A.
Shoreline
Administrator.
1.
Jurisdictions
that are part of the coalition shall designate a shoreline administrator.
The shoreline administrator shall issue written shoreline exemptions
as appropriate and, in the case of a shoreline substantial development
permit, grant or deny the permit. The shoreline administrator shall
administer the shoreline permit and notification systems and shall
be responsible for coordinating the administration of shoreline regulations
with zoning enforcement, building permits, and all other regulations
regarding land use and development in the respective jurisdiction.
2.
The
shoreline administrator shall be familiar with regulatory measures
pertaining to shorelines and their use, and, within the limits of
his or her authority, shall cooperate in the administration of these
measures. Permits issued under the provisions of this shoreline regulation
shall be coordinated with other applicable land use and development
regulatory measures of the respective jurisdiction. The shoreline
administrator shall establish procedures that advise all parties seeking
building permits or other development authorization of the need to
consider possible shoreline applications. It is the intent of the
coalition, consistent with regulatory obligations, to simplify and
facilitate the processing of shoreline substantial development permits.
3.
The
shoreline administrator shall ensure proposed regulatory or administrative
actions shall be liberally construed in the legal context, which is
to give full effect to the objectives and purposes of the SMA and
this SMP, as set forth in RCW 90.58.900.
4.
The
shoreline administrator shall ensure proposed regulatory or administrative
actions do not unconstitutionally infringe upon private property rights.
Shoreline goals and policies should be pursued through the regulation
of development of private property only to an extent that is consistent
with all relevant constitutional and other legal limitations (where
applicable, statutory limitations such as those contained in Chapter
82.02 RCW and RCW 43.21C.060) on the regulation of private property.
B.
Planning
Commissions/Asotin County Shoreline Commission (Shoreline Commission).
1.
The
planning/shoreline commissions are vested with the responsibility
to review the SMP as part of regular SMP updates required by RCW 90.58.080
as a major element of the local jurisdiction's planning and regulatory
program and make recommendations for amendments thereof to the county
commissioners, or city or town councils, as applicable.
C.
County
Commissions/City and Town Councils. The county commissions or city
or town councils are vested with authority to:
1.
Initiate
an amendment to this SMP according to the procedures prescribed in
WAC 173-26-100.
2.
Adopt
all amendments to this SMP, after consideration of the recommendation
of the planning commission. Substantive amendments shall become effective
immediately upon adoption by Ecology.
3.
Approve or deny all shoreline variance and conditional use permits forwarded by the planning commission or hearing examiner pursuant to subsection (B) of this section.
4.
Conduct
appeal of any recommendation of the planning commission.
5.
Decide
on appeals from the administrative decisions issued by the shoreline
administrator.
D.
Hearing
Examiner. The county commissions, or city or town councils, and the
shoreline administrator are vested with authority to retain a hearing
examiner to review applications and make decisions regarding approval
of shoreline conditional use permits and variances. The decision to
retain a hearing examiner for a specific permit application shall
consider but not be limited to the following:
1.
The
amount of time required to review application materials and hold public
hearings on the application, the size of the proposed project, the
complexity of the application, and time-sensitive legislative or policy
matters currently before the decision-making body;
2.
Potential
conflicts of interest by decisionmakers, including but not limited
to the following:
a.
Financial gain;
b.
Property ownership;
c.
Employment;
d.
Association or membership ties;
e.
Family or social relationship;
f.
Bias or prejudgment of issues;
g.
Current legislative or policymaking matters before the decision-makers
that affect the site for which the application has been submitted.
3.
The
applicant may also request a hearing examiner.
(Ord. 2016-02; Ord. 2023-02 § 2 (Exh.
1))




































