HomeMy WebLinkAbout19 23CICI
1
To: Hearing Examiner JU 4 2 7 m
Re: MLA17-00019 Marrowstone Island Marijuana Production an e g
ccccRSO
Alas I do not have attorneys, agents, or jobs to offer the county. I do not NT?DCD
understand the permitting process or county government structure. I am a
homeowner on Marrowstone island having to defend against a well healed
applicant who wants to shoehorn an elephant into a quiet rural residential area
with great beauty, instead of locating the business where it rightly belongs:
alongside other businesses.
This is not a cottage industry.
A cottage industry is a homeowner deciding to produce a small amount of
items, e.g. eggs, pottery, flowers, vegetables out of his home for supplemental
income.
This is not in the "Marrowstone agricultural tradition."
Local resources such as clams and oysters and timber are harvested,
goats and cows are raised on plentiful grass. This is a crop that without
substantial support would not grow here in sufficient amounts.
This is not a "neighborly" business
The use of neighbor as in "does no harm" is not accurate. Neighbor is a
person living near you who you can converse with and who shares the interests
and values of place. You do not need to go through lawyers and agents to talk to
"your neighbor."
Window dressing.
The existing cottage businesses I refer to have their principals living on
the property. Absentee landlords want others to live with their use of the land, not
themselves. Installing "family" does not insure "skin in the game," i.e. you live
with what you create.
Line of sight
Marrowstone has a state park for a reason. The vistas and bucolic nature
of the island area are a respite for high density, viewless spaces. A walled off,
even screened massive greenhouse is not comparable to a large house. It is an
industrial walled off box, and should be sited in an industrial area with other
walled off boxes.
Responsibility to existing homeowners
Residential means your residence. Mr. Smith lives in Seattle. When I
moved to Marrowstone I chose a rural residential home. I had confidence in local
officials and ordinances to protect my investment. No one I know, including those
who supported the marijuana initiative, would live next to a grow facility. Land
prices of long held Marrowstone homeowners will be affected. This is not fear, it
is fact.
Tax dollars
How far is Jefferson county willing to go in pursuing what the applicant
prominently bills as "tax dollars" and "county jobs" (4, probably low paying). Get
those dollars by clustering light industy in areas designated for it, rather than
throwing rural residential neighborhoods under the bus.
Re responses in the Leader by Austin Smith
This was a slick study in "spin". Dangled prominently were the tax revenue
and jobs. The questions of why specifically Marrowstone and chief concerns
expressed at May 15 were not answered substantively. There were lots of
references to how many dollars Mr. Smith has spent to mitigate light, odor, noise,
and waste. Not mentioned is dollars only have to be spent to shoehorn an
industrial business where it doesn't belong. And, dollars spent does not warrant
that the mitigations will work.
Expectations of enforceability
Can Jefferson county assure homeowners that there is sufficient oversight
of this business. Mr. Smith has shielded himself while letting surrogates handle
the permitting. Homeowners, however, have no shields, and have had to spend
many hours attempting to fend off this land use.
Mr. Austin's proposed marijuana grow facility belongs in a light industrial area,
not allowed as a "cottage industry" on Marrowstone island.
Dianne Maynard
761 Robbins Rd.
Nordland
June 27, 2017
Jo Ann Comstock
JUN 2 7 2017 11 Reef Road
Nordland,WA 98358
JEFFERSON COUNTY DCD jacoxey@me.com
June 26, 2017
Stephen K. Causseaux,Esq.
Jefferson County Hearing Examiner
902 South 10th Street,Tacoma
Washington 98405
RE: Case:MLA17-00019
Building Permit: BLD 17-00093
Parcel No: 021204015
Address: 9272 Flagler Road,Nordland WA
Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board License#412943
Dear Mr. Causseaux,
Thank you for the opportunity to submit comments regarding the above-referenced proposal for a
Tier 3 marijuana production and processing facility on Marrowstone Island. Although I
previously submitted comments to the Jefferson County Department of Community
Development,it was prior to the availability of the"Development Review Division Staff Report
to Jefferson County Hearing Examiner"(dated June 20th,2017). I believe that several of the
findings put forth in this report to justify approval of the proposed facility are flawed.I will touch
on only a few of them here,as I know that many of the other issues are addressed by other
concerned citizens in their comments..
1) Regarding the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan stated goal of fostering
cottage industries in order to provide economic and employment opportunities,
staff findings include the following:
• "The proposed cottage industry permit...will provide economic and employment opportunities
to Jefferson County Citizens."
• "The proposed project ... will allow a new business to provide living wage jobs for Jefferson
County citizens."
Conversely,staff findings also include the statement that'All employees are extended family
members of the property owner and will reside at the existing single family residence on the
property." Secondly,in the Operating Plan submitted to the Washington State Liquor and
Cannabis Board,(and received by Jefferson County DCD on March 7, 2017),Mr.Austin Smith
answers"NO"to the question"Will you provide a living wage to eighty-five percent or more of
your employees?"
Clearly,this project will not provide new employment opportunities to Jefferson County residents,
nor does Mr. Smith intend to provide living wages to his "extended family member"employees.
1 of 4
At best,one might hope for"trickle-down"economics and argue that production/processing
operations indirectly create jobs at the retail end of the marijuana business,as well as excise taxes
for the county.
2) Regarding the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan requirement that the owner
or lessee of the property reside within the dwelling unit, staff findings include the
following:
• "Austin Smith...will reside in the dwelling unit."
• "The cottage industry will be owned and operated by Austin Smith,property owner."
Austin Smith's representative, Planning Commissioner Kevin Coker,stated at the May 15th
Marrowstone Island Community Association meeting that Mr. Smith does not intend to reside at
the property for at least a couple of years so that his daughters can complete their high school
education in Seattle. If that is the case,the residency requirement will not be met.
Furthermore,while the Staff Report comments on the applicable county ordinances,it does not
address the apparent conflict with Washington Administrative Code 314-55-015,which states that
the Liquor and Cannabis Board"will not approve any marijuana license for a location where law
enforcement access,without notice or cause,is limited. This includes a personal residence."
3) Regarding Jefferson County Code 18.20.020 requirement that the cottage
industry be accessory and secondary to an existing single-family dwelling, staff
findings include the following:
• "The principal use of the property is residential.The proposed greenhouse is clearly secondary
to the principal use....The project covers only 3.1%of the 7.3 acre parcel...."
Planning Commissioner Kevin Coker, stated at the May 15th Marrowstone Island Community
Association meeting that Mr. Smith was specifically searching for a property for marijuana
production/processing when he chose the location on Marrowstone Island,and that Mr. Smith
does not intend to reside at the property,at least initially. Clearly,the marijuana structure and
business is primary, and owner residency is a secondary"maybe".
Furthermore,if structure size is to be used as a factor for determining primary and secondary use,
the proposed greenhouse structure,at nearly six times the size of the residence,is clearly the
primary use.
4) Regarding Jefferson County Code 18.20.170(4),which limits the size of any new
structure built to accommodate a cottage industry to 5,000 square feet; and JCC
18.20.295(4),which allows a marijuana production greenhouse to up to five percent
of gross parcel size, (for a 7.3 acre parcel), staff findings and conditions include
the following:
• "The parcel is zoned as Rural Residential 1:10 and requires a cottage industry permit for
processing of recreational marijuana. The proposed greenhouse is one structure totaling 10,080
square feet. Only 1,800 square feet of the structure is dedicated to processing,in the area of the
greenhouse labeled'head house'."
