HomeMy WebLinkAbout041David W. Johnson �� W kJ11— 1 7P
From: Don Coleman [don@pleasantharbormarina.com]
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2011 7:55 AM
To: David W. Johnson
Cc: 'Garth Mann'; peckassoc@comcast. net; diane@pleasantharbormarina.com
Subject: water quality agreement
Good Morning David Wayne,
Garth asked me to forward the below comments regarding the water quality agreement.
In order that the Pleasant Harbor Monitoring Program be properly understood within the SEIS, we need to establish the
guidelines for areas of accountability as it pertains to the Pleasant Harbor Resort.
After studying our DNR Lease terms, and conferring with our Insurer ... The Pleasant Harbor Resort has a defined area for
testing ..which is within the boundaries of our DNR Lease. Areas inside the lease have been hypothecated by the State
to Pleasant Harbor Resort to Manage and therefore Monitor. Areas outside of the Lease are subject to both State and
Federal Water Management and Monitoring programs.
As one of many users of Pleasant Harbor, we have proposed that an agency such as Jefferson County or DNR or WDFW
organize all parties that have access or have water run-off to the Harbor. The purpose of this collaboration is to
establish a multi -lateral program for Management and Monitoring of the Harbor. Based on the exposure of each party,
they would contribute a nominal fee per month towards a broader level of third party monitoring. This is important,
since it is most often difficult to determine where the source of a problem originates.
A look at shoreline development between the Harbor entrance south to Quatsap Point shows great potential for
negative environmental impact. In this area we see shoreline armoring, exposed bluffs, very large new home
construction, landscaping, mooring buoys and docks. In the Harbor there are similar shoreline development, more
exposed bluffs, more private docks, another private marina, and recent clearing and construction of large homes. The
State boat launch facility has extensive use by tribal commercial boats with vehicles parking on the ramp to load
commercial catch, and the state park float frequently has long-term moorage use even though it is intended for short
term.
Obviously, one party (Pleasant Harbor Resort) cannot accept accountability from a legal or from a water lease aspect.
Now that the Resort is NOT developing inside the new SMP setbacks, the Resort's risks are substantially mitigated,
especially once the grades are adjusted and fuel tanks are removed and relocated and the Resort has its own Waste
Water Treatment Plant operating.
Even recently, the Resort has demonstrated the willingness and ability to respond to environmental issues when
needed, through the containment of the fuel spill of a derelict vessel that was allowed to remain anchored in the
Harbor for months.
We are recommending that Jefferson County provide the leadership to initiate a collaborative program of all parties with
Access, and Run -Off Exposure to the Harbor in order to establish a simple monthly monitoring program by a third party.
Costs would be pro -rated based on traffic uses and risk exposure to the Harbor from fuel spills, septic tank leakage,
Tribal commercial vessels, and uncontained run-off from properties, as well as setting standards for drop-off from the
State Boat launch.
A single Insurer would provide coverage for the Harbor itself, with each party contributing to the policy premiums.
The aforementioned recommendations need to be addressed. We are unable to provide a meaningful report for SEIS
without the guidelines clearly understood.
Thank you for responding to the issues that will become a real benefit to the Harbor, as well as a future indicator of
dealing with the serious issues of protecting Hood Canal.
Don Coleman
for Pleasant Harbor Resort
Don Coleman
Pleasant Harbor Marina
Maintenance and Security supervisor
don@pleasantharbormarina.com
Cell: 206-714-1482