HomeMy WebLinkAbout2961-675
Page 1 of2
Jeanie Orr
-,. ..
jjili I
From: Jeanie Orr
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 8:07 AM
To: Michelle McConnell
Cc: AI Scalf; Stacie Hoskins; Jeanie Orr
Subject: FW: Public Comment Jefferson Shoreline Master Plan update
From: Frank and/or Julie Kelley [mailto:kelleyfamilyof4@msn.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 6:44 PM
To: #Long-Range Planning
Subject: Public Comment Jefferson Shoreline Master Plan update
Planning Commissioners and Jefferson County Commissioners,
I object to the latest draft of the Jefferson Shoreline Master Plan update.
I object to the underlying logic used to strip my fellow citizens from the reasonable use of their
property. As a waterfront property owner I am not sure how the changes to these development laws
could affect me. Not even the county staff can tell me how my parcel will be impacted by these
changes. Map 29 (the map covering my area of South Point Road) and the remainder of the Shoreline
Environment Designations (SEDs) appear to represent political gerrymandering. This regime appears
designed to start to dramatically increase buffers on those areas where population density is low and
political representation is poor.
I cannot tell from the map whether my residence is located in a "Priority Aquatic Environment" or not. I
contacted Zoe Ann Lamp at the Department of Community Development and although she was pleasant
and tried to help me, she couldn't tell me the designation either. The line is intermittent along the
shoreline and it is not clear if I will be facing a 150 foot buffer or if it will be 50 feet. It appears that
although my neighbor and I may have identical impacts on the same stretch of beach, one of us will
enjoy dramatically different property rights.
Those that have not developed their rural property should not have the burden to restore the habitat for
urban abuses. In general the water quality along Jefferson County's Shorelines is superior to the most of
the remainder ofthe Puget Sound because there is limited industrial use. It is clear the Department of
Ecology views us as the cost-free King County mitigation plan. The burden of proof has not been met
that these extreme buffers will result in a public benefit.
South Point Road has had a residence every 60 feet for many decades now. The density in this area is
essentially capped by the Growth Management Act. The suggestion that your implementation with this
update will result in an improvement in water quality is folly. It will place a catastrophic burden on
some while real efforts to improve the Puget Sound are stymied by deeper pockets.
If this county is serious about improving water quality it will do something about the drainage in our
community. Along South Point Road we have open drainage ditches that take the runoff from the road
and it drops it through a county easement right to the beach without any attempt at filtering or
infiltration. Will the county be subject to the same development standards?
6/18/2009
Page 2 of2
I request rejection of the draft proposal in its current form. Unless the clear benefits of a larger buffer
standard can be supported by science and justified to the public, I request that these limits remain
unchanged in Jefferson County.
Frank Kelley
773 South Point Road
Port Ludlow, Washington
98365
6/18/2009