Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2961-656 ~cJcl fc- ~ '",I ,1 J v9 George S. Yount 717 _25th Street Port Townsend WA 98368 Wednesday, June 17, 2009 Jefferson County Planning Commission 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 RE: Shoreline Master Proqram Update Testimonv I am in favor of most of the Shoreline Master Program update prepared by the Planning Commission. I appreciate the tremendous work and effort by the Planning Commission, the Department of Community Development staff, and all the citizens who volunteered their time and energy in addressing Jefferson County's shoreline development. It reflects d.J our commitment to preserving and protecting the water quality and ecological functions a~ values of our shared shorelines with the citizens of the State of Washington. I am very pleased with and Question and Answer document prepared by Mr. Alverez.... because it dispels most of the misconceptions'and misinformation about the Shoreline Master Program that has been floating around these last two months. What seems to be missed by many folks is the fact that the Shoreline Master Program is designed to aid new property development, not property that is already developed. What is developed is developed. The document is not as complete as I would prefer. I would encourage you to restore the 150 foot prescriptive buffer for urban residential areas. The reduction is counter to the rationale and science used for determining buffer widths in the Critical Areas Ordinance. As development becomes more intense there is a greater need to protect the ecological values and functions of shorelines and associated wetlands. The tables of set backs in the CAO demonstrate this increase in buffer widths. Please note that Whatcom County has an approved SMP with 150 foot prescriptive buffers and their reasoning has withstood legal challenges. It is quite clear that a 150 foot buffers is not onerous. But, if people feel it is, the SMP's flexibility encourages and provides multiple opportunities for buffer reductions as well as activities within the buffers as long as the basic functions and values of a working ecosystem are maintained. 50 feet is too small and is arbitrary. I encourage the Planning Commission to make appropriate revisions based on the wealth of available scientific knowledge, and forward your recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners for their review and adoption. Sincerely, ~~lS~