HOUSE BILL REPORT

HB 2740

BYRepresentatives G. Fisher, Schoon, Belcher, Pruitt, Heavey, Hine and Phillips

Modifying permit requirements for substantial developments on shorelines as they relate to utility extensions.

House Committe on Environmental Affairs

Majority Report:  The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass.  (11)

      Signed by Representatives Rust, Chair; D. Sommers, Ranking Republican Member; Brekke, G. Fisher, Fraser, Phillips, Pruitt, Schoon, Sprenkle, Van Luven and Walker.

Minority Report:  Without recommendation.  (1)

      Signed by Representative Valle, Vice Chair.

House Staff:Harry Reinert (786-7110)

AS REPORTED BY COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS

FEBRUARY 2, 1990

BACKGROUND:

The Shorelines Management Act (SMA) was enacted in 1971 to, in part, "prevent the inherent harm in an uncoordinated and piecemeal development of the state's shorelines."  The SMA establishes a cooperative program between the state and local governments, with local governments having the primary, regulatory responsibility, and the state having an oversight and supportive role.  Under the SMA, local governments are required to submit master programs for approval by the Department of Ecology.  Proposed developments must be consistent with the SMA and the master program adopted by a local government.  A substantial development on the state's shorelines may not be undertaken without approval by the local government.  A substantial development is a project that costs over $2,500 or that restricts public access to the shoreline.  There are a number of exceptions to the definition of a substantial development.

There are no statutory requirements on the time by which a local government must act on an application for a substantial development permit.  Public notice of the application must be provided and 30 days must be allowed for response to the proposal.  Construction may not begin on the project until 30 days after the permit is issued.

SUMMARY:

SUBSTITUTE BILL:  The time period for public comment on a substantial development permit is reduced from 30 days to 20 days if:  1) an application is made to construct a utility service connection serving an existing use; and 2) the new utility service does not extend more than 2500 feet within the shoreline area. The local government must grant or deny the permit for such a proposal within 15 days after the comment period has ended.  If the permit is granted, construction may not begin until seven days after the date of approval.  The local government must include in its public notice for any substantial development proposal a statement of how the public may obtain a copy of the local government's decision following its issuance.

SUBSTITUTE BILL COMPARED TO ORIGINAL:  The substitute removes the possibility that all utility services would have to be requested to take advantage of the shortened periods, and makes other technical changes.

Fiscal Note:      Not Requested.

House Committee ‑ Testified For:    Tricia McKay and Art Sperling, Washington Natural Gas.

House Committee - Testified Against:      No one.

House Committee - Testimony For:    Extending a utility service to a home within the shoreline area can take six months.  This bill is narrowly drawn to allow faster response, without eliminating any steps, to a request for utility services.

House Committee - Testimony Against:      None.