HomeMy WebLinkAbout2961-676
(:MA
Lc }hill ~ir;"\0
{:.u: (x, v C f' rt
<0 I 1'1 ( a 9
230 CAMBER LN
PORT LUDLOW, WA 98365-8782
Fax/Phone (360) 437-8220
ausimpson@msn.com
Submitted to the Jefferson County Planning Commission
June 17, 2009
Re: Planning Commission Revised Draft SMP dated June 3, 2009
'2/{ &: I
Dear Sirs:
We are residents of Port Ludlow, and as such ask your consideration.
Compared with the earlier draft, this draft makes sensible concessions especially in
mandatory setbacks. For this, we thank you. However, we are concerned that the
Revised Draft SMP does not go far enough to protect the rights of shoreline residents of
Port Ludlow.
Port Ludlow has gone to great lengths to minimize its impact on its shoreline. We have
our own sewage treatment plant, storm water retention, and conditioning. Our
ecological shoreline footprint is comparatively small. Residents of Port Ludlow live
around our bay and we nurture it. The last thing we want to do is harm it. When we
have made well above average investments and progress to save Puget Sound, why
should you penalize us for no adequate reason?
It is hard to reconcile the situation in Port Ludlow with that of Port Townsend, whose
ecological impact of shoreline homes, shoreline industry, and shoreline mill are far
greater. Yet, we understand that Port Townsend is exempt from this SMP. Granted, Port
Townsend has far greater population, but, in the same county, should a majority live by
a far more favorable set of County rules than a minority?
The current revision's setbacks are now close to the original rules under which the
county approved Port Ludlow home construction. Nevertheless, for the sake of a few
yards, it appears that a great many Port Ludlow shoreline properties will become "non-
conforming". Surely, it is sensible to ask, 11Who benefits to any meaningful extent
compared with the reduced Port Ludlow property tax and confiscated sale value of a
non-conforming property?"
You have been creative in the construction of this plan, and the current draft has
addressed many improvements. Can you not take common sense a step further to
resolve valid local concerns in Port Ludlow?
,/!~r;;:u~,
Anthony Simpson and Sally Simpson
Page 1 of 1