Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hearing examiner closes public comment on Agergaard after‑the‑fact shoreline permit; staff recommends approval
Summary
Hearing Examiner Gary McLean closed the public comment portion of a hearing on an after‑the‑fact Shoreline Substantial Development Permit application for property on Stewart Island and said he will take the matter under advisement.
Hearing Examiner Gary McLean closed the public comment portion of a hearing on an after‑the‑fact Shoreline Substantial Development Permit application for property on Stewart Island and said he will take the matter under advisement. The application (file LandUse-21-262) was submitted to legitimize prior unpermitted work, including tree removal and a deck expansion, and includes a mitigation plan with a 2:1 tree replacement ratio and other plantings.
The county planner, Colin Maycock, told the examiner that a notice of violation had been issued on Feb. 18, 2020, the applicants developed a compliance and mitigation plan with county staff, and the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) determination was issued Feb. 26, 2025. Maycock said the county received no public comments or SEPA appeals on the application and that staff recommends approval of the permit with the conditions set out in the staff report.
Tim Schurmetsler, attorney for applicants Jen and Shane Agergaard, said the applicants accept most recommendations in the staff report but requested removal of one mitigation element — a soil berm whose primary purpose was to mitigate impacts from portions of the deck that have since been removed. Schurmetsler said the berm “is really targeted at addressing those impacts” and that without the expanded deck the berm is no longer necessary. He also confirmed the applicants will not install a split‑rail fence that had been included in the original mitigation plan.
Maycock confirmed staff has no objection to removing the soil berm from the mitigation plan and clarified that while a permanent fence shoreward of the residence would not be allowed, a temporary protective fence for plantings is permitted during the monitoring period and must be removed afterward. No members of the public in the room or online spoke during the public comment period.
The hearing examiner closed the public hearing on the Agergaard application and said he will take the record under advisement before issuing a decision. No final approval or denial was issued at the session.
