Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2961-591 '.,.~'\ ! ,. r;:':, c Page 1 of2 d' (,t y)'\~/~.'\tt iI ~ 01 Jeanie Orr From: JeanieOrr Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 7:18 AM To: Michelle McConnell Cc: AI Scalf; Stacie Hoskins; Jeanie Orr Subject: FW: SMP Comments From: Gene Farr [mailto:genefarr@cablespeed.com] Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 3:40 PM To: #Long-Range Planning Subject: SMP Comments I have some serious general concerns about the Environmental Designations and the process that led to those designations. I also have some specific concerns relative to the Reach FFF designations which includes my property. I'll address the general concerns as we review the issues related to my property. The area south of my property is currently designated "Conservancy" from the north end of the Becket Point area to the Cape George Colony marina. Then, north and northeast from the marina it is shown as a dual "Natural & Suburban" designation. My property is located on the bluff in that area just were McMinn Road reaches the bluff - about 1 mile NE of the Cape George Colony. This total region around Cape George, just described, is defined as Reach FFF in the PDSMP proposed Designations Map. When the SMP update process started, the Reach FFF was all proposed to be designated "Conservancy". However, when the "experts" looked at aerial photos of the area taken in 2000, somehow they concluded that the area around the Cape George Marina should be "High Intensity", the rest of the Cape George area should be "Shoreline Residential" and all else in Reach FFF should be "Natural". That is inconsistent. It looks like Reach FFF was originally defined as a separate Reach because that section of the shoreline is basically "high bluff'. It does seem appropriate to define the Cape George area as "Shoreline Residential" with the "High Intensity" section; but, it also makes good sense to have the highly developed area in Reach FFF just north of Becket Point as well as the highly developed area that extends +/- about one half mile each way along the bluff from where McMinn Road gets to the bluff, designated as "Shoreline Residential". About 80 % of the lots in that area along the extension of McMinn to the SWand NE along Porter Lane are fully developed "1 Residence to 5 Acre Rural Residential" lots. Also, to define all the developed non Cape George portions of Reach FFF as "Natural" doesn't fit the purpose of the "Natural Designation" which is to "protect from harm or adverse impact shoreline areas that are intact, have minimally degraded functions and processes, or are relatively free from human influence". In addition to the highly developed nature of these areas and lack of significant ecological value or function, it should be noted that up until about some time in the 1960's the bluff at the end of McMinn Road was the location of the County dump. In fact there is still broken glass, iron slag from the burnt trash, car parts, water heaters, etc. on the beach below the bluff, as well as noxious weeds growing on the bluff. Further, none of the other Designation criteria apply except for the concern for unstable slopes. These are not environmental concerns. These are safety concerns which are covered by the Critical Area Ordinance. This brings us to the next point. A recent Washington State Supreme Court decision says that the SMP and Critical Area Ordinances can't cover the same thing. So, all references to Geological Hazards should be removed from the SMP. Further, there is nothing in RCW 90.58 that requires the draconian policy of "No Net Loss". Nor is there any 6/16/2009 Page 2 of2 requirement to include unstable bluffs or other geological hazards in a SMP. Hope this helps you to clean up the PDSMP. Your efforts are very much appreciated. Best regards, Gene Farr 570 McMinn Road Port Townsend, WA 98368 (360) 379-3203 6/16/2009