HomeMy WebLinkAbout65P_2025-0915 Schanfield (North Olympic Group of Sierra Club)1
Cristina Haworth
From:Planning <planning@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent:Monday, September 15, 2025 1:43 PM
To:George Terry
Subject:FW: Sierra Club Pleasant-Harbor-Master-Planned-Resort comments
Importance:High
Emily Calkins
Planning Technician
SDR Lead
Dept. of Community Development
Ecalkins@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4460
Monday-Thursday 9:00-12:00 1:00-4:30
All e-mail sent to this address has been received by the Jefferson County e-mail system and is therefore subject to the Public Records Act, a state law
found at RCW 42.56. Under the Public Records law, the County must release this e-mail and its contents to any person who asks to obtain a copy (or for
inspection) of this e-mail unless it is also exempt from production to the requester according to state law, including RCW 42.56 and other state laws.
From: Darlene Schanfald <darlenes@olympus.net>
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2025 12:57 PM
To: Planning <planning@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: Sierra Club Pleasant-Harbor-Master-Planned-Resort comments
Importance: High
ALERT: BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open attachments or click
on links if you are not expecting them.
County’s Department of Community Development
621 Sheridan Street
Port Townsend, WA 98368,
The North Olympic Group of Sierra Club has followed the Pleasant Harbor development since 2009.
Throughout we have opposed this development and are amazed at Jefferson County Commissioners for their promotion
of this pie-in-the-sky plan by someone that obviously does not have the finances to complete his fantasy development.
Exhibit 65P
2
We are mystified, too, of the County's insensitivity to and its evading of the environmental impacts this development
would have on air, soil, surface and ground water bodies and the wildlife.
We’ve watched these types of developments in the past and they either don’t succeed or they rip up the environment
and go bust. An 890 housing development with all its recreational “amenities” is incapable of providing potable water
long term. Any intent to build a sewage treatment plant on the premises will pollute the community. Treatment plants
do not “treat,” they just process some of the hundreds of thousands of contaminants in the influent. Almost all the
influent contaminants are unregulated. In the processing steps they not only do little to minimize the contaminant
levels; they create new ones synergistically. Not knowing the contents of the sewage means not knowing the kinds and
levels of contaminants post processing.
If the plan is to reuse the sewage solids for fertilizer, the grounds would be covered with hazardous wastes and the
stormwater runoff would pollute the surface water bodies and landscape. Effluent emission into the Hood Canal will
contaminate that water body and the wildlife dependent on it. Hood Canal, presumably the body of water for the
development's treated sewage discharge, is already experiencing algal blooms due to nitrogen loading from failing septic
systems. These blooms are a concern because they can lead to hypoxia, the depletion of oxygen in the water. Does the
County want to risk turning Hood Canal into a "dead zone" and sacrifice it's recreational value for a poorly planned
development?
890 homesites at a minimum would mean 1780 persons (2 people/house) plus hotel and conference center users would
add a huge traffic flow between the development and Highway 101. What steps are being taken regarding Highway 101-
development intersection? Again, long term, potable water will not be available. The Bear Gulch fire, now into its third
month, is only 9% contained, demonstrating the "new normal" we can expect from climate change. Existing roads are
inadequate to provide for evacuation of a major development while ensuring the passage of emergency vehicles
Given the planned traffic to and from the development, all the paved-over-impervious land and the auto traffic, the air
quality in the area would decline. Too, groundwater runoff could be immense during rain/snow seasons.
What is the plan to keep up the golf greens? How much water will they consume?
Like many across the nation, Sunland in Sequim started out as a golf community. Years later the golf club could not
maintain the expense. Sunland’s golf course is now opent to anyone that wants to golf there and will pay the use the
course. This doesn’t mean the golf club is solvent. Golf courses throughout the U.S. have been closing due to lack of
water and lack of funds.
Summer drought is likely to be a perennial problem on the east slopes of the Olympics due to climate change. Has the
developer identified potable water sources and, if they include local rivers, does it ensure adequate in stream flows to
protect salmon and wildlife?
Is this going to turn into an HOA? If so, will all the expenses and responsibilities be shifted to the HOA, leaving the
developer to reap financial harvests and leave the upkeep to the residents?
We hope you will reconsider your support for this development.
Darlene Schanfald, Ph.D.
Chair, Sierra Club North Olympic Group
darlenes@olympus.net
360-681-7565
Exhibit 65P