HomeMy WebLinkAbout2961-119
Jeanie Orr
0v'V\A-
~
C~~~
LindafTom Carpenter [tlcx2@earthlink.net]
Saturday, January 24, 2009 2:46 PM
#Long-Range Planning
RE: Shoreline Master Plan
~"(
@)
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
To Those Who Are Involved in the Master Planning:
As a resident of Jefferson County, I have for many years felt that
the natural beauty of this county is its best asset in many ways.
The conflict of Master Planning is always balancing the immediate needs for economic
sustainability vs long term planning that will be more appreciated in the future.
I feel strongly that by protecting this natural beauty, whether it be the Hood Canal
or development of now timbered land, we will continue to be a visitor destination sought
by many, bringing greater economic benefits of its own. It would appear to many of us,
that as logging employment decreases, the best economic development potential is as a
visitor destination, or even a stop-over gateway to the rest of the peninsula. As
developmental pressures increase with population growth, it would seem to be essential to
make plans that retain as much open, natural habitat as possible, which, in turn, will
provide visitor spending and jobs for many at many different levels of abilities.
Several suggestions I would like very much to see:
1. A requirement that where mature natural trees exist alongside
major roads in Jefferson county, these must be preserved for a set back of perhaps 100
feet (or whatever amount seemed feasible to sustain a natural screen.) This would be
especially essential for all logging properties alongside major roads in the county. Such
a set back would preserve the feeling of the natural beauty of our county
for both residents and visitors. There is nothing more dismal than a
clear cut section of property alongside our roads, particularly as one enter Jefferson
County from the Hood Canal Bridge area.
2. As Bainbridge Island did many decades ago, I would like to see the prevention of
advertising signs alongside the major roadways, unless
designated commercial zoning. This law worked wonders for Bainbridge
Island property values and we all appreciate the natural beauty of the highway from
Bainbridge ferry landing, at least to the Agate Pass Bridge.
3. Last, but far from least, I know of no one who supports the pit to Pier project
with the exception of perhaps 30-50 potential employees, and of course, those owners who
hope for great personal profits.
I understand that you may have jurisdiction only over the land usage.
The use of that land for a noisy conveyor belt, plus the noise of the expanded mining
process itself close to residential and scenic areas,
should be enough to deny this use. How can a "for profit only"
company have the right to install a huge pier into the public waterways of Hood Canal and
have the mess and noise of a constant filling station dramatically affecting those
residents surrounding the site who previously bought there, never suspecting such a
situation could ever arise? This proposed usage would seem to be a classic zoning problem
affecting those who have surrounding property ownership.
In short, I appreciate your reading my suggestions and hope that you will consider
the long term land use preservation that will be even more appreciated in time than any of
us can imagine.
Yours sincerely,
Linda L. Carpenter
200 Shine Road
Port Ludlow, WA 98365
1