HomeMy WebLinkAbout2961-442c
Co rv1\\?
Michel" McConnell
'~o, (; \
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
AI Scalf
Monday, March 09, 2009 2:21 PM
Stacie Hoskins; Michelle McConnell
FW: JC Proposed SMP
Ci30
From: Larry Carter [mailto:lwc@cablespeed.com]
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 1:58 PM
To: AI Scalf
Subject: RE: JC Proposed SMP
AI
I recommend you use the BCC feature on your emails. Everyone you copied on your email has everyone else's email
address and names in most cases.
Thank you for the email just the same. Please keep me on your SMP mail list
larry
Larry
Owner
Olele Point Services, (OPS)
Providinll Professional Ol1erators and Technicians to the Power Generation Industrv
OPS
931 Olele Point Rd, Port Ludlow, WA 98365
360-437-9224 Fax: 360-437-9224 Cell: 360-301-2264
-----Original Message-----
From: AI Scalf [mailto:ascalf@co.jefferson.wa.us]
Sent: Monday, March 09,2009 1:18 PM
To: ken shock
Cc: John Austin; Phil Johnson; David Sullivan; Michelle McConnell; Norman MacLeod; George Sickel; Bud
Schindler; ASM Inc; larry and karen; Kenn Brooks; Bob Lawhead; bill graham; Mountain Coalition;
robertc@harpub.com; ron ewart; Karen Martin; jim hagen; Judi Stewart; jim kennedy; Jim and Donna Buck; Larry
Carter; elk@dishmail.net; Pat Rodgers; Jack Venrick; wayne king; Scott; Emily; Teren; waves@olympus.net;
hoodcanal@windermere.com; Val Schindler; Mike Martin; Brooks & Barbara; Kathleen Bradford; Bonnie Story;
Dennis Schultz; Floyd Fuller; Richard Hild; Jean; John W Mc Duff; Elmer Matson; Roger Short; brinnon@johnston-
realty.com; Katherine Baril
Subject: RE: JC Proposed SMP
Ken
Yes, the State of Washington is directing local governments through the
Shoreline Management Act (SMA) to update our master program (SMP).
The legislature finds that the shorelines of the state are among the most valuable and fragile of
its natural resources and that there is great concern throughout the state relating to their
utilization, protection, restoration, and preservation. In addition it finds that ever increasing
pressures of additional uses are being placed on the shorelines necessitating increased
1
coordination in the management and development of the shorelines of the state. The
legislature further finds that much of the shorelines of the state and the uplands adjacent
thereto are in private ownership; that unrestricted construction on the privately owned or
publicly owned shorelines of the state is not in the best public interest; and therefore,
coordinated planning is necessary in order to protect the public interest associated with the
shorelines of the state while, at the same time, recognizing and protecting private property
rights consistent with the public interest. There is, therefor, a clear and urgent demand for a
planned, rational, and concerted effort, jointly performed by federal, state, and local
governments, to prevent the inherent harm in an uncoordinated and piecemeal development
of the state's shorelines.
It is the policy of the state to provide for the management of the shorelines of the state by
planning for and fostering all reasonable and appropriate uses. This policy is designed to
insure the development of these shorelines in a manner which, while allowing for limited
reduction of rights of the public in the navigable waters, will promote and enhance the public
interest. This policy contemplates protecting against adverse effects to the public health, the
land and its vegetation and wildlife, and the waters of the state and their aquatic life, while
protecting generally public rights of navigation and corollary rights incidental thereto.
The legislature declares that the interest of all of the people shall be paramount in the
management of shorelines of statewide significance. The department, in adopting guidelines
for shorelines of statewide significance, and local government, in developing master programs
for shorelines of statewide significance, shall give preference to uses in the following order of
preference which:
(1) Recognize and protect the statewide interest over local interest;
(2) Preserve the natural character of the shoreline;
(3) Result in long term over short term benefit;
(4) Protect the resources and ecology of the shoreline;
(5) Increase public access to publicly owned areas of the shorelines;
(6) Increase recreational opportunities for the public in the shoreline;
(7) Provide for any other element as defined in RCW 90.58.100 deemed appropriate or
necessary.
In the implementation of this policy the public's opportunity to enjoy the physical and
aesthetic qualities of natural shorelines of the state shall be preserved to the greatest extent
feasible consistent with the overall best interest of the state and the people generally. To this
end uses shall be preferred which are consistent with control of pollution and prevention of
damage to the natural environment, or are unique to or dependent upon use of the state's
shoreline. Alterations of the natural condition of the shorelines of the state, in those limited
instances when authorized, shall be given priority for single family residences and their
2
appurtenant structures, ports, shoreline recreational uses including but not limited to parks,
marinas, piers, and other improvements facilitating public access to shorelines of the state,
industrial and commercial developments which are particularly dependent on their location
on or use of the shorelines of the state and other development that will provide an opportunity
for substantial numbers of the people to enjoy the shorelines of the state. Alterations of the
natural condition of the shorelines and shorelands of the state shall be recognized by the
department. Shorelines and shorelands of the state shall be appropriately classified and these
classifications shall be revised when circumstances warrant regardless of whether the change
in circumstances occurs through man-made causes or natural causes. Any areas resulting from
alterations of the natural condition of the shorelines and shorelands of the state no longer
meeting the definition of "shorelines of the state" shall not be subject to the provisions of
chapter 90.58 RCW.
Permitted uses in the shorelines of the state shall be designed and conducted in a manner to
minimize, insofar as practical, any resultant damage to the ecology and environment of the
shoreline area and any interference with the public's use of the water.
Your Question #1 Pertains to the 75% rule for reconstruction in the event of damage (fire)-
this comes from WAC 173-27-080 and be found in our draft SMP at page 10-6.
#2 Who makes this judgement? First would come the land owner who would
evaluate how much damage, then a permit proposal from the land owner or
representative and a subsequent review by DCD, who would evaluate the proposal and
make a decision.
#3 Would this cloud the title? DCD would not place any notice to title under
this proposed SMP.
#4 Who serves who? See the legislative findings above.
The Planning Commission is currently reviewing and revising the draft SMP and another
public hearing with a public comment period will occur in the months to come. The 75% issue
is being actively debated by the commission and the Board of County Commissioners.
Your home and garage that was started in 2001 exceeded the ISO' buffer requirement and
subsequently would be conforming to both the current CAO as adopted and the draft SMP as
proposed.
Al
3