HomeMy WebLinkAbout2961-448
&vv'\J\
\Arf:.fp
Jeanie Orr
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Gerry Furnia [gpfurnia@centurytel.net)
Tuesday, March 31, 20096:24 PM
John Austin; David Sullivan; Phil Johnson; #Long-Range Planning
Shoreline update
2-q ft I
I am registering my strong opposition to the 160 foot setback and the restrictions on remodeling that are being proposed.
(The application for the latter is daunting, expensive and seems to be designed so there is little hope of any plan for
enlarging a cabin to be approved). I've had my property on Marrowstone for 41 years and feel I've been a good steward of
the land and shoreline. The cabin in within 30 feet of the bank and has had no adverse affect on the bank, which is
completely covered with vegetation.
We can see the water and the sea ife that abounds. At 160 feet we couldn't see the water at all. I am 80 and have
difficulty walking. Have you considered what a problem being so far from the water would be for the elderly? We might as
well be 10 miles inland. Why pay such a premium for waterfront, if you can't ENJOY it?
To say I am steamed over this grabbing of my property rights (no chance to vote... I will be dictated to, for no matter how
we object we can be
over-ruled) is putting it mildly. How many of the ones making these decisions have waterfront property? Or do they live in
PT where the setback is 50 feet!? Is it a case of us property owners being made to sacrifice our right to satisfy others who
have no idea of the pain, frustration and financial hardship they are inflicting, at no cost to themselves? G. Furnia
804 W.McBryde Montesano, WA 98563
1