Changing shoreline protections worry some Thurston County property owners
Some Thurston County residents who live along lakes or the sound are raising concerns about how updated shoreline protections may affect what they can do with their properties.
The long-time-coming Shoreline Master Program (SMP) will repeal and replace existing regulations that have been in place since 1990. The program protects the environment by regulating development on shorelines along Puget Sound, large lakes and streams.
“The proposed updates to the SMP will include current, best-available information, and balance growth and development consistent with protections that prioritize healthy and safe shorelines for people, fish and wildlife,” said Senior Planner Andrew Deffobis.
Deffobis introduced the topic before a Tuesday public hearing where nearly three dozen people voiced their thoughts on the proposed SMP. Many supported the current draft but expressed concerns about climate change as well as some lingering decision points related to shoreline buffer zones and how their properties are labeled.
The county began considering updates to the SMP in 2009 as required by the 1971 Washington state Shoreline Management Act. However, the Thurston County Planning Commission, an advisory body, didn’t approve a recommended draft until a 5-3 vote on Aug. 3, 2022.
Four planning commission members, including one who was absent from the vote, signed on to a minority report that calls for a variety of changes, including larger buffers zones and better consideration for climate change.
On Tuesday, commission member Helen Wheatley, lead author of the minority report, said she supported the current draft with its recent revisions. However, she called on the board to take an adaptive approach to the SMP that includes climate change elements.
“Green infrastructure, green space, providing migration for vital ecosystems — you need to consider climate elements like sea-level rise,” Wheatley said. “So, there’s just a lot of new elements now and it’s really worth keeping it on the forefront as we go forward.”
These elements are expected to factor into the county’s next comprehensive plan update and the SMP is part of that plan, she said.
The ultimate decision on whether to approve the current draft or amend it now rests with the Board of County Commissioners. In the coming weeks, the board will review scores of public comments shared by concerned residents.
Residents’ concerns
Bob Lanouette, who lives along Long Lake, asked the county to approve a 50-foot buffer, an area of separation between land use and the water, for his home.
“Most houses now on lakes are at 50 feet,” Lanouette said. “Imagine owning a parcel of property, fortunately that you would have on a lake, and the (buffer) is set at 85 and you need to set your new house 35 feet behind your neighbors. You would have a small view of the lake and a great view of their backyard. That would not be good.”
Buffers with vegetation are necessary to create habitat, slow rainwater runoff, filter pollutants and keep the water cool, according to county documents.
The current proposal calls for a standard 50-foot buffer for shoreline residential areas on marine or lake shorelines. Urban conservancy areas, or those that are or will be developed into urban settings, would require a 100-foot buffer on the same shorelines.
Rural conservancy areas, such as places with farms, forests, steep banks, bluffs or flood-prone land, would need a 125-foot buffer. Natural areas would need a 200-foot buffer.
All environmental designations would need a 250-foot buffer for streams, according to the proposal. Buffers may be reduced in some scenarios but that would require a shoreline variance permit and mitigation measures.
The proposal also requires a 15-foot building setback beyond the edge of the buffer. This area would allow activities to be conducted around the building, such as construction, without intruding on the buffer, according to county documents.
At this point, the board would need to decide whether to keep these standard buffers, use larger buffers from earlier drafts of the plan, or create entirely new buffer widths, according to a county decision matrix.
Michael Beehler, who lives along Pattison Lake, requested a 50-foot buffer as well. However, he said older buildings should be labeled as conforming even if they don’t meet the new requirements.
“A really important issue is to not penalize people for what they already have,” Beehler said. “If you change the goal line, don’t say you violated the goal.”
Legally existing developments that would no longer meet the new standards were still labeled “conforming“ under the proposed draft recommended by the planning commission.
However, county staff changed that term to “legally nonconforming” following feedback from the Washington State Department of Ecology. The current draft says this term means the development was grandfathered into the new program and is not illegal.
Still, Chris Ivy, who lives along Lake Lawrence, said he worries about how the term “legally nonconforming” may affect his property value.
“If this takes place, will the taxes follow the depreciation of this land?” Ivy said. “I can tell you, most people, if the house is listed as nonconforming and they’re looking to move on the lake, they’re probably going to find something else.”
Some residents also took issue with the environmental designation of their properties, saying it did not match their current use, and others voiced support for environmental protections in light of climate change.
Next steps and resources
The Board of County Commissioners did not directly respond to public comments during the hearing. However, they will consider the comments at two follow-up meetings.
Commissioner Carolina Mejia said the first meeting has been scheduled for 9 a.m. Wednesday, May 24, and the second meeting is planned for 9 a.m. Wednesday, June 14.
Once the board adopts an SMP update, the county will submit it to the state Department of Ecology for final review. Deffobis said the update will take effect once the department approves it.
The county has created an online story map that explains the SMP and the new updates with helpful images and graphics.
More information, documentation and maps for the SMP update can be found on the Thurston County Community Planning and Economic Development website.
