Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Westport Golf Links DEIS: staff flag major wetland impacts, permitting and litigation risks
Summary
Staff summarized the Westport Golf Links DEIS (issued April 7) and warned commissioners that the DEIS alternatives would cause substantial interdunal Category‑1 wetland losses (35–43 acres direct impact plus large buffer impacts), raising questions about mitigation sufficiency, shoreline/critical‑area permits, and vulnerability to coastal erosion; Ecology staff said significant mitigation gaps and permit hurdles remain.
Stewardship and legal staff provided an update on the Westport Golf Links draft environmental impact statement and the regulatory pathways the project would require. The DEIS was released April 7 and the public comment period was extended to June 9; staff said they received roughly 1,289 comments and prepared preliminary responses to about 175 substantive comments.
Stewardship staff summarized the technical stakes: interdunal wetlands make up most of the proposed 562‑acre analysis area, and the DEIS’ two action alternatives describe 35–43 acres of direct wetland impact plus buffer impacts of roughly 118–128 acres. Staff noted those interdunal wetlands are rated Category‑1 (highest sensitivity) and that mitigation proposals in the DEIS rely in part on off‑site mitigation and on regulatory approvals not yet assured. The Department of Ecology told the commission the DEIS as drafted includes gaps relative to Ecology’s permitting and mitigation guidance and cautioned that Ecology has raised concerns that some alternatives “would not meet the necessary permit requirements.”
Assistant Attorney General Joe Pesco briefed the commission on legal timelines and risk, noting that shoreline and critical‑area appeals commonly go to the Shoreline Hearings Board and sometimes to superior court; litigation timelines in previous, analogous Westport matters have stretched multiple years, and automatic stays and litigation risk could delay or bar construction even after permitting. Commissioners asked staff to return with the final EIS, a clear list of the regulatory permit triggers, and recommendations for parallel staff work (for example, a commission‑led planning exercise or land‑classification review) if commissioners want to develop alternative visions for Westport while permitting proceeds.
