Sewage Plant on the Island Next to Camas?

[Searching-01]

Originally Posted by StealthRabbit

Puget Sound area? And the Olympic Peninsula? I didn't see Bellingham in this suggestion (but already suggested in other-thread-by OP)

Gulf Islands (BC) was a pretty sweet place to live! (Telegraph Harbour)

Tad rainy and some really wild and interesting winter storms (for inland waters).

Point Roberts was really close (if you must live in USA)

Ecologically pretty clean and safe. We ate a LOT of fresh seafood while living there! Kids went out on the water everyday to catch and explore.

Since this particular thread is about Camas sewage Island (of which there is not one), Just settling ponds for paper making process. Used to smell like diapers in March and April, but not for last 20 yrs.

What's Bellingham like?

I have friends on Bainbridge Island, but they are a working couple. two incomes. Bainbridge looks nice. Also have an acquantance on Mercer Island, also nice, but out of reach.

[StealthRabbit]

Bellingham has a very 'environmentally conscious' planning dept. (several WWU grads)

Pretty 'Earth First' populous.
Lots of pressure from U and residents to keep it clean.

And (Bonus) it is near Canada... where you can still find a bit of 'clean wilderness'.

[petermascon]

Originally Posted by StealthRabbit

You want planning? Boulder, CO. Nice climate and recreation.

There are several other restrictive yet very pleasant locales in USA.

I'm in a federally restrictive area yet 20 min away from PDX. I can't paint or roof my home, or add outdoor lights without approvals. I purposely chose this restrictive area to avoid apartments and businesses being planted next door.

IIRC, there are about 5 private homes in Teton National Park. That's another option if you can do cold winter's or leave. I couldn't hack FL either. I would look to areas near National Labs. Great and often beautiful areas with engaged, intelligent, retirees.

Can you elaborate on federal restrictive land. I'd like to know more about what this is and why those rules are in place.

[StealthRabbit]

Originally Posted by petermascon

Can you elaborate on federal restrictive land. I'd like to know more about what this is and why those rules are in place.

Rules are in place to protect the Natural Resources (view in this case). They work great if federally administered (You know the rules and abide by them). but Feds gave control to Counties in the CGNSA, so they can 'interpret' the rules as is best for their pocket books.

Enjoy the reading. If in Clark County, you will face many more rules and a LOT more expense, but there is a specific staff person to deal with. +/-.
Drs and Lawyers seem to get what they want in Clark County ($$$$), not possible by following the strict CGNSA rules. (note completed projects on SE 80th (continuation of Marble road in Skamania County). These would not be allowed if Feds were still enforcing the building, but Clark County allowed (My last CC approval for starting review cost $26,000 BEFORE review or permits or impact fees). My own home and (3 subsequent) approvals were the price of a postage stamp ($0.26 at the time) to White Salmon, WA. Non-Drs and lawyers (less $$$ and pull) will just get their projects denied in Clark County. Our neighbors in Clark had to reposition their home, way out of the view, but their neighbors (Dr) got to plant their home smack in the middle of the view. Class, persuasion, and $$$ matters a lot in Clark County. If you want to build in CGNSA, build in Klickitat Skamania has been fair to me, but it takes a really long time to get through approval, and AFAIK, Clark is now administering Septic for Skamania. (SWWA Health). That is a huge barrier. Don't go there There are very specific designers and installers + you need frequent inspections from specific inspectors. Other counties, you can take a mandatory septic installer test and DIY (Which I did many times in CC, yrs ago). Now impossible in CC.

| Columbia River Gorge Commission
FAQs | Columbia River Gorge Commission

[petermascon]

Originally Posted by StealthRabbit

Rules are in place to protect the Natural Resources (view in this case). They work great if federally administered (You know the rules and abide by them). but Feds gave control to Counties in the CGNSA, so they can 'interpret' the rules as is best for their pocket books.

