appears to be rushed and oddly released on Dec. 3rd
with an unreasonable time to receive the active public comment through the holidays? This process needs the
mandated active public involvement of private waterfront owners seeing and understanding what the current changes
that are being proposed are. As currently proposed these regulations are dramatically reducing the use of their
shoreline. Per "WAC 173-26-186" (5) Local government should use a process designed to assure that proposed
regulatory or administrative actions do not unconstitutionally infringe upon private property rights.
It was the directive of the grant to inform and involve the public at large in participation at all stages.
Per SMP Guidelines "Ecology regional shoreline planners are to provide "technical assistance" on the
overall planning --- not give directives on how counties should rule. "Under the SMA each county with
"shorelines of the state" must adopt a Shoreline Master Program that is based on state laws and rules but
tailored to the specific geographic, economic and environmental needs of the community. The SMA
establishes a balance of authority between local and state government. Cities and counties are the
primary regulators."
1
In WAC 173-26-171 Authority, Purpose and Effects of Guidelines, under Section (2) Purpose: "Local
government shall have the primary responsibility for initiating the planning required by the Shoreline
Management Act and "administering the regulatory program consistent with the policy and provisions" of
the Act. "The department (of Ecology) shall act primarily in a supportive and review capacity with an
emphasis on providing assistance to local government and insuring compliance." Under Section (3) Effect.
(a). "The guidelines allow local governments substantial discretion to adopt master programs reflecting
local circumstances and other local regulatory and non-regulatory programs related to the policy goals of
shoreline management as provided in the policy statements of RCW 90.58.020, WAC 173-26-176 and
WAC 173-26-181.
Thank you for included this for formal public comment, Peter Brockman
-----Original Message-----
From: Michelle McConnell
Sent: Dec 31, 20086:46 PM
To: Michelle McConnell
Subject:
REMINDER: The Planning Commission has on their agenda a "side-by-side" review of the main similarities and
differences between the performance standards/development regulations of the existing SMP and the Preliminary Draft
SMP proposal. This will be next week at 6:30 pm at the WSU Spruce Room in Port Hadlock on Wednesday January 7,
2009.
The agenda is online at
hUp:/ /www.co.iefferson.wa.us/com mdevelo pment/PDFS/PCAgenda/2009%20Agendas/PC%20Agenda%2001-07 -09. pdf
Best wishes for a safe and happy New Year's celebration,
Michelle
You have received this message as a member of the Jefferson County Shoreline Master Program (SMP) Interested Parties Email
Distribution List. If you do not wish to receive further project notices, reply to this message with "UNSUBSCRIBE" as the subject and
body text. Anyone who wants to be added to the list may send an email with "SUBSCRIBE" as the subject and body text. Please note:
Recipient names and email addresses are not shown to keep that information private.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Michelle McConnell, Associate Planner - LRP Lead
Shoreline Master Program (SMP) Update Project Manager
Direct: 360.379.4484
Web: www.co.jefferson.wa.us/commdevelopment/ShorelinePlanning.htm
Jefferson County Department of Community Development
Long Range Planning Division
621 Sheridan St, Port Townsend, W A 98368
Front Desk: 360,379.4450
Fax: 360,379.4473
NEW OFFICE HOURS: 9 a - 4:30 p Monday - Thursday; Closed on Friday
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
NOTE: All e-mail sent to this address will be received by the Jefferson County e-mail system and is subject to Public Disclosure under Chapter 42.56 RCW.
2