Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2961-645 Page 1 of2 Jeanie Orr ') {"i <- It~ / From: Jeanie Orr Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 3:59 PM To: Michelle McConnell Cc: AI Scalf; Stacie Hoskins; Jeanie Orr Subject: FW: Public Comment From: Larry Carter [mailto:lwc@cablespeed.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 20093:10 PM To: #Long-Range Planning Subject: Public Comment Larry Carter 931 Olele Point Rd Port Ludlow, W A 98365 Jefferson County Planning Commission I have a few beefs with the proposed SMP. Thank you for your hard work and tireless effort to complete the review. We don't agree on every issue but I believe your product represents your best combined ideals for an SMP. Now to my complaints: 1- Noone will answer this question. What loss of ecological function has occurred that was not protected under the existing regulation but will be protected in the new reg? Folks, ifit ain't broke... .don't fix it! 2- 1fthe proposed changes are based on science, how did Port Townsend get their SMP passed in 2007 with NO buffers? All the listed science that serves as their basis for changing our SMP was already written before Port Townsend passed their SMP in 2007. 3- You spent $670,000.00 of state grant money to write this thing and not one red cent was spent to study the economic impact on the property owner's land values. When Jack Westerman asked about doing a study, he was told there was no money to conduct a study. 4- The state Dept of Ecology is using Jeffco to mitigate the negative environmental impact of the 1-5 corridor 5- There was no designated Shoreline Property Owner on either of the two citizen's committees that submitted their recommendations to the Planning Commission. The folks that will be impacted most were not represented. 6/1 7/2009 Your struggle is finally over but ours has only begun. Thank you for dropping the buffers back in residential and high intensity designated areas. Larry Carter Shoreline Property Owner 6/1 7/2009 Page 2 of2