“Alarmed by building projects that pop up without their knowledge, members of the Freeland Subarea Planning Committee are demanding more information from Island County.The unincorporated town’s county-appointed committee is preparing a 20-year plan for the Freeland area, but some new proposals may not ultimately fit with that plan. The main case in point at Thursday night’s meeting was a new commercial development at the corner of Fish Road and Highway 525 that will include a gas station, convenience store, car wash, and room for other businesses.They’re screwing up the long range plan by continually granting building permits, said committee member Jerry Robillard, referring to county officials. He said he didn’t know about the gas station proposal until nine months after it was submitted to the county. That offended me, he said. The county should have told us.So much is happening so fast, added Al Peyser. Storage facilities . . . things of that nature . . . I don’t know how many times we’ve asked for information from the county.Steve Shapiro explained, We want to know what projects are being considered and have discussions . . . we just want to be able to give input.The committee eventually voted on three approaches to take in an effort to pry information loose about new development proposals:* Chairman Tom Roehl was directed to ask the Freeland Water District to forward new project information to the planning panel. Roehl said that the water district often receives earlier notice of projects than the county.* A letter from the committee will be written to Island County Public Works Director Larry Kwarsick, asking that the committee become a party of record to Freeland projects. That should result in automatic early notification, according to Roehl.* More controversially, the committee voted 5-1 (three members were absent) to designate Steve Shapiro as the leader in exploring the possibility of having the Subarea Planning Committee review all business and multi-family housing applications before building permits can be granted by the county. Robillard cast the dissenting vote. Although he shared the concerns of supporters, he felt reviewing permits is beyond the scope of the planning committee.Roehl as chairman did not vote, but he expressed concern that the county would be reluctant to grant project review authority to the committee. There’ll be resistance to take the time to do that, he predicted. Such a role might require adopting review criteria, likely a lengthy process, he added.But most committee members seemed ready to try anything to get more information from the county. I get so tired of not communicating, said Peyser.”