HomeMy WebLinkAboutLog133
Page 1 of 2
David W. Johnson
From: Nancy Dorgan [ndorgan@waypoint.com]
Sent: Sunday, November 27,20053:32 PM
To: David W. Johnson
Cc: Lorna Delaney; Wiatrak, Phil (ECY); Klocke, Karen (DOH); Josh Peters; 'Gerald Steel'
Subject: Marrowstone Construction: MLA05-00276
David W. Johnson
Jefferson County
Department of Community Development
David:
Attached is the .pfd file for the Marrowstone summary judgement on the LUD formation. Judge
Williams ruled that:
"The Court finds that formation of the LUD is not precluded even though at the time of
the formation of the LUD the specific improvements contemplated were not within the
specific provisions of the public water svstem coordination act or the PUD's own water
service plan. Those plans must be amended, however. prior to anv construction of the
proposed LUD."
As I stated in my earlier comments on MLA05-00276, there has been no programmatic SEPA
review of the impacts of the Marrowstone system on the Chimacum Creek sub-basin that will
be the source of Marrowstone water. Lacking to date is relevant SEPA review of:
(1) the PUD's 2004 Water System Plan update;
(2) a DOH-required amendment to that WSP for the new Marrowstone system;
(3) the PUD's engineering Project Report for construction of the Marrowstone system;
(4) Marrowstone construction permits, which DCD deemed to be SEPA-exempt,
despite adjacent wetlands and shoreline considerations
(5) proper completion, with SEPA, of an amendment to the County's Coordinated Water
System Plan referred to above in Judge Williams' ruling.
The Marrowstone water system has almost successfully eluded programmatic environmental
review, a review that has nothing to do with 8" pipes. The project has also been phased in
such a way as to avoid SEPA review of necessary and known under-water components of the
water system.
If the requested permits in MLA05-00276 are issued, they will not be consistent with the
existing Jefferson County Coordinated Water System Plan. WUCC approval of the
Marrowstone service area is not a sufficient CWSP amendment. Such an amendment needs
- WGrr~
# (~5
11/28/2005 Pag'3M_-L_ot..3..-
Page 2 of 2
to be a legislative/SOCC decision with prior SEPA notice and determination, and then given
final DOH approval. None of that has happened yet.
How and when does the County intend to address the CWSP inconsistency?
Thank you.
Nancy
11/2812005
LOG 'TEM
# l ~-3
Pag9._~'l:_ut3-
Page 1 of 1
David W. Johnson
From: Nancy Dorgan [ndorgan@waypoint.com]
Sent: Monday, November 28,20058:45 AM
To: David W. Johnson
Subject: Re: Marrowstone Construction: MLA05-00276
Thanks, David. I wanted to give you an early heads-up in this comment period. It's a
complicated situation that has been allowed to get worse for lack of attention.
You should also know that although the WUCC approved a set of PUD service area maps in
April '04 that included the new Marrowstone service area, those maps were subsequently
rejected by DOH for lack of detail. Mark Horton and the County then created a new set of
maps and forwarded them directly to DOH. Those revised maps were never given to the
WUCC for review and approval. The WUCC has not met again since April '04.
There are a lot of people you will need to talk to to get this cleared up. I want to see this
process done right and without shortcuts. I'd be glad to help in any way I can.
Nancy
385-9287
----- Original Message -----
From: David W. Johnson
To: Nancy Dorgan
Sent: Monday, November 28,200510:13 AM
Subject: RE: Marrowstone Construction: MLA05-00276
I will review this issue and let you know.
LOG ITEM
# ~2, :s
pag'3.___ _utE
11/28/2005