My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOCC Exhibits A-E ECY Approved SMP-Code Amendments
>
Meetings
>
2016
>
03. March
>
2016-03-15 10:00 AM - Commissioners' Agenda
>
BOCC Exhibits A-E ECY Approved SMP-Code Amendments
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/7/2018 10:36:59 AM
Creation date
4/7/2018 10:31:02 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meeting
Date
3/15/2016
Meeting title
Commissioners' Agenda
Location
Commissioners' Auditorium
Address
205 West 5th Room 109 - Ellensburg
Meeting type
Regular
Meeting document type
Supporting documentation
Supplemental fields
Alpha Order
m
Item
Request to Approve an Ordinance with Amendments to the Kittitas County Code and Kittitas County Comprehensive Plan to reflect the Washington State Department of Ecology Approved Shoreline Master Program for Kittitas County
Order
13
Placement
Consent Agenda
Row ID
28372
Type
Ordinance
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
339
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br />Kittitas County Shoreline Master Program <br />Chapter 1 12 <br />March 7, 2016 <br />Kittitas County Board of County Commissioners Shoreline Master Program Adopting Ordinance <br />Kittitas County Shoreline Master Program Exhibit A | March 2016 | Page 12 of 339 <br />in a manner to minimize, insofar as practical, any resultant damage to the <br />ecology and environment of the shoreline area and any interference with the <br />public's use the water. <br />1.4 Title and references <br />This Document shall be known and may be cited as the “Kittitas County Shoreline <br />Master Program.” This document may be referred to herein as the “Program,” “Master <br />Program,” “Shoreline Master Program,” or “SMP.” Definitions referenced from WAC <br />173-26-020 are provided in Chapter 2, including “may”, “must”, “shall”, and “should” <br />which have specific meaning for implementation of the Shoreline Management Act. <br />1.5 Public involvement process, advisory committee and agency coordination <br />1. Public information and outreach <br />This SMP was updated as part of a multi-jurisdictional update process with Kittitas <br />County serving as project lead. The participating jurisdictions were Kittitas County, the <br />City of Ellensburg, the City of Cle Elum, and the Town of South Cle Elum. The <br />participating jurisdictions involved the public throughout the update effort consistent with <br />the Shoreline Management Act (see RCW 90.58.130) and the SMP Guidelines (WAC <br />173-26-090). As project lead, Kittitas County prepared a public participation plan that <br />identified specific objectives, key stakeholders, and timelines for public participation <br />activities. <br />2. Multi-jurisdictional SMP update coordination <br />The SMP update process was closely coordinated among the participating jurisdictions. <br />An interlocal agreement was adopted to define the responsibilities of each jurisdiction <br />and allocate resources from a Washington State Department of Ecology grant. <br />Kittitas County provided the primary professional and clerical support and was <br />responsible for project management and contracting. Staff assigned by the Cities and <br />Town coordinated local efforts on shorelines within their respective municipal boundaries. <br />The County coordinated the SMP update process with Washington State Department of <br />Ecology (Ecology), Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), tribal <br />governments and other state agencies as required in the SMP update guidelines. In <br />addition, the County consulted with other entities for scientific, technical or cultural <br />information including federal agencies, watershed planning units, conservation districts, <br />public utility districts, and other institutions as needed. <br />All participating jurisdictions were responsible for reviewing and commenting on <br />recommended shoreline environment designations and the goals, policies, and use <br />regulations associated with those designations as well as the various supporting <br />documents including but not limited to: inventory characterization reports, restoration <br />plans and cumulative impact analysis. Each jurisdiction was responsible for approving <br />the final SMP through local adoption processes.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.