By Sherry Haviland
We need everyone to be in attendance at Spanaway Elementary School’s library this Wednesday, March 12 by 6:30 pm.
We will be talking with everyone about the new changes to the shoreline plan. This new plan was presented to the Council last week at the County-City Building, community meeting was held up in the Lake Tapps area last Week and our turn will be coming to PLU on Thursday, March 20 in the Scandinavian Center at 5:30.
We need to be prepared. So, please come to the meeting to find out the latest information. This does effect you.
= = = =
FROM: Jessie Richards, Al Anderson, Linda Heade (Spanaway Lake Property Owners)
SUBJECT: ACTION TAKEN AT PIERCE COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING
The above property owners attended the Pierce County Community Development Committee Meeting this past Monday, March 3, 2014.
PURPOSE OF THE MEETING: Debby Hyde, of Planning & Land Services, presented the final draft of revisions to the current Pierce County SMP to the Pierce County Council reps who sit on the PC Community Development Committee. They are Rick Talbert, Chair, Douglas Richardson, Stan Flemming, Jim McCune, and Connie Ladenburg. The focus of discussion was Chapter 18S.10; Exhibit “G” to Ordinance 2013-45. You can access this document at the Pierce County website: www.piercecountywa.org/council… attachment “G”! The Council reps voted 3/2 to accept this as a “working document” in order that both council members and the public are working from the same document.
EXHIBIT “G” Categories that IMPACT ALL WATERFRONT OWNERS: (pay special attention to the terms “shall”, “may”, “should”)
- 18S.10.055: pages 7-8
- 18S.30.030: pages 25-27
- 18S.40.060: pages 46-47
- 18S.40.100: pages 51-53
- 18S.40.140: pages 56-59
The above are only recommendations for close reading. Please consider reading through the entire 111 pages for night time enjoyment. Question: Why do we need so much regulation!!!!
HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE MEETING
- Councilman Talbert, Richardson, and McCune strongly emphasized that they WANT, NEED, and will LISTEN to public comment prior to final approval. THEY WANT PUBLIC IMPUT AS TO HOW ANY SECTION(S) OF THE REVISED SMP NEGATIVELY AFFECTS PROPERTY OWNERS.
- Within two years, this revision process will happen again!
- Jim McCune, Spanaway Lake PC Council Rep., expressed his strong opposition to the fact that DOE is overstepping the rights of property owners per WAC 126 & 127 and HB1113 established in 2013. Also, Jim was critical of the fact that the county’s written notification to waterfront property owners did not present a clear message of alerts to the “take aways” included in the revised SMP and that this communication did little to draw attention to the context.
PLEASE PLAN TO ATTEND THESE MARCH MEETINGS
- SPANAWAY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ON MARCH 12, 2014 @6:30.
- PIERCE COUNTY PUBLIC HEARING ON THE SMP AT PLU, MARCH 20, 5:30 PM Scandinavian Cultural Center. We need to PACK this meeting!
Pierce Prairie Post 
3/21/14
Subject: Pierce County Shoreline Master Program (SMP)
The below points were made at the hearings for Lake Tapps and Lake Spanaway owners of waterfront properties on 3/12/14 and 3/20/14 respectively. Some of the comments are repeated and not all the comments were captured.
*Lake Tapps
The lake is a special case because it is partially drained during part of the year.
No one from the DOE or state cared when homeowners were trying to save the lake.
The buffer and set backs are not reasonable and will make development difficult.
Property values will drop due to the regulations.
The high water mark doesn’t make sense because it is higher than the water has ever been.
The SMP will make it harder to build on waterfront property.
It is a reservoir and not a lake.
The lake should not be covered by the SMP.
DOE will add more restrictions at the next change.
There is no transparency. Residents were not notified of the changes in a timely manner.
The lake has fish according to one person and it doesn’t according to another person.
There are no natural fish. They are all brought in.
The bass love my dock.
Trees don’t keep the lake cool.
It is not clear what results are being sought based on the setbacks.
Read about SMP on http://laketappsnews.org/
Make the SMP more understandable.
