|
 | |||
| Lopez Island | Orcas Island | Visitor's Guide | ||
| Email this page to a friend | ||
| ||||||||||||||||
|
CRITICAL AREAS CITIZEN REVIEW COMMITTEE |
|
|
Council's Critical Areas Ordinance workshop set for Aug. 25San Juan County Council has scheduled a three-and-one-half hour workshop on the Critical Areas Ordinance and the Shoreline Master Plan at 1 p.m. Tuesday, August 25 at the San Juan Community Theater in Friday Harbor. A council-appointed citizen Critical Areas Ordinance Committee met for more than two years in public to recommend revisions to the CAO. The next step in the county's planning process are public hearings of the draft ordinance before the planning commission. The planning commission then forwards its recommendations to the county Council which holds public hearings. After hearing from the public, the county Council can adopt the ordinance as presented or make changes before adopting it. If major changes are made, another round of public hearings must be held. Instead of proceeding with the process which is the policy of San Juan County, the county council listened to councilmember Lovel Pratt's suggestion and inserted a workshop into the mix. The workshop format allows for the council to ask questions. The public can submit written questions which may be answered if time permits. Previously the county had promised to hold another evening public meeting on San Juan Island in order for citizens to have their questions about the CAO answered since the first one held in June was overcrowded. The meeting was to be held in the summer. Council Chair Rich Peterson will moderate the workshop discussion. Participants include:
The council has pledged that all questions submitted by the public will be answered either at the workshop or on the County website and additional public outreach meetings. The full agenda, additional information and reference documents produced for the workshop will added to the at: County's web site as they become available. Pratt asks council to change planning process for CAOBy Sharon Kivisto posted 06/24/2009
San Juan County Councilmember Lovel Pratt, a former planning commissioner, convinced the council to change the procedure. The next step will be a council workshop where the council will tell the planning department staff what they want "to get out of the ordinance." As part of the public outreach process, county staff is planning another informational meeting on San Juan Island since the first one was over-crowded. County Long-range Planner Shireene Hale will be at the Orcas Senior Center in Eastsound from 9:45 to 11:45 a.m. Thursday, June 25 to answer any questions, in an informal setting, citizens have involving the draft ordinance. The council listened to a presentation about the San Juan Initiative's work by Amy Windrope, who was a member of the CAO committee. Windrope discussed a tailored approach to shoreline setbacks depending on vegetation whether they were "100 or 150-feet". The council has heard comments from citizens who prefer 50-foot setbacks. After her presentation, Windrope was called back. Pratt said, "I'd like to suggest the staff has put together a draft. We've had an initial round of public meetings and we've gotten some initial feedback from the public about that. I think it'd be great to have a workshop. I think it would be great to have Amy participate in it as well as our county staff and certainly be good to have someone from Randy's office also to weigh in on the element we are talking about. Get us up to speed on where we are on the process and to consider the next steps." Councilmember Rich Peterson said, "You know I thought about that too. But I'm wondering if that doesn't somehow upset the process. Because The process I thought at this point was for the draft to move forward to the planning commission. Wouldn't that occur at the planning commission? Would it not impede the planning commission's ability to manipulate what they believe the ultimate ordinance should be? Aren't we stepping in front of the line if we do that?" Councilmember Richard Fralick said, "There's a lot of issues. Part of the thing we are looking at is some of the confusion. Long range Planning Dept. doesn't know what the the council wants to get out of this. Doesn't know whether or not we are willing to take on the risk of being different. Workshop might be beneficial at this point to allow us to have at least the dialogue not suggesting we make a decision. Allow us the opportunity for us to get our views out there." Peterson said, "I think it would be profitable to, you are a former planning commissioner, you could probably speak to what it would make the planning commission think." The council agreed to schedule a workshop. Council wants another meeting on CAO on San Juan Islandposted 06/16/2009
Councilmember Howie Rosenfeld said he wasn't able to get into the meeting and was "accosted by several angry citizens." It is unfortunate misinformation about the necessity of the CAO is being spread, he said. The possibility of having a second meeting on Orcas Island was also reserved at the request of the Orcas Island councilmembers. Critical Area Ordinance Workshop at Lopez Community Center todayWorkshops will be held on San Juan, Lopez and Orcas islands about the proposed amendments to the Unified Development Code regarding the critical area requirements for upland and shoreline areas. The workshops will provide information and begin public review and discussion on the proposed changes. Maps will display the location of Critical Areas, scientists will be available to answer technical questions, and CD copies of scientific reports and draft documents will be provided. It is anticipated that additional workshops will be held in August, and that public hearings with the Planning Commission will begin in September. Suggestions and input will be accepted throughout the review and adoption process. MORE INFORMATION The schedule is:
CAO: Separating fact from fearBy Sharon Kivisto posted 06/07/2009 Unbuildable lots, expensive studies, no flower beds - those are the rumors about the proposed updated San Juan County Critical Areas Ordinance. The reality: the number of undeveloped lots that may have difficulty meeting the new requirements: 155. And 2,500 square feet of development is allowed with no special studies. The update was due in 2006. The state's Growth Management Act requires protection of the natural resources. "The proposed changes are for the most part the minimum we can defend under the state GMA," said Senior Planner Shireene Hale. A contentious citizens advisory committee worked on the ordinance for two years. A facilitator had to be hired to keep the group moving along. At the end, with the process bogged down, the decision was made with the approval of the county Council for the Community Development and Planning Department to move the ordinance forward. The draft ordinance is now ready for citizens to view before it goes through the Planning Commission and ultimately to the county Council. Public hearings will be held before both the commission and the council. CD&P Department staff will hold public meetings June 15, 16 and 17 to update citizens on the ordinance. Maps showing the undeveloped properties will be available. The maps were created using information from GIS data. The public is encouraged to review the maps and inform staff of any inaccuracies. People with questions can also contact Shireene Hale at shireenehl@co.san-juan.wa.us There are plenty of rumors flying about what the ordinance requires property owners to do and what it restricts them from doing. In an effort to clear up the misinformation we are posting a letter which contains many of the rumors and we are countering it with a list of the facts. We hope this is helpful in creating a healthy commmunity conversation about this topic based on facts not fiction. | |
Letter about CAO OrdinanceDear Citizens, WOW! Open your eyes and read the new proposed CAO ordinance. It is scary! The biggest criticism I have regarding this document is the overreaching powers and the unintended consequences it will have on all property owners in our County. Did you know that with the recommended setbacks from shorelines or streams you may lose the right to build on your vacant property or even remodel your existing home? Even your right to plant flowers in certain areas is taken away. Most projects will simply be so expensive they will not be able to be legally done by the average property owner. You will be required to hire: lawyers, biologists, geologists, water hydrologists, surveyors etc. You will also have to pay for: permits, fees, special requirements like how you will have to mark out the areas and have mandatory 5 year plans. Anything you might want to do in the future on your property may become impossibly expensive. Simply put, if this document does not take away your right to build, the costs to do things legally will stop you. Quiet enjoyment of your property is about to become extinct. Soon, only the extremely wealthy will be able to own property in San Juan County. You could even go bankrupt for unknowingly doing something on your property. Whenever ordinance recommendations are made, they should be backed up by real science, and provide a balance of affordability to our citizens. This CAO does neither. This CAO document will take away your use of your property. Your property will in effect be given to the Planning Department as their park, with you being required to upkeep it in the manner they dictate to you. You will receive no compensation or reduction in property taxes for this taking. Many homeowners' properties clearly meet the definitions of wet lands, or they have ponds, streams or other criteria that would make those properties subject to the new setbacks, buffers and other CAO regulations. This CAO document also gives inordinate power to the "Director" who is currently the person pressing for violations to be listed as "criminal acts” subject to criminal penalties, fines and imprisonment. He has also been trying to usurp the power of our elected Council by making policy decisions contrary to the intent of the law. The most recent example is his attempt to keep anyone from building an accessory structure before she/he builds the main house. Good Grief! Is there no protection for the citizens from arbitrary actions and overreaching regulations or Directors? This is a massive regulatory solution to a problem that does not exist and the changes are radical. We already have very stringent regulations that protect our environment. Thomas Jefferson once said, "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." Property owners are better stewards of their land, because they have a vested interest in it. Please attend the June 15th CAO hearing in F.H., and then join me at the Grange Hall on June 16th at 4:30 pm, to hear more and brainstorm what can be done to prevent this taking.
