HomeMy WebLinkAbout2961-602
(. ... .. 1"\ (~.
J/' fi (
Page 1 of 1
1'./\
2."1 (0 J
Jeanie Orr
From: Jeanie Orr
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 20094:50 PM
To: Michelle McConnell
Cc: AI Scalf; Stacie Hoskins; Jeanie Orr
Subject: FW: SMP Comment
From: Matt Sircely [mailto:mattsircely@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 20094:29 PM
To: #Long-Range Planning
Subject: SMP Comment
Hello Planning Commission (planning@co.iefferson.wa.us),
In accordiance with Wednesday's due date for comments on the Shoreline Master Program (SMP),
please consider the following statement. I am grateful for your work, and the work of many other
community members to update the SMP in a way that reaches compromise between all stakeholders. I
also appreciate your work to review the draft SMP based on citizen comments. However, I urge you to
revert back to much of the language that has been commonly discussed in recent months, avoiding some
of the recent changes to the draft. In particular:
1. The Planning Commission has eliminated important safeguards that would protect shoreline
habitat and water quality as new growth occurs
2. Please don't roll back the environmental safeguards proposed in the citizen committee's draft.
Please reinstate the science-based buffers for all of Jefferson County shorelines. These buffers are
sized to reduce erosion and flooding of our homes, prevent chemicals from poisoning shellfish
beds, keep our beaches clean enough to swim in, and our salmon streams cool.
3. I support the Planning Commission's revision to make it easy for homes to be rebuilt after a fire.
Instead of reducing environmental safeguards on 60 miles of shoreline, the County needs to come
up with a cheap and easy process that allows development on nonconforming lots while protecting
water quality and habitat.
4. I support the previous drafts, which require geoduck aquaculture to obtain a conditional permit.
There are too many unanswered questions about the modem way of farming geoduck, and the
science on the issue is due in within a few years. We can modify that later, if it proves there's no
harm to the near shore habitat. I trust that geoduck farmers will be able to navigate any conditional
permit process and proceed with ecological sensitivity.
5 . We support the previous draft which banned the use of pens to raise fish on the shore. Canada has
experienced many problems with pen fish, and until such time that the science is clear, we need to
keep this practice off our shores.
6. The draft removes important safeguards to protect sensitive habitats from mining. Mining should
not be allowed in the conservancy environment, and additional protections are needed.
Thank you so much for your tireless work!
Matt Sircely
681 17th St.
Port Townsend, W A 98368
(360) 301-3789
6/1612009