Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout019Michelle Farfan From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: commtech.us@gmail.com on behalf of Mark Rose <mark@markrose,org> Monday, January 05, 2015 l-0:56 AM David W. Johnson Brinnon SEPA Acomment Brinnon SEPA comment.docx Pasted below and attached - thank you. From: Mark Rose. 687 Pulali Point Road Brinnon, WA 98320 360-30 1 -2600 To: David Johnson Department of Community Development Port Townsend, WA 98368 Re: Proposed Pleasant Harbor Golf Course and Resort DSEIS Date: January 5,2015 Greetings, I have been a Brinnon resident for the past l5 years. I have followed the proposed resort development at Black Point closely since it was proposed more than 5 years ago. I have also conducted hundreds of hours of research into this and previous proposals for Black Point devleopment, and studied similar proposals and the history completed MPRtyperesorts in the San Juans, other counties in Washington state, and elsewhere in the United States. I appealed the SEPA ruling for the Brinnon Sub Area plan in 2002 and received favorable rulings from the SEPA Hearings Examiner and Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board. I have studied to Jefferson County FEIS and the DSEIS for this latest resort proposal. My particular concems with the current DSEIS include but are not limited to highway use, road safety, water quality in Hood Canal, overdevelopment on a fragile shoreline, potential for adverse impacts on our existing economic base of tourism, and the statistically high risk that taxpayers will bear the burden of this development and/or its potential for failure. Sea water intrusion, well contamination, decreasing water supplies, and the impacts of new drilled wells on existing water supplies is a huge issue in South County and in particular close to the shoreline. It is clear that insufficient data has been collected or produced as to potential negative impacts of extremely high water use as proposed by this intensive development and golf course. 1 I remain deeply concerned that this proposal was handed out for public comment over the Thanksgiving through New Year's holidays when many area taxpayers are out of the area or involved with family and guests. This makes the timing of this public comment period questionable as to whether we, the public, were even offered adequate time for review. The proposal as put forth fails to meet county goals of improving tourism revenue for South County, and in fact could adversely impact tourism revenue for South County. This area is reachable only by a two-lane road from north and south. Last year, one fatality accident on Mount Walker caused traffic to be stuck on Mt Walker for seven hours. This is only one serious accident that has completely closed access to the area. I urge that the no action option be selected in response to this project. If options one or two are allowed, the developer must be required to: 1) deposit the amount of all ascertainable direct and indirect costs regarding services and infrastructure into a fund available to local govemment to cover the costs as they are incurred, and 2) furnish a performance bond issued by a highly rated insurer to cover all potential costs that cannot be ascertained beforehand, including repairing any environmental damage incurred over a 50 year period because of the development and the costs of cleanup and restoration if the project is started but abandoned. I have read the marketing materials from the developer. Like the previous developer they use misleading language to explain the area. We can go virtually the entire month of August with a couple of days of sunshine and the heavy rains, cold and wind for approximately six months of the year is not conducive to an attractive resort. Thank you for your consideration of my comments. Respectfully submitted, Mark Rose Mark Rose httpl@ 2 http ://about.me/markrose From: Mark Rose. 687 Pulali Point Road Brinnon, WA 98320 360-301-2600 To: David Johnson Department of Community Development Port Townsend, WA 98368 Re: Proposed Pleasant Harbor Golf Course and Resort DSEIS Date: January 5,2015 Greetings, I have been a Brinnon resident for the past 15 years. I have followed the proposed resort development at Black Point closely since it was proposed more than 5 years ago. I have also conducted hundreds of hours of research into this and previous proposals for Black Point devleopment, and studied similar proposals and the history completed MPRtyperesorts in the San Juans, other counties in Washington state, and elsewhere in the United States. I appealed the SEPA ruling for the Brinnon Sub Area plan in 2002 and received favorable rulings from the SEPA Hearings Examiner and Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board. I have studied to Jefferson County FEIS and the DSEIS for this latest resort proposal. My particular concems with the current DSEIS include but are not limited to highway use, road safety, water quality in Hood Canal, overdevelopment on a fragile shoreline, potential for adverse impacts on our existing economic base of tourism, and the statistically high risk that taxpayers will bear the burden of this development and/or its potential for failure. Sea water intrusion, well contamination, decreasing water supplies, and the impacts of new drilled wells on existing water supplies is a huge issue in South County and in particular close to the shoreline. It is clear that insufficient data has been collected or produced as to potential negative impacts of extremely high water use as proposed by this intensive development and golf course. I remain deeply concerned that this proposal was handed out for public comment over the Thanksgiving through New Year's holidays when many area taxpayers are out of the area or involved with family and guests. This makes the timing of this public comment period questionable as to whether we, the public, were even offered adequate time for review. The proposal as put forth fails to meet county goals of improving tourism revenue for South County, and in fact could adversely impact tourism revenue for South County. This area is reachable only by a two-lane road from north and south. Last year, one fatality accident on Mount Walker caused traffic to be stuck on Mt Walker for seven hours. This is only one serious accident that has completely closed access to the area. I urge that the no action option be selected in response to this project. If options one or two are allowed, the developer must be required to: I ) deposit the amount of all ascertainable direct and indirect costs regarding services and infrastructure into a fund available to local government to cover the costs as they are incurred, and 2) furnish a performance bond issued by a highly rated insurer to cover all potential costs that cannot be ascertained beforehand, including repairing any environmental damage incurred over a 50 year period because of the development and the costs of cleanup and restoration if the project is started but abandoned. I have read the marketing materials from the developer. Like the previous developer they use misleading language to explain the area. We can go virtually the entire month of August with a couple of days of sunshine and the heavy rains, cold and wind for approximately six months of the year is not conducive to an attractive resort. Thank you for your consideration of my comments. Respectfully submitted, Mark Rose