HomeMy WebLinkAbout66G_Scagliotti (JST)_2025-09031
Cristina Haworth
From:Alex Scagliotti <ascagliotti@jamestowntribe.org>
Sent:Wednesday, September 3, 2025 12:17 PM
To:George Terry; Cristina Haworth
Cc:Allie Taylor; Cynthia Rossi
Subject:PHMPR issue-solution matrix
Attachments:PHMPR notes for Jeff.Co .docx
Hello George and Cristina,
While I know you're well-acquainted with our overall concerns, I wanted to provide a simple matrix that
summarizes the issues as well as what I feel are relatively straight-forward solutions. I don't think that
these solutions are particularly heavy lifts or controversial but let me know what you think. I wanted to
provide input before you release your staff report so that you can assess internally and adopt or adapt as
County conditions if they are consistent with your authority and role.
Note that the solution for including a water quality action trigger point is an example of a condition that
we would like to see but the values I included are not fully backed up by relevant data - the County's
water quality division would need to weigh in on specific values or percentages. Regardless, I think it's
prudent and reasonable to include a condition that requires some corrective action by the applicant
and/or County if there is a clear trend toward degradation but before state water quality criteria are
surpassed, considering the highly valuable shellfish beds immediately to the north and south of the
project area.
Also note that these suggestions are exclusively from our environmental staff and separate from our
cultural resource staff who have a very different set of concerns as you know. Of course, all of the Tribe's
priorities (cultural and environmental) should be considered equally but I thought it might be easiest if
we separated out the themes for you all to consider while you're working internally on your staff report.
Hope this helps and feel free to give me call with any questions or clarifications.
Cheers,
Alex Scagliotti
Environmental Planner
Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe
360-477-9712
ascagliotti@jamestowntribe.org
Exhibit 66G
Topic Issue Solution
WQ Water quality plans, monitoring and controls are
inconsistent between documents with no
indication as to which standard will be followed
The County can amend the WQ plan to indicate that it
supersedes or takes precedent over other plans in relation
to water quality monitoring, controls and reporting. Depending on the plan, the most prominent
language around water quality standards seems
to be that the resort will not violate WQ criteria
and will take corrective action if violated. This
"emergency room" response only requires action
if water quality is degraded beyond State
standards.
There should be a trigger point that requires assessment,
identification and control as a preventative measure,
rather than an reactionary measure once criteria are
violated and the harm has been done. Including a
condition such as "a trigger point of three consecutive
readings above 10% of seasonal baseline levels, one
reading at or above 20% of seasonal baseline levels, or
state criteria is surpassed - whichever comes first" is an
example of early detection and correction condition that
will help address issues before early.
The WWTP and water re-use is generally a positive
attribution of this project but they can fail or
malfunction and potentially cause major impacts
to nearby shellfish beds (i.e. bacteria
contamination).
We request that tribes with U&A in Hood Canal be notified
within 48 hours if there is any unintended, unplanned or
emergency discharge of untreated or partially treated
water from the plant to the marine environment.
Wildlife Development will act as attractant to nearby elk
herds that are a treaty resource - Dosewallips SP
is an example of this. Vehicle collisions from
increased traffic and lack of exclusions
unnecessarily imperils this resource and people's
safety.
Add exclusionary, elk-proof fencing around the resort to
prevent habituation and road crossings will prevent the
vast majority of collisions. Tribes will work with Jefferson
County to frame out a condition within the Prelim Plat
Application to add a layer of specificity of fence
requirements (i.e. min 8 ft, etc) as discussed in the
technical meeting on 3/14/25.
The wildlife plan has contradictions, irregularities
and dubious action points that make it difficult for
us, and eventually the applicant from interpreting
its standards.
Amend the plan to add clarification with clear action
points. We can provide some examples of needed
clarifications.
Shellfish Increased visitation will increase recreational
traffic and harvest on and near productive
shellfish beds - impacting their productivity and
availability to the tribes.
Restrict access to tidelands via trail system and provide
signage or public education on importance of protecting
nearby shellfish beds.
Exhibit 66G