Lake Sammamish neighbors storm City Hall about "view corridors".

In the last two weeks over 40 citizens living along the west bank of Lake Sammamish have approached the Planning Commission to be heard about the proposed Shoreline Master Plan update and View Point Neighborhood plan. THEY ARE NOT HAPPY!

"View corridors" 30% of lot-width are proposed to allow the passing public views to the lake. It limits the height of new construction and would necessitate falling older trees. Mostly, the residents complained about poor public notice. They felt the Administration was trying to push this through to limit citizen input. What do you think?

Many West Lake Sammamish residents argued eloquently for their 5th Amendment rights protecting private property owners from "taking" their land without just compensation. The Shoreline Master Plan HERE requires review by a state regulatory agency, the Department of Ecology.

The story is still unfolding. Ongoing developments can be found on the commission's & candidate video archive HERE and on RCTV-21 at Wednesday on 7pm commission meetings. Mail your comments to planningcommission@redmond.gov

Some of this issue is about is BUFFERS. We create buffers to protect our steams, wetlands, lakes, flood zones, and hazardous slopes. The Shoreline Act and city administration want to mitigate the buffers from the regional traffic on W. LK. Sammamish Parkway. Residents of the West Lake Sammamish Association (WLSA) say they need the buffers to protect the slopes from erosion, protect the lake wate r quality, buffer from traffic noise, and bicycle safety...and most of all, protect their property rights.

This is an interesting twist. Lake residents are the custodians of the lake. They care for it. They live in a natural habitat that's protected by buffers now threatened by government regulation.

According to a citizen, it is RUMORED that the view corridor must be granted to the City of Redmond as an easement and there is no plan for compensation to the property owner. Vegetation would have to be cleared and the view maintained by the property owner. Most lots in this segment of shoreline are valued in excess of $1m each, taking 30% of that property and converting it to public use with the property owner responsible for maintenance is a huge imposition on private property rights.

Sidebar: If a Redmond resident had to vote for Mayor just on this one issue would he/she choose Marchione or Robinson? Robinson lives in the View Point neighborhood but he has voted down buffers in the past. At the Critical Area Ordinance Public Hearing of 5/17/2005, Jim Robinson motioned to amend the Critical Area ordinance "to retain the existing [small] buffers". The motion died for a lack of a second. Trees help to buffer street noise and anchor slopes from erosion and filter run-off along the Lake Sammamish shoreline.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FROM: KIM ALLEN:

Bob - Just a reminder of what happened at the meeting you mention above. "Robert S. Yoder, 10019 169 Avenue NE, asked the Council to designate riparian habitat as a Habitat of Local Importance, since Redmond is a green city, with lakes, rivers and streams with fish and wildlife. He said the habitat protects against erosion and protects water quality.Councilmember Robinson suggested that the Council consider including the term “Riparian Habitat of Local Importance” in the Definitions section of the Critical Areas Ordinance."Minutes of 5/17/05 Council meeting, pp.198-200.As to the final vote on the Shoreline Plan, including the buffers, here was the final vote:"Ordinance No. 2259, adopting Findings of Fact, amending the Natural Environment Element of the Redmond Comprehensive Plan in order to update the city’s goals and policies relating to critical areas, adding and amending various definitions in Chapter 20A.20 of the Redmond Community Development Guide relating to critical areas, amending Chapter 20D.140 of the Redmond Community Development Guide in order to update the city’s critical areas regulations and incorporate the Best Available Science, providing for severability and establishing an effective date, was presented and read.Upon a poll of the Council, Cole, Marchione, McCormick, Paine, Resha, Robinson, and Vache voted aye. Motion carried unanimously (7 – 0)."5/17/05 Council meeting minutes p.200
Sunday October 14, 2007

FROM BOB YODER

10/14Hi Kim - In friendly response to your above comments. 1) Robinson suggesting Riparian HOLI be relegated in the CAO solely as definition, is almost an insult, though it was one crumb more than the rest. A definition is far from a symbolic gesture. Nancy McCormmick's suggestion during the same public hearing that the Planning Commission vet the issuance of a proclaimation that Riparian be our Habitat of Local Importance. Riparian is truly proving to be one of our cities most valuable habitats for monitoring our water quality. It's just very unfortunate that Mr. Robinson was the only counclmember motioning to reduce riparian zones from the CAO plan. Yes, of course all candidates voted FOR the new Critical Area Ordinance. Wouldn't it be nice if council voting records were duly recorded for easy access by the public...tabulated on a spreadsheet. Unfortunately, the Administration hasn't provided this critical assessment service. Finally, Kim, I want to thank you again for the tremendous support you gave me during my presentations for Riparian HOLI. Unfortunately, the administration wrote a C.3 report to council killing this wonderful idea which had potential to attract many citizens and students into the process of sustaining our natural resources and environment. Regards,Bob