Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Michelle McConnell <br />From:Craig Durgan [durgan@olympus.net] <br />Sent:Monday, May 10, 2010 10:22 PM <br />To:Stewart, Jeff R. (ECY) <br />Subject:Comment re Jefferson County proposed SMP <br />Categories:LASMP Public Comment <br /> <br />Jeffrey Steward <br /> <br />Department of Ecology <br /> <br />State of Washington <br /> <br /> <br />Mr. Steward, <br /> <br /> <br />My comments are in regard to the Shoreline Management Program (SMP) for Jefferson County. <br /> <br />By all criteria and acknowledged by the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) and others the shoreline of <br />Jefferson County is in good condition and is near pristine in condition. This was accomplished under the existing SMP by <br />the existing land owner, not the government. Now being proposed is a draconian change in the SMP. I have great <br />concern the net effect of this change will be the degradation of the shoreline. Government in general has not done a good <br /> <br />job of managing resources. Just look at the salmon runs in Washington as an example. <br /> <br />The proposed SMP will create a huge number of legal non-conforming structures including my own home. There are <br />many negative ramifications to this. Insurance and mortgage loans will likely be adversely affected. Property values will <br />decline as well as salability. This is all in violation of the Washington State Constitution where not only are "takings" a <br />cause of action but so is "damaging" property. Naturally you are relying upon numerous court ruling saying that regulatory <br />takings are not really unconstitutional. But, the area of damaging property is an unsettled area. It will be a surety that <br />imposition of 150' buffers will create large numbers of legal non-conforming structures. Is this a damaging action? Only <br /> <br />future court action will determine this. <br /> <br />DOE and you have lauded the Inventory and Characterization Report as scientific proof that 150' buffers are needed. No <br />study of the impact on Jefferson County's shoreline was ever done. Therefore there is no scientific proof of the need for <br /> <br />changing the SMP and implementing 150' buffers. <br /> <br />No economic study of the cost of implementing the 150' proposed buffers was done in direct violation of the Shoreline <br /> <br />Management Act (SMA). <br /> <br /> <br />If residential use is a preferred use in the SMA how can 150' buffers be used. This is a conflict in the original law. <br /> <br />I am a member of the Citizens Alliance for Property RIghts (CAPR) and am also incorporating all the comments by CAPR <br /> <br />in my comments here by reference. <br /> <br /> <br />Regards, <br /> <br /> <br />Craig Durgan <br /> <br />801 Olele Point Road <br /> <br />Port Ludlow, WA 98365 <br /> <br /> <br />1 <br />