*PLU meeting for Spanaway Lake residents
The 111 page document is hard to understand.
Excessive permits will be required.
There was a lack of reasonable advance notice that changes to the SMP were in work.
DOE is not accountable.
It is based on scientific fraud. Science needs to back the recommendations. SMP not based on science. Not true science.
Stop the process. More time required. More data is required.
Homeowner had to build house based on setback restriction but shellfish industry can ruin the tidelands. The industry deposits garbage and plastic on beach. They don’t pay taxes and create limited number of jobs.
Shellfish industry wrote the regulations. There are 1,000 applicants for grandfathered sites to raise agriculture items. This will weaken shoreline management. Plastic will be on the shorelines.
SMP is punishing landowners.
Homeowners have paid thousands of dollars for property taxes.
The SMP will result in significant costs for homeowners for engineers and lawyers.
The vote by Pierce County Council on the SMP should be delayed.
Pierce County Council and county workers are trying to do their job as best they can.
Property owners want to protect the water resources and their property.
Property is being taken without compensation and this is a violation of the US Constitution.
The Pierce County Council members have not met with DOE on the SMP.
Homeowners were unable to provide specific recommendations for changes to the SMP.
There is no defensible reason for moving the set back from 50 to 75 feet.
No reason for being more restrictive here than at Lake Tapps.
The buffer and setback rules are not right.
Let people who live on the lake write the regulation.
Rewrite the nonconforming section.
Property values will go down because it will be too expensive to build.
Making an area natural does not make it better. Don’t want weeds vs shrubs.
Turning the waterfront into a swap is not good.
Delay the approval of the plan.
The plan is unconstitutional and there is no end in sight as far as more changes.
Adding nonconforming use to property will reduce property value.
Reader gets lost reading 100 plus pages and wants the SMP to be clear and simple.
Objects to buffer zone.
Measure stream flow effectively.
SMP is overreaching and there is no science backing it.
Under current rules, it took homeowner 3 ½ years and 185 pages of documentation to be able to put in a bulkhead.
DOE required a tree 2 feet from the lake but that does not make sense.
Don’t adopt the plan.
SMP ignores science.
Wait till the $4k study of Spanaway Lake water quality is completed prior to passing the SMP.
The law is more about control and is a land grab.
Owners care about their property.
The Lake is a surface manifestation of an aquifer.
Data is required to support the changes.
*Pierce County Council comments
The council members all thanked attendees for coming and expressing their view points and collectively made several points beyond the below comments.
If residents have specific concerns about certain clauses, they should submit their proposed changes to the county council.
The plan needs to be updated every 8 years and the update is three years late. Once the current plan is updated, it will need to be updated in 4 years since it is currently late.
If Pierce County does not adopt the plan the Department of Ecology will write and adopt the SMP that will need to be enforced. Four votes are required to send the SMP to the DOE.
*The following suggestions are offered for future homeowner meetings with the county council.
Prior to the comments from the residents, the county should present a PowerPoint presentation with the following:
• A brief history of water regulations beginning with US laws passed in 1971, state laws and county rules and regulations.
• The organizations responsible for enforcing waterfront regulations at the national, state and local level.
• The goals of the SMP.
List the significant changes.
Note that other counties have adopted updated plans.
Provide a time line chart with key milestones.
Have a chart showing how property values have changed or not changed in the counties where they have adopted an updated shoreline management plan.
Explain why the proposed ordinance would be constitutional.
Indicate what homeowners can do to have an impact.
• Submit specific recommended changes by paragraph to the county council.
• Mobilize their community to agree on key recommendations.
• Contact their state representative with their specific concerns.
• Request DOE to host a question and answer meeting.
• Request Pierce County Council to host a question and answer meeting.
• Establish a communication link/website for the 12,000 waterfront owners to submit comments by topic.
• Set up a site where homeowners can vote to adopt, not adopt or delay the ordinance and have a space where homeowners can give the reason for their vote. Have voters indicate the area where they live. Tapps, Spanaway Lake, Gig Harbor etc.