Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Michelle McConnell <br />From:Marilyn Knutson [] <br />Sent:Tuesday, May 11, 2010 2:52 PM <br />To:Stewart, Jeff R. (ECY) <br />Cc:Robert Knutson <br />Subject:Jefferson County LA-SMP Comments <br />Attachments:CAPR Comments Jefferson County LASMP.pdf; CAPR Comments Jefferson County <br />LASMP.rtf <br />Importance:High <br />Categories:LASMP Public Comment <br />Date: April 11, 2010 <br /> <br />From: Robert & Marilyn Knutson <br /> 1385 East Ludlow Ridge Road <br /> Port Ludlow, WA 98365 <br /> <br />To: Jeffree Stewart, Shoreline Specialist <br /> 300 Desmond Drive <br /> Washington State Department of Ecology <br /> Lacey, WA 98503 <br /> email: <br /> <br /> Sent by email and US Mail <br /> <br />We have been in attendance at a number of community meetings recently with the Jefferson County <br />Commissioners, DOE and other interested citizens regarding the already submitted LA-SMP. We would <br />have been involved much earlier than this, but unfortunately, the outreach programs to inform the <br />general public seemed not to reach either us, or many other shoreline property owners that we know here <br />in Port Ludlow. We did however, receive notification both from the county and the local real estate <br />organization about 10 days prior to the April 20, 2010 meeting held at Fort Warden. <br /> <br />We do, however, have a number of comments that we wish to make, as we have now become familiar <br />with the Jefferson County LA-SMP, as submitted to the Department of Ecology. We do expect a reply to <br />all questions asked prior to any decision being made by DOE. <br /> <br /> <br />COMMENTS <br /> <br />1. The overwhelming number of citizens that spoke at the April 20, 2010 meeting were <br />against the suggested 150 foot setback <br /> <br />It was very apparent to anyone that attended the meeting that about 80 to 90% of the citizens who <br />spoke and that owned shoreline property are against the proposed 150 foot setback. It seems that the <br />only people in favor of the proposed setback were Port Townsend residents (land owners or not), who <br />already are covered by a 50 foot setback. <br /> <br />QUESTION: Doesn't it seem that with such a one sided response from those attending the <br />meeting that the county and DOE should revisit the 150 foot requirement? <br /> <br /> <br />2. The makeup of the committee who discussed and wrote the suggested LA-SMP <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br />