Enjoy the reading. If in Clark County, you will face many more rules and a LOT more expense, but there is a specific staff person to deal with. +/-.
Drs and Lawyers seem to get what they want in Clark County ($$$$), not possible by following the strict CGNSA rules. (note completed projects on SE 80th (continuation of Marble road in Skamania County). These would not be allowed if Feds were still enforcing the building, but Clark County allowed (My last CC approval for starting review cost $26,000 BEFORE review or permits or impact fees). My own home and (3 subsequent) approvals were the price of a postage stamp ($0.26 at the time) to White Salmon, WA. Non-Drs and lawyers (less $$$ and pull) will just get their projects denied in Clark County. Our neighbors in Clark had to reposition their home, way out of the view, but their neighbors (Dr) got to plant their home smack in the middle of the view. Class, persuasion, and $$$ matters a lot in Clark County. If you want to build in CGNSA, build in Klickitat Skamania has been fair to me, but it takes a really long time to get through approval, and AFAIK, Clark is now administering Septic for Skamania. (SWWA Health). That is a huge barrier. Don't go there There are very specific designers and installers + you need frequent inspections from specific inspectors. Other counties, you can take a mandatory septic installer test and DIY (Which I did many times in CC, yrs ago). Now impossible in CC.

| Columbia River Gorge Commission
FAQs | Columbia River Gorge Commission

Hey Rabbit. Thank you for the info. We are in camas. That is how I came across this thread.

I just looked up the CGNSA. I now see the rules you mentioned. I never knew anything like this existed. Found it very interesting.

Thanks again for the info.

[texasdiver]

Originally Posted by petermascon

Hey Rabbit. Thank you for the info. We are in camas. That is how I came across this thread.

I just looked up the CGNSA. I now see the rules you mentioned. I never knew anything like this existed. Found it very interesting.

Thanks again for the info.

Please don't get Stealth started on the CGNSA unless you have a LOT of time on your hands!

[StealthRabbit]

Feel free to ask all the other posters here who LIVE in the CGNSA
And have been through the building / rules process 5+ times.

They can help you a lot.

Better yet... bring money, lots of money. (none of my places cost over $100k, land + fully built out)

[Wile E. Coyote]

Originally Posted by Searching-01

At times it feels that way... into the 4th *year* of this search... 99% of the country *does* fail for me.

The other 1% is owned by the 1%, LOL! I.e. unaffordable for the rest of us... LOL!

But all kidding aside, it is true. I'm finding civil planning patently sucks.

Must be a relatively recent phenomenon. A few decades back, as a kid, I don't recall things being like this.

I find it hard to believe more folks are up in arms about it and that more civil planners aren't being fired.

Back in my home town in Fla... the Scripts Institute and a grocery store are right next to a waste transfer station....

That's a health care company and a food source... adjacent to waste transfer. Can't imagine what the planners were thinking about.

And crap like that is everywhere.

If you're aware if it... it increases the difficulty of finding an acceptable place to live by orders of magnitude.

Throw in a few others like no/minimal snow, low crime, etc. and you really are down to a very, very small sliver of the entire country. And most of those spots are very unaffordable, least for me.

But I keep "searching" as my handle indicates.

At least up until '98 when they put that waste transfer station in, my home town in Fla. passed all my personal checks. Not any more, obviously.

What do you find wrong with 97229?

[Hemlock140]

Originally Posted by MtnSurfer

Bellingham is really expensive for WA though a nice college town. The OP doesn't like the homeless of Olympia from another thread.

Tahoe is actually not a bad idea. Although the OP mentioned liking warmer weather. So the snow may be too much. However, if you go to the Nevada side there is no state tax and lower elevation with less snow. A friend from work just retired there.

We actually like the Sacramento area for more affordability. That was our second choice if we were to stay in CA. It's a pretty short drive to Tahoe from eastern Sacramento around Auburn.

Derek

We used to vacation nearly every year at VRBO condos at Incline Village (Tahoe Nevada). Those older, small condos are now running about $800k, and the area is suffering from severe growth and summer crowding problems, in addition to the recent increased fore danger. No longer on our list of favorites, despite going there since the 1960s.

We always stop at the Dutch Bros in Camas, on the way to Portland or back a few times a year, and have never smelled anything unpleasant. On the other hand, the nasty smell on I5 near the Puyallup River in Tacoma remains, despite the city claiming it has been corrected.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...housing-crisis