Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Planning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public commenter says new county CAD review misapplies Title 24, causing extra wetland work
Summary
A resident raised concerns during public comment that Thurston County's new CAD (Comprehensive Application Development) review is improperly requiring wetland delineations in some cases and that front-desk planning staff lack needed training to differentiate stream versus wetland delineations.
Justin Russell, a Thurston County resident, told commissioners Feb. 18 that the county's newly implemented CAD review process is creating unnecessary work and expense by requiring wetland delineations where staff should determine an on-site evaluation is sufficient under Title 24.
Russell said a property with a stream—but no mapped wetlands—was instructed to obtain a wetland delineation after a planner at the front desk told the applicant a delineation was required. "The planner couldn't determine the difference between a wetland delineation and a stream delineation," Russell said, describing the guidance as inconsistent and confusing.
"This is gonna put us in a bind ... It's just gonna take more and more time," Russell said, adding that the result is wasted applicant money and delays. He asked the board to ensure oversight, training and that the department director perform required site visits under Title 24 to determine whether critical areas apply.
County staff told Russell during the public comment period that the board does not answer questions during comment and that written follow-up through the county manager's office would be the way to obtain a formal response. Russell said he would submit information in writing.
No formal agenda action or staff response was recorded on the floor at the Feb. 18 meeting; commissioners heard the comment as part of the public-comment segment of the meeting.
