County Planning Commission leery to approve curbs on flood plain fills
By John Henderer,The Chronicle, 11/11/98
A renewed effort to control filling in the flood plain in Lewis County received a chilly review Tuesday from the county planning commission.
As if bidding at a public auction, planning commissioners fired off hypothetical problems, questioning proposed amendments to county building and flood hazard ordinances.
Among other things, proposals by the Lewis County Flood Control Citizens Advisory Committee would require property owners to demonstrate a beneficial use for fill material.
In addition, property owners would have to attempt to use fill from within the flood plain, rather than hauling it down from the hills.
Another section would allow the county building official to require a property owner whose excavation, embankment or fill has become a hazard to ''eliminate'' the hazard.
''The language makes me extremely uncomfortable as a private property owner,'' said planning Commissioner Kyle Heaton. ''Now, you can reach back 50, 60 years with that.''
While many planning commissioners viewed the proposals as government infringing on private property rights, the Flood Control Committee intended them to protect citizens, said Ilona Peterson, a committee member.
''We're looking at trying to lessen damage from floods,'' Peterson said. ''These ordinances are to protect you.''
The county commission will hold a public hearing Nov. 23 on the proposed amendments. Earlier this year, commissioners rejected a recommendation from the Flood Control Committee to ban filling in the flood plain.
Citing comments from state and federal officials, Peterson said the county's permissive policies may work against a $1.1 million county flood control study in the Chehalis River Basin.
''If we don't put these in place, they might say, 'They don't want to help themselves, why should we help them?' '' Peterson said.
As a result, federal officials might route money necessary for the estimated $80 million flood-control project elsewhere.
''Isn't that blackmail?'' asked Fred Breed, planning commission chairman. ''Do we have to create an ordinance every time we want something from the federal government?''
Commissioner Steve Ryan queried whether removing soil to fill beneficially elsewhere would harm or benefit the area of removal.
Ted Sprague, a member of a growth management citizens committee, questioned whether a homeowner who raised his or her house 20 years ago would have to remove the fill material out of concern it had negatively affected a neighbor.
However, Commissioner Ed Moerke said the proposals are something ''this county can live with,'' and are much better than a proposed county stormwater runoff control ordinance.
Heaton said he favors mitigating flooding effects, but claimed trouble arises when the attempt steps on the property rights toes of ''everyone else in the county.''
The proposed filling restrictions are practically identical to those in effect in Thurston County, said Doug Jensen, county chief deputy civil attorney.
Planning commissioners decided to meet again at 7 p.m. next Tuesday to discuss the issue further.
Among other things, the ordinances would:
John Henderer covers county government and environmental issues for The Chronicle. He can be reached by e-mail at jhenderer@chronline.com or by calling 807-8239.
Back to Whats New Index Page
Back to CRC Index Page
Back to Lewis County Issues Index Page
Back to Grays Harbor County Issues Index Page
Back to Thurston County Issues Index Page