From the “While You Were Out” Department
A summary of some of what we have been doing in the last month regarding the permitting process:
We offered to meet with the owner to the north, but the owner wanted a lawyer to attend as well. As we don't have legal representation, we politely declined.
We requested information from SDCI on the discrepancy between permit fees charged to wealthy, waterfront homeowners and groups like ours made up entirely of volunteers and community members, organized solely for the protection of a public resource. We were directed to the city's document referencing fees etc. We pursued the question further and received a response from a supervisory person. This and related issues will be raised with City Council members who set fees and develop ordinances affecting street ends.
We will argue that a recognized group of stewards and volunteer caretakers of any street-end should be afforded the same privilege of a reduction in permit fees as the very wealthy.
Another lssue we raised with SDCI brought up a long-standing question of ours about the lack of any public comment period relating to construction on, and private use of, our East Harrison Shoreline Street-end. We requested that this be granted even at this late date. We argued that any issues pertaining to a streetend entitle the public to an opportunity to weigh in.
We have been arranging a meeting with Council Member Joy Hollingsworth and other City Council members.
An additional letter to Ben Perkowski, the SDCI reviewer, calls on him to explain how he himself signed off on an exemption from the Shoreline Management Act for the property owner to the south. It appears to contradict what the Act allows (see below).
From the letter from longtime streetend advocate Marty Oppenheimer to Ben Perkowski:
I note that your Exemption From Shoreline Management Act Substantial Development Permit Requirement is clear that "Permit will result in no increase in impervious surface area within 100 feet of the shoreline."
However, presumably as a part of the building permit and this exemption, a new 14 foot wide concrete driveway was constructed as a part of this residence, both on their private property and on the adjacent shoreline street end. It is also my understanding that said driveway was constructed on the adjacent SDOT property with no SDOT permit having been applied for or issued.
Clearly a 14 foot wide concrete driveway extending nearly from the water to 39th Ave E creates a rather significant increase in impervious surface within 100 feet of the shoreline. Given that, is SDCI in a position to require that the concrete driveway be removed by the property owner?
We are awaiting his response.
That's all, folks!
Libby and Grace