2 of 4
• "In no case shall more than 5,000 square feet of total building area on the property be
devoted to the cottage industry." (Condition 17)
• "Not more than one cottage industry shall be allowed in or on the same premises." (Condition
20)
• "The project will produce a commercial and agricultural product."
Frankly,this is a bit confusing. In addition to the 1,800 square foot cottage industry"head house"
for processing,the plans show 1,800 square feet of greenhouse for"veg"and 6,480 square feet of
greenhouse for"flower".If only the processing component is deemed a cottage industry,what are
the"veg" and"flower"components?
"Veg" suggests"vegetables". Is that the "agricultural product"referred to,separate and distinct
from the marijuana production and processing? Wouldn't an agricultural greenhouse be a second
cottage industry?
I assume "flower"refers to the marijuana production component. (Revised Code of Washington
82.04.213 states that"`agricultural product'does not include marijuana,useable marijuana,or
marijuana-infused products...") Would"flower" then represent a third commercial or industrial
type of"cottage industry", (albeit,exempt from the 5,000 square foot limit).That too,would
violate the limit of one cottage industry on the property.
To add to the confusion,Mr. Smith indicates on the Operating Plan submitted to the Washington
State Liquor and Cannabis Board that the marijuana production is an"outdoor grow"and not
an "indoor grow".
5) Regarding Jefferson County Code 18.40,Article VIII Conditional Uses, staff
findings include the following:
• "The addition of a greenhouse for growing an agricultural/commercial cash crop fits with the
existing and intended character of the community in that it introduces additional agricultural
uses.... There are existing agricultural structures of similar size in the surrounding area that are
not adequately screened from the public view"
• "The project proposal is consistent with(the)standard... The public interest suffers no
substantial detrimental effect. Consideration shall be given to the cumulative effect of similar
actions in the area."
This property is located in an area zoned"rural residential"and while there are other small-scale
agricultural operations on Marrowstone,agriculture/commercial cash crop is not by any means
the predominant"character of the community".I am unaware of any agricultural structures on
Marrowstone Island that remotely approach the size of this proposed facility and would
appreciate specifics in supporting the claim that there "are existing agricultural structures of
similar size in the surrounding area".Furthermore,it bears repeating that,(per RCW 82.04.213)
marijuana is not an"`agricultural product". Agricultural crops do not require eight-foot
screening fences or 24/7 security systems—just two important distinguishing factors.
Mr. Smith stated in aJune 21, 2017 article in the Port Townsend Leader that"...the area seemed
very liberal,being that the closest grocery store has a pot shop next door."This statement reflects
his unfamiliarity with Marrowstone,as there no"pot shop"next to the only grocery store on the
3 of 4
island. In fact,there are no commercial/industrial marijuana production/processing or retail
facilities on the island, and the community strongly opposed a previous proposal for a grow
operation.
The cumulative effect of similar actions on Marrowstone Island would radically alter the character
of the community. There are several undeveloped parcels on Marrowstone,many of them near
this proposed facility. The possibility of having to drive through a corridor fringed by eight-foot
tall fences on either side of Flagler Road in order to access Fort Flagler State Park is an extremely
unpleasant scenario. I do not believe that the cumulative effects of similar actions have been duly
considered.
In summary,I respectfully request that you recommend that the county deny this permit.
Marijuana production and processing is unsuited to rural residential areas.
Sincerely yours,
Jo Ann Comstock
Patty Charnas,Director of Community Development, (pcharnasaco jefferson.wa.us)
Pat Hopper,Associate Planner, (phoppera,co jefferson.wa.us)
Kate Dean,Jefferson County Commissioner District 1, (jeffboccna,co jefferson.wa.us)
David Sullivan,Jefferson County Commissioner District 2, (jeffboccna,co jefferson.wa.us)
Kathleen Kler,Jefferson County Commissioner District 3, a effbocc(a,co.jefferson.wa.us)
Philip Morley, County Administrator, (pmorley(a,co jefferson.wa.us)
Washington State Liquor and Marijuana Board(mjretail@lcb.wa.gov)
4 of 4
John Comstock
11 Reef Road /417/'
1 1
JUN
Nordland, WA 983583lDF� 2 7 2017
60 316 June, 20170ERSaN CC
275
UNr
DCD
RE: File MLA17-00019:ZONI 7-00002-ZON170003-BLD17-00093
Proposed Greenhouse 9272 Flagler Rd. Marrowstone Island.
Thank you examiner Causseax and members of Jefferson County Planning and
Community Development for hearing this issue.
I am John Comstock, a Nordland resident and member of the Marrowstone Is-
land Preservation Committee. I'm speaking on their behalf.
We would like to welcome Mr. Austin Smith as a new neighbor to Marrowstone
Island and share what we presume is his intent to provide safe and conflict-free
legal marijuana to our county. It is clear that Mr Smith has planned to incorporate
many of the latest marijuana growing technologies in his project. While we en-
dorse the intent of the 65% of Jefferson County voting for i502, we are concerned
that its implementation not shortcut county and local land use law.
We argue that the County's Criteria for Conditional Uses that you have before
you are not being met by the proposed project and recommend that you disap-
prove it for this location.
Our argument focuses on substantial failure to comply with the JCC 18140.530
Approval criteria for all conditional uses.
1 . The county may approve or approve with modifications an application for a
conditional use permit if all the following criteria are satisfied:
a. The conditional use is harmonious and appropriate in character and quality
of development in the vicinity of the subject property and with the physical
characteristics of the subject property. The scale of this industrial
greenhouse is many times that of existing or similar facilities, and
would set a non-conforming precedent for industrialization of our is-
land. Its approval would place many other parcels zoned rural-resi-
dential at risk on Marrowstone for similar development.
b. The conditional use will be served by adequate infrastructure including
roads, fire protection, water, wastewater disposal, and stormwater control.
The site is remote from fire protection and law enforcement, esti-
mated water use and stormwater management for the 10,000sf roof
are problematic in the event of a storm or clogged pipe or gutter.
c. The conditional use will not be materially detrimental to uses of property in
the vicinity of the subject parcel. Schaefer Fan Engineers were unable to
provide noise level for the proposed Schaefer 48" belt-driven fans.
They state that next larger 54" fan produces 77db five feet from the
fan. Calculations for the 48" fan are approximately 66db. (ASHRAE
Handbook 11.1) WAC 173 (table below) limits noise from such
sources to 55db from 7am to 10pm, and 10db less at night. Planning
summary seems to have wrongly cited 400 feet of heavily wooded
buffer to the south. The 400 foot "buffer" next to the residential RV
park belongs to another property owner and is currently for sale, and
(according to its owner) may be soon logged.
d. The conditional use will not introduce noise, smoke, dust, fumes, vibra-
tions, odors or other conditions which unreasonably impact existing uses in
the vicinity of the subject parcel. Besides the eight exhaust fans and 20
HAF fans, the effectiveness of odor and light pollution are promised,
but not included as the terms of the permit. Use of the adjoining
properties for peace and quiet, and freedom from odor and light pol-
lution are not protected by conditions of the permit.
