HomeMy WebLinkAbout2961-382
{01Mf\-
I[Iffb
1,{)i1'V1W.6
Jeanie Orr
Page 1 of 1
From: Tim & Kathy Loika [loika5@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2009 3:42 PM
To: #Long-Range Planning
Subject: Shoreline Set Back Comments
V1b{
@
If! understand the plan correctly it will require setbacks to go from 30 feet to 150 feet. If this is
accurate the property I purchased and checked with the Department of community development to make
sure the septic installation was completed with a valid permit, and that the lot was in fact a buildable lot
becomes unbuildable because it is not as deep as 150 feet. What this amounts to is a, if not an illegal
taking of private property, it is certainly unethical. If the actual goal is to protect fish, clams, eagles,
etc, which I believe Michelle McConnell has been quoted as saying, are you going to eliminate all
logging in the Puget Sound Watershed? That would have a greater positive impact on wildlife habitat
than shoreline homes. It doesn't make ethical sense to go after individual homeowners (because you can
get away with it) and allow logging to continue unchecked, the ferries dump their untreated human
waste straight into the sound, and cities still continue to build not only adjacent to the water but over the
top of it.
Finally if! understand the plan correctly, homes that burn would not be allowed to be rebuilt without
being moved 150 feet back. This part of the plan while once again unethical, would on the surface
appear to have a unintended consequence of encouraging environmental arson.
Thanks for listening
Tim Loika
loika5@gmail.com
2/2/2009