Sincerely, |
FACTSLots which are buildable now cannot be made unbuildable by new regulations. There is a reasonable use exception for properties that are otherwise buildable but have trouble meeting the Critical Area regulations (see Section 18.30.110.E). As with our existing Critical Area regulations (which have been on the books since 1991), the requirements only apply to certain areas – wetlands, streams, the shoreline, geologically hazardous area, areas prone to flooding, and a few upland areas with endangered species. They do not apply to any other areas. With regard to the cost of meeting the requirements, the proposed draft offers property owners several options. If one is willing to build outside of buffer areas, there should be no additional expense. If a property owner wants to develop a site specific plan, then they are probably going to have to hire experts to help them evaluate their property, review the applicable science, and develop a plan that is equally protective of water quality, fish and wildlife – the public resources we are required to protect. Even for properties nearly or totally covered with wetlands or wetland/ stream/ shoreline buffers, 2,500 square feet of development is allowed with no special studies. More development is allowed if the property owner can offset the impacts of the new development by restoring degraded areas. If the property owner chooses this option, they will need to hire experts and meet other requirements to help ensure that on balance, their development will not have a negative impact on our shared natural resources. Estimate of the number of undeveloped parcels that may have difficulty meeting the new stream, wetland and shoreline buffer requirements: Less than 25 undeveloped parcels that may have difficulty meeting the stream buffer requirements (ones with less than 2 acres outside the stream and buffer) Less than 50 undeveloped parcels that may have difficulty meeting the shoreline buffer requirements (parcels less than 1 acre in size). The number may be significantly lower because this includes common open space lots which are not buildable lots. 80 undeveloped parcels that may have difficulty meeting wetland buffer requirements (ones with less than 1 acre outside the wetland and buffer). The scientific documents used are available on CDs from the Community Development and Planning Department. The word Director in an ordinance refers to a position not to a specific individual. The ticketing ordinance being proposed by the CD&P Dept. Director Ron Henrickson for building code enforcement does the opposite of what Penwell says. The tickets are civil infractions not criminal. The code enforcement currently in place is a criminal system. The prosecutor decides whether to prosecute as a criminal matter or handle as a civil matter. As far as usurping the county Council, the Director he/she (or their employees) are responsible for enforcing the requirements of the County's Unified Development Code, which is adopted by the county Council. Some sections of the existing code, which was approved in 1998 by a previous Board of County Commissions, are ambiguous and in need of revision. The county Council can ask for changes to the code through the annual Docket which they have done.It is common knowledge the code is ambiguous and in need of revision for clarification. The proposed changes are for the most part the minimum the county can do and still we defend under the State Growth Management Act. While San Juan County is overdue it is benefitting from the delay because more in known regarding what is acceptable. There were many appeals by other jurisdictions. And while some citizens argue that the county's ordinance is too onerous, there is a strong possibility the state's Dept. of Ecology and the Dept. of Fish and Wildlife will appeal the setback for wetlands and streams respectively according to Hale. Information about the process of updating the County's Critical Areas Ordinance is available on the Community Development and Planning Department Web site. |
|
|
SAN JUAN ISLANDER © 2010 |
||