WAC 173-60-040 1111aNimunt permissible environmental noise levels. (I )No person
shall cause or permit noise to intrude into the property of.rnother person which noise exceeds the
maximum permissible noise levels set tc,rth below in this section.
(?)(a) the none limitations established are as set forth in the followin_a table after any
applicable adjustments provided for herein arc applied.
LUNA OF LUN: OF
NOISE SOT TRCF lthCE1Y1NCi
PROPERTY
Class A Class B Class C
CLASS A 55 dBA 5; dBA 60 dBA
cl_\SS H {7 60 65
c t Ass c' 60 !i` 70
(b) Between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. the noise limitations of the foregoing:
table shall he reduced by 10 dR,'1 for receiving.property within ( las A F.DNAs.
(e j At any hour of the day or night the applicable noise limitations in(a) and (b) above
may be exceeded for any receiving property by no more than:
(i) ; dBA for a total of 15 minutes in any one-hour period: or
(ii) 10 dflA tier a total of 5 minutes in any one-hour period. or
(iii) 15 (IBA for a total of 1.5 minutes in any one-hour period.
[Order 74-32. .S 173-0:1-040. filed 4122/75, effective 9;1;751
e. The location, size, and height of the buildings, structures, walls, and
fences, and screening vegetation for the conditional use will not unreason-
ably interfere with allowable development or use of neighboring properties.
This 23' tall 70x140 foot building will dwarf any neighboring structure,
and would adversely affect prospective owners considering family
homes. I am unaware of any other 8' fence, or similar screening fac-
ing any road on Marrowstone Island.
f. The pedestrian and vehicular traffic associated with the conditional use will
not be hazardous to existing and anticipated traffic in the vicinity of the
subject parcel. Truck parking for this business may be inadequate as
the truck maneuvering area used by the previous owner will be occu-
pied by the greenhouse. Recent truck delivery had to park on the
highway to offload the greenhouse.
g. The conditional use complies with all other applicable criteria and stand-
ards of this code and any other applicable state and federal law Applicant
has repeatedly described this grow factory as Hydroponic; specifi-
cally prohibited by JC Public health language of the permit applica-
tion.
h. Site is not near an airport So this criterium may not apply.
i. The conditional use will not cause significant adverse impacts on the hu-
man or natural environments that cannot be mitigated through conditions
of approval. Size and scale of this marijuana factory cannot be miti-
gated unless relocated to a site zoned commercial, which is our pref-
erence. Accidental spills of fertilizer, fungicide, or pesticide into our
sole source aquifer, or into the type F stream running to Mystery bay
shellfish farms are not amenable to mitigation without an impervious
catchment basin underlying the greenhouse, a safety measure which
is not part of the project.
j. The conditional use has merit and value for the community as a whole.
Unlike other cottage industries on the island, whose owners live on-
island, and provide products and services for immediate use by
neighbors, this is an extractive industrial business, whose product
will be packaged and sold off-island. This business model contrasts
dramatically with those of other cottage industries on Marrowstone
Island.
k. The conditional use is consistent with all relevant goals and policies of the
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan. This project is not consistent
with many elements of Marrowstone Island Community Plan, which is
referenced in the Jefferson County Comprehensive plan.—particu-
larly with respect to size and character of the operation, residents ac-
tually living on the site, and cottage industry character of the opera-
tion.
I. The public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect. Consideration
shall be given to the cumulative effect of similar actions in the area. The
cumulative effect of industrial marijuana greenhouses would be cata-
strophic for the rural residential character of Marrowstone Island. As
evidenced by the seven producer/processor operations in the Glen
Cove neighborhood, there is intense pressure to replicate this type of
lucrative business wherever possible. The Liquor Board map cur-
rently shows 1100 grow operations in the state, and 14 in Jefferson
County. We are concerned that the trend toward ever-larger grow op-
erations to will render Mr Smith's operation non-competitive and
leave the island with an unsightly and degraded parcel of land, not
suitable for rural residential use.
m. In instances where all of the above findings cannot be made, the applica-
tion shall be denied. We submit that most of these criteria are not and
cannot be met by a fair consideration of the facts.
Recognizing that 1502 permits legal grows of marijuana in Washington, we
ask that it be done right. Location of these operations in commercial—or
appropriate agricultural zoning will address our concerns for reduced prop-
erty values, pollution, odor, and acrimonious neighborhood relations.
The i502 website shows only $12,500 tax revenue returning to Jefferson
County in 2016. Clearly this is insufficient to compensate our local staff for
the workload this evolving stampede represents. We observe that while the
county imposed a moratorium pending revision of marijuana code in 2015,
current code contains conflicting language and may lead to unwise plan-
ning decisions. Examples of this conflicting language include criteria for
SEPA review, and agreement with Washington State Liquor and Marijuana
Board code.
We ask that this particular permit be disapproved, and that Jefferson
County restrict these facilities to commercial/industrial zoning.
Thank You John Comstock
Patrick Hopper
From: Amy Greenbaum <agreenbaum@sinclairdigital.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 7:10 AM
To: Patrick Hopper
Subject: Marrowsrone Island industrial planned site
Hi Pat,
I understand you are lead on reviewing public comments on the proposed marijuana plant on our island.
I have to ask how did this proposal got this far. Marrowsrone Island has a community development plan in
place, and this industry does not agree with it. No one (my guess even the owner of the land)wants to live
beside an industrialized large scale operation like this..
We are a small residential island, agricultural bunch, we live in natural pastoral setting we have cottage
businesses that contribute to the community.
I object to this proposal, I think its folly for the county to have monetary gain in permit fees and the residents
have to live with this huge eyesore that impacts our community ecologically and Ceres us off course of our
community plan.
Thank you,
Amy Greenbaum
425-269-1917
..please excuse overzealous autocorrect or random typos, I'm emailing from my mobile device.
RD Crag
JUN 2 7 2017
JEFFERSON COUNTY DCD
1
Patrick Hopper
From: Carol Gonnella <carolgonnella@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2017 10:06 AM
To: Patrick Hopper
Subject: RE: Marijuarna Facility on Marrowstone Island
CIgt
1
To: Pat Hopper JUN
From: Carol Gonnella
Date: June 26, 2017 JEFF, 1 201?
RE: JEFFCO Case#ZON17-00003 RSoNCQ�
Building Permit#BLD17-000093 �//Vbcr
Hello:
My name is Carol Gonnella and I am a resident of Marrowstone Island. I am writing this letter in regard to the proposed
marijuana facility on this island. I want to stress that I am not opposed to the use,growing or selling of marihuana in the
State of Washington, but I do have major concerns about a facility being on the island of Marrowstone. As I am sure you
are aware, Marrowstone is a sleepy, quiet island witlh an "out in the country"feeling.with very little industry. Most of
its residents are retired. In the big picture, a marijuana facility does not fit the character and personality of this island.
By putting your stamp of approval on this facility, it is one step to modifying the the quality of life that is presently here.
As a governing body making decisions about cottage industries, I believe it is imperative that you fully analyze the
impact on a community your decision will make and attempt to mitigate any impacts to the greatest extent possible. A
much better and appropriate location would be an industrial park or a more commercial location.
