HomeMy WebLinkAbout2961-357
Page 1 of2
& tY!l0t
Vv-ty
Uc M;~
Jeanie Orr
From: Phil Best [philbest@tscnet.com]
Sent: Friday, January 30,200910:09 AM
To: #Long-Range Planning
Cc: Andrea Mitchell; Vem Rutter
Subject: Jefferson County SMP - Comments for Hood Canal Environment Council
2AlPi
@
The Hood Canal Environmental Council (HCEC) sends this email as initial comment to the Jefferson County draft
of an amended Shoreline Master Program (SMP). Since 1969 HCEC has worked to protect Hood Canal, and the
Shoreline Management Act has been an important tool for that purpose. While we are still reviewing the draft
plan, HCEC is generally supportive of its elements. We are pleased to make the following points:
1. We support adding to the purpose of the SMP the concept of a plan for restoration and achieving no
net loss of viable natural shorelines.
2. We support cumulative impact analysis as a way to guide and judge individual projects, even when the
proposed project is the first proposed in a particular area but would set a precedent for similar projects
which could not be differentiated under the rules.
3. It is important to keep high protective standards and consistent management goals, especially for all
shorelines of statewide significance, including Hood Canal.
4. In the 1970's HCEC encouraged the Department of Ecology and the state Attorney General to oppose a
permit issued by Mason County for a gravel mining operation at the mouth of the Hama Hama River,
which ultimately resulted in permit denial with this statement by the Shorelines Hearings Board:
"Intensive land uses or developments within the shoreline of Hood Canal, a shoreline of state-wide
significance, should be discouraged or prohibited. It is difficult to perceive a use more intensive and
incompatible with the present shoreline and aesthetics of Hood Canal than the construction proposed
by the Company. The pier, conveyor and barge facility will intrude upon the magnificent grandeur that
is now existent, converting the natural characteristics and the beauty of the existing shoreline into one
marred by this proposed industrial enterprise." Since that decision we have seen the degradation of
Puget Sound, including Hood Canal, and the immense cost and resources now being assembled to
reverse and repair the damage from industrial development. That case was based on general guidelines
that existed before a local shoreline management plan was in place, but it certainly articulates a position
that should be included in Jefferson County's SMP - on shorelines of statewide significance, (A) no
industrial activities that are not water dependent (including mining operations) are allowed, and (B)
aesthetics should be given great weight.
5. It is important to have setbacks (buffers) based on scientific data and to err on the side of protection in
the event of conflicting evidence, so that shorelines can achieve stability and function as a vital part of
healthy natural systems with minimum need for costly corrections in the future, and toward this end we
support the larger buffers in the draft SMP. For over three years, a citizen committee has worked to
draft a plan that protects property rights while protecting the environment and enhancing public access,
and we support their recommendations included in the draft SMP.
6. We support the SMP draft in the areas of commercial use/development and marinas, which appear to
provide adequate safeguards for environmental protection.
7. In relation to major rivers, we support the SMP draft inclusion of CMZ's.
2/2/2009