HomeMy WebLinkAboutAP10 Notice of Appeal SEPA mitigated Determination of non-signifcance (MDNS) MLA19-00008 BDN Smersh Application1
February 14, 2024
County Development Review Division
Jefferson County Department of Community Development
621 Sheridan
Port Townsend, Washington 98368
Attention: Jefferson County Hearing Examiner
NOTICE OF APPEAL
SEPA MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFCANCE (MDNS)
FILE NUMBER: MLA 19-00036; SDP 19-00008 BDN LLC
RE: BDN-SMERSH APPLICATION FOR GEODUCK CULTIVATION
FULL NAMES: Sue Corbett, Jan Wold, Marilyn Showalter, Marsha Case, Steve Dittmar,
Kathy Dittmar, Ed Davis, Sara Davis, Chris Eagan, Carolyn Eagan, Bill West, Cheryl West,
Celine Santiago, and Paul Steenberg, who collectively may be referred to as “Shine Friends and
Neighbors,” or “Shine Friends”; the Coalition to Protect Puget Sound Habitat (Coalition);
and Hood Canal Environmental Council (HCEC).
MAILING ADDRESSES AND EMAIL ADDRESSES. Please see all names, addresses, and
email addresses on the following two pages.
CONTACT PERSON:
Marilyn Showalter
1596 Shine Road
Port Ludlow, WA 98365
marilyn.showalter@gmail.com
360-259-1700
FILE NUMBER: MLA 19-00036; SDP 19-00008 BDN LLC
DOCUMENT APPEALED: Final SEPA Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance,
Attached.
CONCISE STATEMENT OF FACTUAL AND LEGAL BASIS FOR APPEAL. Please see
Statement of Issues,” beginning on page 4.
SPECIFIC RELIEF SOUGHT: We seek a declaration that the MDNS is clearly erroneous as
to form and content; that the appropriate determination is a Determination of Significance (DS),
or, if not granted, that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared, with a
remand to the Department of Community Development; and that any further process be
accompanied by a notice that conforms to Jefferson County Hearing Examiner Rules.
CA received 08/05/25
EXHIBIT AP10
Shine Friends SEPA Appeal
MLA 19-00036/SDP 19-00008 BDN
4
ISSUES FOR APPEAL
BDN proposes to insert more than 40,000 PVC tubes per acre1 (more than seven miles and
eleven TONS of plastic) in each of five acres, and grow more than 120,000 geoducks (three per
tube) to two pounds each, i.e., 1.2 million pounds or 600 TONS of biomass in a monoculture.
The project will have probable significant adverse impacts. The MDNS is clearly erroneous and
fails to meet required legal standards of law, including SEPA, the SMA, JCC Chapters 18.25,
18.40, and 2.30, and Jefferson County Hearing Examiner Rules of Procedure (Ordinance 12-19
App B, 10-15-2029), due to errors, omissions, and insufficient or inaccurate information on
which to form an adequate basis for determination, as well as improper findings and conclusions.
WAC 197-11-335; WAC 197-11-330; Anderson v. Pierce County, 86 Wn. App. 290, 301(1997).
1. PROCEDURAL
1.1 MDNS does not comply with Jefferson County Hearing Examiner Procedural Rules 3(1)(b).
It imposes unauthorized (repealed) filing conditions that require a “standing” statement,
affirmation statement, and signature from each appellant—discouraging would-be appellants.
1.2 The Staff Memo lists the wrong address for the Project site. Persons using that address in an
online parcel search would not realize that the site sits between two public tideland parks—a
highly relevant SEPA issue.
1.3 The Staff Memo is so cursory and conclusory in its analysis of comments received as to be
meaningless. Without demonstrating an adequate analysis, the MDNS cannot show it is based
on “information reasonably sufficient to evaluate the environmental impact of a proposal.”
WAC 197-11-335; WAC 197-11-330; Anderson v. Pierce County, 86 Wn. App. 290, 301(1997.
2. MISSING BUT REQUIRED INFORMATION
2.1 Both the Shoreline Application and BDN’s SEPA Checklist fail to provide essential, required
information, through blank, incomplete, or inaccurate answers. This renders the MDNS clearly
erroneous, as it is not based on “information reasonably sufficient to evaluate the environmental
impact of a proposal.” WAC 197-11-335; WAC 197-11-330.
2.2 Perhaps the most egregious of these “answers” is BDN’s failure to identify DNR Beach 59 as an
adjoining neighbor. This required information has been omitted in the Shoreline Application, the
JARPA, the SEPA Checklist, and every document to date. Beach 59 is a ½ mile-long public beach
where people, including children, walk, run, clam, and take in the natural view. Sailboarders,
windsurfers, stand-up paddleboarders, kayakers, canoers, and motor boaters land on the beach and
navigate the immediate surface waters. Neither BDN nor the County has even acknowledged this
park, let alone analyzed or addressed impacts to it (despite being advised of its existence in April
2022.) There are many more examples, including failure to identify a fish stream in a Critical Area,
and answers regarding structures and uses that cover only part of the site parcel.
1 The precise figures are 43,560 tubes per acre (one per square foot) in 5.15 acres. We are using round numbers here
for ease of comprehension.
CA received 08/05/25
EXHIBIT AP10