On a more specific level,these are my concerns:
1. JCC 18.20.170 (o) states that the total feet of building area on the property allowed for the cottage industry must not
exceed 5000 square feet. What is the total number of square footage for the green houses and other buildings and who
and how will this requirement be monitored in the future to insure compliance?.
2. JCC 18.20.170(s) references no interference or detriment to the quiet use and enjoyment of the adjoining properties
and surrounding area. Without a doubt,this facility will impact all the residents of Marrowstone in some way, with the
greatest impact to those residents in closest proximity. I have heard stories of other residents who have marijuana
facilities close to their homes. They have reported that they suffer from many impacts but the greatest of which are the
federal helicopters that periodically hover above the facility to inspect it. We must remember: THE GROWING OF
MARIJUANA IS A FEDERAL OFFENSE. None of us in Washington State has the ability to control the inspection or
surveillance by the federal government. Thils could have an incredible detrimental influence on residential properties
and could greatly diminish the property values of those communities.
I implore you to carefully analyze and address the actual and potential impacts of an industry like this being allowed in a
residential area. I strongly believe these impacts will be substantial, and will over time, kill the golden egg that makes
this island so very special. Again, a much better location for such a facility is an industrial park or commercial location so
these impacts can be mitigated.
Thank you for considering these concerns when making your decision.
Warm regards.
Carol Gonnella
1
2
June 26, 2017
D2C2/
4 n To: Mr. Pat Hopper
Department of Community Development JUN 2 7
JEFFE
621 Sheridan Street IISQN`,Ov
Port Townsend, Wash.98368 NOCO
Mr. Hopper,
I am writing you concerning the proposed marijuana growing facility that the Jefferson County Dept. of
Community Development, County zoning commission, and the Jefferson County Commissioners are
looking at for the possibility of permitting such an enterprise to take hold of,there on Marrowstone
Island, in Jefferson County.
I am the oldest son of, Nettie Jean Gustafson, owner of the property that shares a boundary
with the proposed facility. I am also her Durable Power of Attorney. You should know that my mother,
an upstanding senior citizen of this state, is very upset about this possibility as the proposed facility is
located right next to her property on Fort Flagler Road and her property is already being negatively
affected by this proposal.At the time of this writing we have learned that she has recently lost the
possibility of a sale of her property when a prospective buyer found out about the grow operation and
pulled out of making an offer on her property. It has also come to our attention that some
representatives of the operation have been making statements to the affect that the property that is
owned by my mother is timbered and creates a needed natural buffer for an operation such as this.The
problem here, is that it is not going to be true as the family has contacted several logging firms for
estimates to log the property.This would, as a result,take away the "natural" buffer that is being
claimed as needed and remaining there to help that project. This is something that the commissioners
should be made aware of.
She has asked me contact the appropriate agencies and representatives to voice her grave
concerns for her property, investment, lively hood, and financial source of money to provide safe and
secure room and board for her life at the assistant living facility that she now resides at.This proposal is
very ill conceived in the relation that it does not have any concern for the citizens of Marrowstone Island
or the citizens of Jefferson County.This proposal from the owner/investor of the operation has only one
concern and that is of its financial success, no matter how it is accomplished or who it negatively
impacts or hurts.
Mr. Hopper,there is even a much bigger area of concern for the residents of Marrowstone
Island and the residents and citizens of Jefferson County.This concern is the fact that the citizens and
the representatives of Jefferson County have a great treasure, a great jewel in their possession that is so
rare and so valuable that it should be guarded with great care and honor.This treasure is the one thing
that very few counties or cities can claim as their own. It is a beautiful Island with a rich and historic
past. One that cannot ever be duplicated.The sad story here is that someone or several people that
have the respect and trust of its citizens may make the wrong decision and destroy this paradise and
cast it away like it had no value.The romance, beauty, intrigue, and pride that is intertwined in this
wonderful oasis with in Jefferson County, could be forever lost, never to return if this proposal of a
Marijuana Operation is allowed to go forward. Many of these residents, citizens, and owners of
Marrowstone Island have lived there for generations.They are a very proud and unique people that
regard this island as a paradise and often look to hand it down to their children.These people are the
guardians of the past, present and future of their island and are very proud of its place in history and do
not want to see it sold out to the highest bidder or for a favor. It is important that everyone realize that
this proposed industrial grow operation could be put in any of a thousand different locations other than
Marrowstone Island. I, like so many others, believe that the reason that the investors and owner picked
this place is because they viewed the occupants of the island as being push overs and they could push
things thru without opposition. I am sure that you are finding that this is very far from the truth.
In reviewing this situation, I believe that the County government, county planning and zoning
commission, and the Department of Community Development has a great and historic opportunity to
stand up and not let big money and big business control the game and get what they want at any cost to
the wonderful citizens of Jefferson County. From this point forward, history for the island will either
remain rich and a treasure,and something to pass down to all of our children and the visitors and guests
that come there or it will be forever changed and become just another trophy in someone's book and
wallet.
In closing, I wish all those of Marrowstone Island and Jefferson County a bright future and those with
the burden of having to wrestle with and make these decisions the strength to decide carefully and
wisely with their citizens and the law in equal balance for the best interest of all.
Thank you,
Respectfully,
Alan Gustafson
Patrick Hopper
From: gork70@aol.com
Sent: Monday,June 26, 2017 5:02 PM
To: Patrick Hopper
Subject: JEFFCO Case#ZON17-00003
I sent a letter some time ago strongly opposing this marijuana growing facility. As the largest owner of property on
Marrowstone Island
I am still strongly opposed to this processing facility for the same reasons stated in my original letter.
Regards, George W. King Tel 206-282-8058
2 D 3( . v, I \ L
JUN 262017
JEFFERSON COUNTY DCD
1
Patrick Hopper
From: Melvin & Karen Lake <mklake@earthlink.net>
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2017 2:13 PM
To: Patrick Hopper
Subject: Stop Industrialization of Marrowstone Island
Pat Hopper
Department of Community Development
621 Sheridan Street
Port Townsend, WA 98368
Please be advised:
As property owners on Marrowstone Island since 1989, we are against the Industrialization of Marrowstone Island, a
rural, residential community.
This is in reference to: JEFFCO Case#ZON17-00003
Building Permit#BLD17-000093
We are unable to attend the Public Hearing on 27 June 2017 at 1 pm at the Jefferson County Courthouse, however,this
is our protest/vote against the Marijuana growing and processing facility proposed to be built on Marrowstone Island
located near Fort Flagler State Park, and just north of Smitty's, an established camping park.
This Marijuana growing and processing facility ignores our Island Development Plan, and will risk our rural residential
zoning and community
Melvin & Karen Lake
1342 E Marrowstone Rd.
Nordland, WA 98358
Sent from Karen's iPad
illgaI \ •
1.
JUN 262017
JEFFERSON COUNT,DCD
1
Patrick Hopper
From: Jacqueline Witt <jacquelinewitt2011@hotmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2017 1:32 PM
To: Patrick Hopper
Subject: STOP/REJECT ZONE CHANGE CONSIDERATION ON MARROWSTONE ISLAND
STOP/REJECT, application for zone change on Flagler Road on Marrowstone Island please! I live across the
street from this property and absolutely do not agree with a change of zones. We are residents on the island
and choose to raise our families as stated in MICA guidelines...We have a community association as many
other homeowners for the residents security and peace of mind...NO business for zone change is o.k.. There
are plenty of appropriately zoned properties for this business off of our island...please do not
compromise. Thank You...Sincerely, Extremely concerned citizen and resident Jacqueline on Mumby Road.
