Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout145Michelle Farfan From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Matt Sircely < mattsircely@gmail.com > Friday, June 24,2016 4:32 PM kevin coker David W. Johnson Re: Draft Letter That element is in our current draft of the regs that addresses landscape and pest control materials. On Jun 24,2OL6, at 5:12 PM, kevin coker <cokerdesignworks@msn.com> wrote: Hi David, Matt, I don't see the issue of a "Salmon Safe" groundskeeping guideline that Matt had mentioned early on as a way of helping to deal with golf course maintenance. Kevin Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: David W. Johnson Sent: Friday, June 24,2016 11:33 AM To: Cvnthia Koan; Gary Felder; Kevin Coker; Lorna Smith; Mark Jochems; Matt Sircelv; Mike Nilssen; Richard Hull; Tom Giske Cc: David W. Johnson Subject: FW: Draft Letter Here you go! -----Ori ginal Message----- From: Matt Sircely [mailto:mattsircely@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, June 17,2016 3:19 PM To: David W. Johnson <djohnson@cojefferson Subject: Re: Draft Letter If you or anyone wants to make suggestions before sending it along that's ok too. > On Jun 17,2076, at2:54 PM, Matt Sircely <mattsircely@qmail@ wrote: > Hey David, > At the end of the meeting, I promised to compose a draft letter from the pC to the BOCC. > If the commission likes it, I look forward to having it vetted and adapted by others. I have faith in the process, and hopefully it's a place to start. Please feel free to forward it to folks who need to see it. > Matt 1 > Dear BOCC, > After extensive review and deliberation, the Jefferson County Planning Commission submits recommendations for approval of the Regulations for the Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort (MPR) with certain modifications which are included in our recommendation. We appreciate the opportunity to review the issues surrounding the proposed MPR, and we appreciate the large volume of public comment that has been received both recently and throughout the project's history. > In submitting our recommendation, please accept these additional suggestions from the commission. These informal suggestions address matters that either appear settled, or remain in an active state of discussion/negotiation. Therefore, the commission has chosen to highlight certain details and considerations which do not necessarily appear in the formal recommended modifications to the regulations. > The proposed scale of the resort, with an established limit of 890 units, has raised concem among a majority of commissioners, primarily due to the potential for strain on resource demand, as well as waste management and traffic considerations. Several commissioners recommended adherence to a principle that density should not exceed the norms currently experienced in regions that are already highly developed (located within existing urban growth areas as identified in the comprehensive plan). > The commission suggests that kettles should remain a terrestrial feature for many reasons, including several issues raised by recent correspondence and testimony from representatives of the S'Klallam Tribe. > We support the continued engagement between the BOCC, staff, the tribe, and the applicant. As the dialog progresses, we recommend that the issue of kettles be included in the larger discussion. We suggest the development of detailed guidelines for buffers around kettle areas that are deemed significant for ecological and/or cultural reasons, including the presence of plants traditionally considered to be of medicinal value to local tribes. > We also encourage the BOCC to consider testimony received by the commission from a representative of the S'Klallam Tribe that sealing kettles for wastewater retention would likely alter the flow of fresh water to tidelands, where a delicate balance of salinity is required for optimal shellfish harvest, > We thank the BOCC for the opportunity to offer our recorrmendation for approval with modifications of the Regulations for the Pleasant Harbor MPR, and we are encouraged that continued dialog between the county, applicant and tribe, will yield beneficial outcomes which will continue to reflect the values and priorities of the citizens of Jefferson County into the future. 2 <Draftl PC Letter to BOCC - ms.rtf>