HomeMy WebLinkAbout65Q_2025-0915 Iles-Shih1
Cristina Haworth
From:George Terry <GTerry@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 9:52 AM
To:Cristina Haworth
Subject:FW: Comment on Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort (MPR)
FYI, sorry another just came in.
-George
From: Planning <planning@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2025 9:42 AM
To: George Terry <GTerry@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: FW: Comment on Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort (MPR)
From: Matthew Iles-Shih <ilesshih@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2025 10:48 PM
To: Planning <planning@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: Re: Comment on Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort (MPR)
ALERT: BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open attachments or click
on links if you are not expecting them.
Greetings,
I don't believe we'd received a response to the following questions when initially submitted during an earlier request for
comment in 5/2024, though they still appear relevant:
After reviewing the preliminary plat and associated documents for the Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort
(MPR), we had a couple of questions/comments:
1. Perimeter Fencing/Barrier: What is the actual plan for perimeter barriers and how will this impact
existing wildlife and related ecology?
-There is an indication in the Wildlife Management Plan that the development may install a 8-10' wire
fence around part or all of the property perimeter. It is argued that a barrier on the western side could
reduce cross-highway animal traffic, however, any such barrier on the eastern side of the site would not
have this same safety advantage and would significantly impact the penninsula's ecology, especially in
relations to resident deer and other terrestrial wildlife that are currently sustained through their ability to
access a range of environments and resources across Black Point (something which might no longer be
possible if the Pleasant Harbor Hamlet -- a very sizeable and strategically-located portion of the entire
peninsula -- is effectively cordoned off.).
2. Water quality & quantity questions:
Exhibit 65Q
2
-Stormwater management: is the current plan for stormwater management -- especially related to
potentially contaminated water redirected from impermeable surfaces and other pollution sources --
sufficient to protect the aquifer and nearby surface water resources?
-There may be a particular concern regarding "Storm Pond #4", at the development's northeastern
border which will be collecting storm runoff from a significant section of streets and residences in
the northeastern corner of the property. The potential for accumulating and piping of unprocessed
petroleum-derived and other pollution from a series of streets, residences and facilities seems
significant. Both via the burm's spillway and through subterranean flow, this water could impact the
water quality of the local aquifer (an issue for existing and future wells) and Foster Lake, a marine
embayment that has historically been used for aquaculture. Is there a robust plan to treat and
monitor this stormwater?
-Are there sufficient protections to aquifer and surface water (local freshwater and nearby saltwater) with
respect to other potential sources of pollution, e.g., fertilizers and pesticides commonly used to maintain
golf courses and other non-native vegetation? What is the plan for mitigation and monitoring?
-In the event that issues emerge related to the MPR and water quality or quantity (e.g., impacting
neighboring well water), is there a plan for assisting the MPR's neighbors?
Thank you for your consideration of these questions and concerns. We look forward to learning more.
Sincerely,
-Your Neighbor
Exhibit 65Q