Dixeci \ .
I�
JUN 2 6 2017
JEFFERSON,.•L.OUNTY DCD
1
Patrick Hopper
From: John Gonnella <jgonnellal@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2017 8:48 AM
To: Patrick Hopper
Subject: Proposed Industry on Marrowstone Island
Pat,
I am writing to you to voice my strong opposition to the proposed Marijuana facility on Marrowstone Island.
I am not in opposition to this individuals right to pursue his business venture. Unfortunately,the location he has chosen
is totally inappropriate for the size,scope and nature of this business. I am equally concerned for the precedent this
could establish if it were allowed to be established.
A very strong argument can be made for this business to be located in an industrial zoned area.
Obviously, it would have a huge impact on our rural environment and would offer no positive benefits to our
community. I suspect the detriments are well known to you and will be expressed again tomorrow at the public hearing.
Unfortunately, I will be out of town or I would be in attendance to lend my voice in strong opposition to this proposal.
I ask you and those who serve with you to oppose this building permit and preserve this island for those who have
chosen to live here and for the many visitors who visit to enjoy the quiet, safe rural community Marrowstone Island has
been for decades.
Sincerely,
John Gonnella
120 Beach Drive
Nordland, Wa Reference:JEFFCO Case#ZON17-00003
REM
` f'
Building Permit# BLD17-000093
JUN 2 6 201?
JEFFERSON COUNTY DC®
1
1 4•at
Kellie .
Ra an M.A.Ed. 1-
Ragan,
40 Strawberry Lane JUN 2 6 207?
Nordland,Washington
JEF.F RSQN CO.,
DCO
June 23, 2017
Pat Hopper
Department of Community Development
621 Sheridan
Port Townsend WA 98368
SUBJECT:JeffCo Case#:ZON1700003, Bldg Permit# BLD17-000093
Dear Mr. Hopper:
This is to voice my opposition to the proposed marijuana growing and processing plant(proposed
project)on Flagler Road on the island.
Chapter Five of the 1978 Marrowstone Island Community Development Plan (plan) clearly identifies
goals and policies regarding commerce and industry to ensure that the unique rural character of the
island is preserved. As noted on page 18 of the plan:
• cottage businesses should employ no more than two persons outside the immediate family,
• be contained within the primary residence or common outbuildings, and
• not adversely affect the use,value,or enjoyment of adjacent properties;
• Intensive commercial activities should be considered incompatible with the rural character of
the island, and industrial activities are considered urban land use and should not be considered
compatible with the goals and policies of this plan.
The scope of the proposed project(10,000 sq.ft.),the built environment requirements of operating a
processing plant, potential infrastructure requirements, and anticipated intensive commercial activity
are in direct conflict with the plan. My concerns include but are not limited to:
• Light, noise, olfactory,ground, and surface water pollution,
• Handling of industrial waste and by-products,
• Adverse impact on adjacent properties as a result of industrial activities,
• Increased burden on emergency response services(law enforcement,fire)
• Disregard for the Marrowstone Community Plan
a
JeffCo Case#: ZON1700003, Bldg Permit# BLD17-000093
Ragan Opposition
Page 2 of 2
Per the current Jefferson County Growth Management Plan, Chapter 7-Economic Development,
Jefferson County has already identified industrial and manufacturing sites including the Port of Port
Townsend, Port Townsend Industrial Park, Glen Cove, Eastview,Quilcene Industrial Area, and
Irondale/Hadlock UGA.
The proposed project is just plain wrong for the island, and if approved,could adversely impact that
character of the island for perpetuity.
Thank you for considering the above.
Sincerely
4.744 --
Kellie Ragan, Island Resident since 1979
40 Strawberry Lane
Nordland, WA 98358
Patrick Hopper
DJrTjFrom: Catherine Furnia <cmfurnia@gmail.com>Sent: Friday,June 23, 2017 12:38 PM
To: Patrick Hopper
Subject: Marrowstone Island/Olympus Gardens public hearing JUN117
JEFFERSGPL COUNJ U
Dear Patrick, co
Please print and present the following to the hearing examiner, Mr. Stephen Causseaux, on June 27, 2017 at the
public hearing regarding the Olympus Gardens application for permit on Marrowstone Island:
To Whom it May Concern,
I am writing to state that I am against Olympus Gardens LLC/Austin Smith being granted a permit to establish
a marijuana grow and processing operation on Marrowstone Island.
According to the Marrowstone Island Community Development Plan which was approved and certified by the
Jefferson County Board of Commissioners on March 20th, 1978, Olympus Gardens, and any future marijuana
grow/processing operations are in direct violation of the community development plan. If the county believe
that a subsequent development plan has somehow superseded ours, they have not notified the residents of
Marrowstone Island by public notice or in any other form. Resolution number 23-78 states without any
ambiguity that our plan has precedence over any other plan. Therefore, there can be no argument to be made by
Mr. Smith or his representative that will be legally sound.
Marrowstone Island is a small, rural community. The Marrowstone Island Community Development plan lays
out the size of businesses to be allowed on the island as "Home or cottage businesses are activies such as a
beauty parlor, tax accounting, sign painting, etc. Home or cottage businesses should: (a) employ no more than
two persons outside of the immediate family. Mr Smith's plan includes more than two persons outside the
immediate family, unless he plans on having his minor children process marijuana.
Also, according to the plan "Home based businesses on the Island should : ...(b) not aversely affect the use,
value, or enjoyment of adjacent properties." Property values of properties next to marijuana farms and
processing operations are generally devalued by 10% by assessors around the country due to the stench, light
pollution, and activity of these businesses.
Olympus Gardens has no reason to build on Marrowstone Island since they are using a greenhouse. There are
better locations in light industrial areas near Port Townsend, where there are already existing marijuana
operations, where Mr. Smith can locate his business.
Finally, of interest, I contacted the US Navy spokesperson for Indian Island, she conferred with the Navy's real
estate office and the legal office. They confirmed that state Highway 116, as it crosses Indian Island, is actually
on federal property. The federal government owns the property, and the road is built on it.
This means that every time Mr. Smith or one of his associates transports marijuana, in any form, they will be
breaking federal law and subject to arrest,just as they would be for transporting a controlled substance in
a National Park.
Please consider that the Marrowstone Island Community Development Plan, approved by the county in 1978,
and never rescinded, is effectively the law on Marrowstone Island, and clearly shows that Olympus Gardens,
LLC/Austin Smith, have no standing for being granted a permit to have a business on Marrowstone Island.
i
Sincerely,
Catherine McConnachie
Geraldine Furnia
Gene McConnachie
Teresa Furnia
2
Patrick Hopper
From: Shuri, Frank <Frank_Shuri@golder.com>
Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 5:34 PM
To: Patrick Hopper
Subject: Opposition Marijuana Growing Operation on Marrowstone Island
Dear Mr. Hopper—I am resending my email of 4-30-2017 in opposition to the proposed marijuana growing operation on
Marrowstone Island:
JEFFCO Case#ZON17-00003
Building Permit# BLD17-000093
I request that this email (including my previous email)serve as my comment to the Public Hearing scheduled for June 27,
2017 on this matter and be entered into the record, since I will not be able to attend in person.
