Wildlife Impacts Missing In COB Waterfront District EISPermalink +
Sat, Sep 28, 2013, 6:05 pm // Wendy Harris
I remain concerned that the city is moving forward with waterfront development plans without an updated analysis of plant and wildlife impacts. Unless environmental impacts are identified in the EIS, they will not be mitigated as part of the development process. Nor does this protect plants and animals as required under the Endangered Species Act, the Washington Shoreline Management Act (enacted pursuant to initiative by the public), the Bellingham Shoreline Master Plan or the Critical Area Ordinance. Finally, it does not conform to public values.
The staff advised the council that the EIS Addendum incorporates marina impacts on aquatic wildlife by referencing the 2007 Whatcom Waterway EIS, which reviews the marina as option 6, reflected on table 4-2 on the DOE website, attached as Exhibit B of the Planned Action Ordinance. This type of convoluted obscurity is not appropriate in the EIS process. Environmental impacts should be listed in the body of the EIS and discussed in a clear, straightforward manner.
Beyond this, the use of the 2007 Whatcom Waterway EIS is an inadequate substitute for a current Waterfront District EIS for the following reasons:
- The Whatcom Waterfront EIS addressed only a specific sub-area of the Bellingham Bay waterfront. We need an EIS analysis that analyzes plant and animal impacts throughout the entire waterfront.
- The Whatcom Waterfront EIS addresses only aquatic issues. It does not address terrestrial species or habitat, habitat connectivity and biodiversity.
- The waterfront EIS needs to determine impacts under the current waterfront plan, which did not exist in 2007. This was recognized by the port in its EIS Addendum issued last year, but plants and animal impacts were not included.
- The Whatcom Waterfront EIS was developed for purposes of a MTCA cleanup, rather than for impacts resulting from waterfront land use and zoning. Land use plans create issues, such as intensity of use, inadequate buffers, and conflicting land uses, which do not exist and are not addressed in a site cleanup plan.
We are left with a waterfront plan advancing quickly toward enactment, without any proper review of plant and animal impacts, and therefore, of necessary mitigation. This calls into question the legal validity of the waterfront plan, and creates future problems that could more easily be addressed right now.
The city needs to supplement the waterfront district EIS to analyze plant and animal impacts. And after it has this information, it needs to develop a comprehensive conservation strategy that addresses the data gaps and the connectivity and habitat needs first called out by Ann Eissinger in the 1995 and 2003 Bellingham Habitat and Wildlife Assessment. Please submit a written comment to the city council and the mayor requesting additional analysis and protection for Bellingham Bay and its uplands. We need to continue to ask until our voices are heard.
Sat, Sep 28, 2013, 6:05 pm // Wendy HarrisThe city and port have not addressed wildlife impacts from waterfront development and this should be done before a waterfront plan is enacted.
Sat, Sep 28, 2013, 3:20 pm // John ServaisAs the right wing radicals seek to shut down our national government this week, we need to push back with common sense.
8 comments; last on Oct 01, 2013
Fri, Sep 20, 2013, 8:09 am // Dick ConoboyHearing held on 11 September. Comment period extended 10 days. Effects on home owners already manifest.
8 comments; last on Sep 22, 2013
Thu, Sep 19, 2013, 7:08 am // Riley SweeneyRiley examines who is donating to which candidates
Mon, Sep 09, 2013, 1:07 am // Wendy HarrisThe staff will be explaining the public's concerns, but the public is not allowed to testify.
Fri, Sep 06, 2013, 3:52 pm // Wendy HarrisElected officials continue to rely on inaccurate and misleading reports by the city and port staff regarding waterfront development.
Wed, Sep 04, 2013, 9:37 am // John ServaisAn attempt at linking to one or more writers who can help us make sense of going to war with Syria. An alternative to Kerry-Obama.
Wed, Sep 04, 2013, 1:36 am // John ServaisContacting Rick Larsen and Susan Delbene is actually a viable citizen exercise just now. Tell them to vote NO on bombing Syria.
1 comments; last on Sep 04, 2013
Election InfoCandidate Filings
Coal, Oil & TrainsCommunity Wise Bellingham
Powder River Basin R. C.
Local Blogs & NewsBellingham Herald
Bham Herald Politics Blog
Bham Politics & Economics
Friends of Whatcom
Get Whatcom Planning
League of Women Voters
Western Front - WWU
Local CausesChuckanut Community Forest
City Club of Bellingham
Futurewise - Whatcom
Lummi Island Quarry
N. Cascades Audubon
NW Holocaust Center
Reduce Jet Noise
Salish Sea Org.
Save the Granary Building
WA Conservation Voters
Port of Bellingham
US - The White House
WA State Access
WA State Elections
WA State Legislature
Weather & ClimateCliff Mass Weather Blog
Two day forecast
Watts Up With That? - climate
Edge of Sports
Famous Internet Skiers
Good Web SitesAl-Jazeera online
Foreign Policy in Focus
Innocence Project, The
Intrnational Herald Tribune
Julia Ioffe/New Republic
Middle East Times
New American Century
Paul Krugman - economics
Personal bio info
Portland Indy Media
Project Vote Smart
Stand for the Troops
Talking Points Memo
The Crisis Papers
War and Piece
NwCitizen 1995 - 2007Early Northwest Citizen
Quiet, Offline or DeadBellingham Police Activity
Citizens of Bellingham
Cordata & Meridian
Facebook Port Reform
N. Sound Conservancy
No Leaky Buckets
Protect Bellingham Parks
The American Telegraph