KINGSTON — It was a night for the books.

The final public hearing for the Suquamish and Kingston sub-area plans took less than an hour Dec. 13 — compared to the more than three hours it took for the Kitsap County Planning Commission to hear testimony last month.

But it didn’t mean that those who spoke didn’t have anything important to say.

The Kitsap County Board of Commissioners heard testimony Tuesday night from residents who had commendations or concerns about either sub-area plan, prior to possible adoption into the county’s comprehensive plan for 2005.

Each plan had been under review for the past year by a working group consisting of residents residing within each plan’s area. The groups made recommended changes to their respective plans, which were presented to the county planning commission in November. The commission then made a recommendation to the commissioners to approve the plans, with slight modifications.

For Suquamish, the group proposed primarily textural changes to the plan, which hadn’t been updated since 1999. Areas of concern included creating and maintaining parks and trails within the area, improving traffic flow and making streets safer for students.

Suquamish resident and working group member Julia Smith realized that while the plan seemed to have been rushed at the end, it is important for it to be passed so Suquamish can receive attention for public services from the county — something she feels the area has been lacking.

“My point is (the plan) was done in ‘99 and the county dropped the ball on it,” she said. “We want to know what we have to do to get on your radar. We’re here and we’d like to get some services.”

Committee member Gail Petranek said she felt something needs to be done about traffic in the neighborhood, especially with all the children who walk to Suquamish Elementary.

“I’m just very concerned we are going to have an issue where a kid is going to be hit,” she said.

In the plan, it was suggested that the county apply for funds from the Safe Routes to School program, a tool that would help make the streets safer.

“I’m willing to bend over backwards and upside down to make this work,” Petranek said.

For Kingston, the working group and planning commission had recommended expanding the boundaries to include several private properties, as well as Arborwood, totaling to approximately 336 additional acres to accommodate expected population increases through 2025.

Property owners Susan Arness and Rhonda Rotsten expressed their concerns about why their properties were not part of the UGA recommendation. Both women said the UGA borders their properties on three sides.

While the Kingston working group has explained it had worries about the environmental sensitivity of both properties, Rotsten said she was never told why her property was not included. She believes it’s logical to have her property as part of the UGA , as it meets the intent of the state’s Growth Management Act. Rotsten’s property is north of Kingston, off Lindvog Road.

Arness said she applied to have her two properties, totaling 55 acres and including the South Kingston estuary, added into the UGA to protect the wetlands.

Working group member Naomi Maasberg said the group wanted to keep the environmentally sensitive areas out of the UGA for the time being because it is unknown what the new boundaries — which will bring higher housing densities — will do the area.

“Until we get a better way to protect critical areas, we need to keep environmental areas out for now,” she said.

The county commissioners will be taking written comments through noon Dec. 19. They can be sent to Albert Williams, (360) 337-4579 or AWilliam@co.kitsap.wa.us. Commissioners are expected to make a decision on whether or not to adopt the plans later this month.