In summary, as discussed below,the proposed marijuana growing operation is an industrial\commercial enterprise that
is inconsistent with the rural\residential character of the Island and violates the Marrowstone Island Development
Plan. I respectfully request that it be disapproved.
Sincerely, leet1
Frank S. Shuri
176 Baldwin Rd. JUN 2 6 2017
Nordland, WA 98358 JEFF
ERS(?N COUNTY OCD
From:Shuri, Frank
Sent: Sunday,April 30, 2017 4:22 PM
To: 'phopper@co.jefferson.wa.us'<phopper@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: Opposition Marijuana Growing Operation on Marrowstone Island
Dear Mr. Hopper—I understand that an indoor marijuana growing operation involving an area of 10,920 square feet is
being proposed for a property located at 9272 Flagler Road on Marrowstone Island. I am opposed to allowing this
proposal to proceed, because the scale of this operation is so large that it is a commercial\ industrial venture not
compatible with the Marrowstone Community Development Plan. Potential adverse impacts from increased traffic,
noise, and lighting required for such a facility are incompatible with the rural residential character of the Island and this
Plan.
On this basis, I ask you and the other members of the Planning Commission to disapprove this proposal for marijuana
growing operations on Marrowstone Island.
Thank you,
Frank S. Shuri
176 Baldwin Rd.
Nordland, WA 98358
1
/
June 19,2017 •
ilk,
416
Patrick Hopper, Project Manager �4c
Jefferson County Dept of Community Development -40
621 Sheridan St
Port Townsend, WA 98368
Dear Sir,
I am strongly opposed to the proposal that a marijuana processing industry be allowed on Flager Road
on Marrowstone Island. It seems to me that Jefferson County is quickly moving to become an eyesore
equivalent to the ugly Sequim to Port Angeles route.We have industrial parks which should be where
even a small industry should be located. I am sure you have received a multitude of other strong
objections to this proposal.
I would like to receive information about how this has occurred and what options the many concerned
citizens of Marrowstone Island have as well as notice of any future meetings planned concerning this
affair.
Thank you for your consideration of my concern,
Leah Brown
1300 Schwartz Rd
Nordland, WA 98368
Patrick Hopper
From: George Tsitsas <marrowstonepots@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 9:53 AM
To: Patrick Hopper
Subject: Marrowstone Island Marijuana Farming
Apparently, we have some residents of Marrowstone Island who don't know the difference between
Marijuana farming and Industrialization. This type of activity is legal and should be allowed where
it is proposed. It isn't even visible to anyone so I'm not quite sure why the objection. I use the
medical marijuana tincture and cream and find it very useful for pain without any side effects.
I am supportive of this function as I am sure a lot of other silent people are but please do not release
my name to the public since I don't care to hear their complaints.
George Chechopoulos
Marrowstone Island Resident
If
JFR JUN
4 ?017
FFRSoN t;01.40.% 000
(jut, l`k1 )phi
L at i3
tae-t► ficu,znti,,;, CI
Pa 14dp pef
10 2- St-1411f 41-eitit-k
rzel _ --_
rJe- ii Lo c S.e - Zo 60003,
T���t int n
oi Per,,vu i- B i_D i 1 -000013
Nk-IL,;.k_ 1'� . c o (1
��' peal ,� fo �e�P �"�� 'l/vL (AAA tT��;S J✓te (qa c
Iw�cjvx t askz 01151 ..Ei ,,� la f)ay" .Imo.
. Pe.rwiiKc� �.dh �( ;�.) -Ca cc.. -
.�c S e
-Le A/L .tiatiJ%fuk2
CCwrvt.t,L„i 1 ' tet a
e�yt,,ati }
� (fie'�;ti
- tS
,
C'wt s hsokLe t 1t r _
e e x441 Zr". a-J�Q �(�A, \f-e- P
u k r Fn,ir;oQ .e CC" t tr C11/0 1`, e-_1 i ro-Nca.
OIlJ6'AQ �L - rlY kind; C/•VN TF.(..j" CGGiY�V�f�l� �1 �t t0%.- 5
�pY u 6\4.t t..-u'Wi Os, V.,- 14 IL�. �
C om- h"Q
Dear Mr. Causseaux
I am writing to oppose Austin Smith from having a marijuana grow and processing INDUSTRY on
Marrowstone Island. I know many others are speaking of the actual concerns, codes, permits relating to
this industry. I live 4 properties south of his proposed site-9064 Flagler Rd. I have lived here 38 years.
I speak to the fact that most of the residents feel that we are Stewards of our 6.3 sq. mile island. Our
Marrowstone Island Community Association (MICA)approved,along with the county, the Marrowstone
Plan of 1978,which outlines this caring. MICA has committees that research, actively pursue, and give
information to the community: Salt water intrusion;well water testing for salinity;shellfish toxins;
cemetery; emergency preparedness, ham radio operators, FRS radios,scholarships for EMT training;
bridge to be built at causeway to allow salmon back into Kilisut Harbor/Mystery Bay; Bird/Wildlife
reports; Marrowstone Citizens of the year;volunteer fire department;volunteer EMT services(we
bought our own ambulance in the early 1980-shad bake sales and Marrowstone tee shirt sales to help
pay for it....response time, 3-5 minutes—(the Only volunteer EMTs/ambulance in the US at the time).
Our community spirit is shown in the Polar Bear Dip-Jan; Citizen(s) of the Year-May;Tractor Days,-May;
Strawberry Festival-June; Island yard sales,with%of proceeds going to Marrowstone Emergency
Services; Harvest Festival-Oct;Santa by Boat-Dec and many other impromptu events. The Next
Door and Yahoo internet"Bulletin Boards"for concerns,events,help, lost dogs,storm warnings,
memorial services, sometimes cougar, bear sightings---which I,and many others are happy to see
(from a distance!). There have always been bald eagles that fly over my place,and head back to their
area behind Smitty's trailer park,which is 520 ft.from Austin Smith's property.
This marijuana industry has no place on this small island---there are industrial parks where this type of
business belongs. I do not see how this type of business shows any community spirit.
Sincerely,Yvonne Otterness, 9064 Flagler Rd. Nordland,360-385-3276
0 r n ,---....._ , _9 _
f
7
• C.-- - (-7
�Q( CoMJ� ISSlaJctS) ��,�
mac.,�.._,r- of
Vv p-,( ,— Jr° ,..—.) :,....1 ct�./.1L
, iJ v i—/a�
,.)- s ,r0/-',P`_,s
s c-k=,/--I-51: P -6-----r rc 0
} c ( ,a, _ ,,t_
r^ e o/G 0.1-/j` ye
A -F:
3 "C.-. sC iso A-1,,t- ; i- i
-11
-F.,.o
iJ
C ,
V cf�, vn/'% `fes P � �.r S l�
/ K 0, cc 1 G 'i-' rA- c *-
lJ G
1 �' ) i
� ((\.�,arc cr/'� � M p v
Cr S�' 1 � c ��r�, cr.r, ,r
io k V r‹. 7
vie �_1 '
- c
i � j G � e- d-
1
i
‘r2
,r IG /s a
r -I rn5 (j (4_54_
Foctk A ret rn P5� -s
1 S d I I7 °P)
, i 5 Ve r
5 Ay/ Le-- r ( cl-et5
c;1-q- (J)Jc -±D 5 se-A--{--Hel
62 /S GL I <t C. Ge tl rl/(f`�
� ms
1,q \t S A r t u e s i3O
a Fro, `�(�'� , 3 k r 5 aur 5 r--
6-(A)12-e--%r -4- f`e-
I ►` v� - 5 ( o- -COV ,e6r5
G/Y 4-7; �' Lt.) `'Mr: am- 7-,--70 res
re .rt a( 07- 5 �� i 55 � �
a.r. 6 c �c� 5 Lcs , m
h2en
OU
o ct cpa.
4 1 h `2 W �.l'� \ C Y\ e
r l y\ °e V e-r- V d
A 1/0 y
J r
23CICI
1
To: Hearing Examiner JU 4 2 7 m
Re: MLA17-00019 Marrowstone Island Marijuana Production an e g
ccccRSO
Alas I do not have attorneys, agents, or jobs to offer the county. I do not NT?DCD
understand the permitting process or county government structure. I am a
homeowner on Marrowstone island having to defend against a well healed
applicant who wants to shoehorn an elephant into a quiet rural residential area
with great beauty, instead of locating the business where it rightly belongs:
alongside other businesses.
This is not a cottage industry.
A cottage industry is a homeowner deciding to produce a small amount of
items, e.g. eggs, pottery, flowers, vegetables out of his home for supplemental
income.
This is not in the "Marrowstone agricultural tradition."
Local resources such as clams and oysters and timber are harvested,
goats and cows are raised on plentiful grass. This is a crop that without
substantial support would not grow here in sufficient amounts.
This is not a "neighborly" business
The use of neighbor as in "does no harm" is not accurate. Neighbor is a
person living near you who you can converse with and who shares the interests
and values of place. You do not need to go through lawyers and agents to talk to
"your neighbor."
Window dressing.
The existing cottage businesses I refer to have their principals living on
the property. Absentee landlords want others to live with their use of the land, not
themselves. Installing "family" does not insure "skin in the game," i.e. you live
with what you create.
Line of sight
Marrowstone has a state park for a reason. The vistas and bucolic nature
of the island area are a respite for high density, viewless spaces. A walled off,
even screened massive greenhouse is not comparable to a large house. It is an
industrial walled off box, and should be sited in an industrial area with other
walled off boxes.
Responsibility to existing homeowners
Residential means your residence. Mr. Smith lives in Seattle. When I
moved to Marrowstone I chose a rural residential home. I had confidence in local
officials and ordinances to protect my investment. No one I know, including those
who supported the marijuana initiative, would live next to a grow facility. Land
prices of long held Marrowstone homeowners will be affected. This is not fear, it
is fact.
Tax dollars
How far is Jefferson county willing to go in pursuing what the applicant
prominently bills as "tax dollars" and "county jobs" (4, probably low paying). Get
those dollars by clustering light industy in areas designated for it, rather than
throwing rural residential neighborhoods under the bus.
Re responses in the Leader by Austin Smith
This was a slick study in "spin". Dangled prominently were the tax revenue
and jobs. The questions of why specifically Marrowstone and chief concerns
expressed at May 15 were not answered substantively. There were lots of
references to how many dollars Mr. Smith has spent to mitigate light, odor, noise,
and waste. Not mentioned is dollars only have to be spent to shoehorn an
industrial business where it doesn't belong. And, dollars spent does not warrant
that the mitigations will work.
Expectations of enforceability
Can Jefferson county assure homeowners that there is sufficient oversight
of this business. Mr. Smith has shielded himself while letting surrogates handle
the permitting. Homeowners, however, have no shields, and have had to spend
many hours attempting to fend off this land use.
Mr. Austin's proposed marijuana grow facility belongs in a light industrial area,
not allowed as a "cottage industry" on Marrowstone island.
Dianne Maynard
761 Robbins Rd.
Nordland
June 27, 2017
Jo Ann Comstock
JUN 2 7 2017 11 Reef Road
Nordland,WA 98358
JEFFERSON COUNTY DCD jacoxey@me.com
June 26, 2017
Stephen K. Causseaux,Esq.
Jefferson County Hearing Examiner
902 South 10th Street,Tacoma
Washington 98405
RE: Case:MLA17-00019
Building Permit: BLD 17-00093
Parcel No: 021204015
Address: 9272 Flagler Road,Nordland WA
Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board License#412943
Dear Mr. Causseaux,
Thank you for the opportunity to submit comments regarding the above-referenced proposal for a
Tier 3 marijuana production and processing facility on Marrowstone Island. Although I
previously submitted comments to the Jefferson County Department of Community
Development,it was prior to the availability of the"Development Review Division Staff Report
to Jefferson County Hearing Examiner"(dated June 20th,2017). I believe that several of the
findings put forth in this report to justify approval of the proposed facility are flawed.I will touch
on only a few of them here,as I know that many of the other issues are addressed by other
concerned citizens in their comments..
1) Regarding the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan stated goal of fostering
cottage industries in order to provide economic and employment opportunities,
staff findings include the following:
• "The proposed cottage industry permit...will provide economic and employment opportunities
to Jefferson County Citizens."
• "The proposed project ... will allow a new business to provide living wage jobs for Jefferson
County citizens."
Conversely,staff findings also include the statement that'All employees are extended family
members of the property owner and will reside at the existing single family residence on the
property." Secondly,in the Operating Plan submitted to the Washington State Liquor and
Cannabis Board,(and received by Jefferson County DCD on March 7, 2017),Mr.Austin Smith
answers"NO"to the question"Will you provide a living wage to eighty-five percent or more of
your employees?"
Clearly,this project will not provide new employment opportunities to Jefferson County residents,
nor does Mr. Smith intend to provide living wages to his "extended family member"employees.
1 of 4
At best,one might hope for"trickle-down"economics and argue that production/processing
operations indirectly create jobs at the retail end of the marijuana business,as well as excise taxes
for the county.
2) Regarding the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan requirement that the owner
or lessee of the property reside within the dwelling unit, staff findings include the
following:
• "Austin Smith...will reside in the dwelling unit."
• "The cottage industry will be owned and operated by Austin Smith,property owner."
Austin Smith's representative, Planning Commissioner Kevin Coker,stated at the May 15th
Marrowstone Island Community Association meeting that Mr. Smith does not intend to reside at
the property for at least a couple of years so that his daughters can complete their high school
education in Seattle. If that is the case,the residency requirement will not be met.
Furthermore,while the Staff Report comments on the applicable county ordinances,it does not
address the apparent conflict with Washington Administrative Code 314-55-015,which states that
the Liquor and Cannabis Board"will not approve any marijuana license for a location where law
enforcement access,without notice or cause,is limited. This includes a personal residence."
3) Regarding Jefferson County Code 18.20.020 requirement that the cottage
industry be accessory and secondary to an existing single-family dwelling, staff
findings include the following:
• "The principal use of the property is residential.The proposed greenhouse is clearly secondary
to the principal use....The project covers only 3.1%of the 7.3 acre parcel...."
Planning Commissioner Kevin Coker, stated at the May 15th Marrowstone Island Community
Association meeting that Mr. Smith was specifically searching for a property for marijuana
production/processing when he chose the location on Marrowstone Island,and that Mr. Smith
does not intend to reside at the property,at least initially. Clearly,the marijuana structure and
business is primary, and owner residency is a secondary"maybe".
Furthermore,if structure size is to be used as a factor for determining primary and secondary use,
the proposed greenhouse structure,at nearly six times the size of the residence,is clearly the
primary use.
4) Regarding Jefferson County Code 18.20.170(4),which limits the size of any new
structure built to accommodate a cottage industry to 5,000 square feet; and JCC
18.20.295(4),which allows a marijuana production greenhouse to up to five percent
of gross parcel size, (for a 7.3 acre parcel), staff findings and conditions include
the following:
• "The parcel is zoned as Rural Residential 1:10 and requires a cottage industry permit for
processing of recreational marijuana. The proposed greenhouse is one structure totaling 10,080
square feet. Only 1,800 square feet of the structure is dedicated to processing,in the area of the
greenhouse labeled'head house'."
2 of 4
• "In no case shall more than 5,000 square feet of total building area on the property be
devoted to the cottage industry." (Condition 17)
• "Not more than one cottage industry shall be allowed in or on the same premises." (Condition
20)
• "The project will produce a commercial and agricultural product."
Frankly,this is a bit confusing. In addition to the 1,800 square foot cottage industry"head house"
for processing,the plans show 1,800 square feet of greenhouse for"veg"and 6,480 square feet of
greenhouse for"flower".If only the processing component is deemed a cottage industry,what are
the"veg" and"flower"components?
"Veg" suggests"vegetables". Is that the "agricultural product"referred to,separate and distinct
from the marijuana production and processing? Wouldn't an agricultural greenhouse be a second
cottage industry?
I assume "flower"refers to the marijuana production component. (Revised Code of Washington
82.04.213 states that"`agricultural product'does not include marijuana,useable marijuana,or
marijuana-infused products...") Would"flower" then represent a third commercial or industrial
type of"cottage industry", (albeit,exempt from the 5,000 square foot limit).That too,would
violate the limit of one cottage industry on the property.
To add to the confusion,Mr. Smith indicates on the Operating Plan submitted to the Washington
State Liquor and Cannabis Board that the marijuana production is an"outdoor grow"and not
an "indoor grow".
5) Regarding Jefferson County Code 18.40,Article VIII Conditional Uses, staff
findings include the following:
• "The addition of a greenhouse for growing an agricultural/commercial cash crop fits with the
existing and intended character of the community in that it introduces additional agricultural
uses.... There are existing agricultural structures of similar size in the surrounding area that are
not adequately screened from the public view"
• "The project proposal is consistent with(the)standard... The public interest suffers no
substantial detrimental effect. Consideration shall be given to the cumulative effect of similar
actions in the area."
This property is located in an area zoned"rural residential"and while there are other small-scale
agricultural operations on Marrowstone,agriculture/commercial cash crop is not by any means
the predominant"character of the community".I am unaware of any agricultural structures on
Marrowstone Island that remotely approach the size of this proposed facility and would
appreciate specifics in supporting the claim that there "are existing agricultural structures of
similar size in the surrounding area".Furthermore,it bears repeating that,(per RCW 82.04.213)
marijuana is not an"`agricultural product". Agricultural crops do not require eight-foot
screening fences or 24/7 security systems—just two important distinguishing factors.
Mr. Smith stated in aJune 21, 2017 article in the Port Townsend Leader that"...the area seemed
very liberal,being that the closest grocery store has a pot shop next door."This statement reflects
his unfamiliarity with Marrowstone,as there no"pot shop"next to the only grocery store on the
3 of 4
island. In fact,there are no commercial/industrial marijuana production/processing or retail
facilities on the island, and the community strongly opposed a previous proposal for a grow
operation.
The cumulative effect of similar actions on Marrowstone Island would radically alter the character
of the community. There are several undeveloped parcels on Marrowstone,many of them near
this proposed facility. The possibility of having to drive through a corridor fringed by eight-foot
tall fences on either side of Flagler Road in order to access Fort Flagler State Park is an extremely
unpleasant scenario. I do not believe that the cumulative effects of similar actions have been duly
considered.
In summary,I respectfully request that you recommend that the county deny this permit.
Marijuana production and processing is unsuited to rural residential areas.
Sincerely yours,
Jo Ann Comstock
Patty Charnas,Director of Community Development, (pcharnasaco jefferson.wa.us)
Pat Hopper,Associate Planner, (phoppera,co jefferson.wa.us)
Kate Dean,Jefferson County Commissioner District 1, (jeffboccna,co jefferson.wa.us)
David Sullivan,Jefferson County Commissioner District 2, (jeffboccna,co jefferson.wa.us)
Kathleen Kler,Jefferson County Commissioner District 3, a effbocc(a,co.jefferson.wa.us)
Philip Morley, County Administrator, (pmorley(a,co jefferson.wa.us)
Washington State Liquor and Marijuana Board(mjretail@lcb.wa.gov)
4 of 4
John Comstock
11 Reef Road /417/'
1 1
JUN
Nordland, WA 983583lDF� 2 7 2017
60 316 June, 20170ERSaN CC
275
UNr
DCD
RE: File MLA17-00019:ZONI 7-00002-ZON170003-BLD17-00093
Proposed Greenhouse 9272 Flagler Rd. Marrowstone Island.
Thank you examiner Causseax and members of Jefferson County Planning and
Community Development for hearing this issue.
I am John Comstock, a Nordland resident and member of the Marrowstone Is-
land Preservation Committee. I'm speaking on their behalf.
We would like to welcome Mr. Austin Smith as a new neighbor to Marrowstone
Island and share what we presume is his intent to provide safe and conflict-free
legal marijuana to our county. It is clear that Mr Smith has planned to incorporate
many of the latest marijuana growing technologies in his project. While we en-
dorse the intent of the 65% of Jefferson County voting for i502, we are concerned
that its implementation not shortcut county and local land use law.
We argue that the County's Criteria for Conditional Uses that you have before
you are not being met by the proposed project and recommend that you disap-
prove it for this location.
Our argument focuses on substantial failure to comply with the JCC 18140.530
Approval criteria for all conditional uses.
1 . The county may approve or approve with modifications an application for a
conditional use permit if all the following criteria are satisfied:
a. The conditional use is harmonious and appropriate in character and quality
of development in the vicinity of the subject property and with the physical
characteristics of the subject property. The scale of this industrial
greenhouse is many times that of existing or similar facilities, and
would set a non-conforming precedent for industrialization of our is-
land. Its approval would place many other parcels zoned rural-resi-
dential at risk on Marrowstone for similar development.
b. The conditional use will be served by adequate infrastructure including
roads, fire protection, water, wastewater disposal, and stormwater control.
The site is remote from fire protection and law enforcement, esti-
mated water use and stormwater management for the 10,000sf roof
are problematic in the event of a storm or clogged pipe or gutter.
c. The conditional use will not be materially detrimental to uses of property in
the vicinity of the subject parcel. Schaefer Fan Engineers were unable to
provide noise level for the proposed Schaefer 48" belt-driven fans.
They state that next larger 54" fan produces 77db five feet from the
fan. Calculations for the 48" fan are approximately 66db. (ASHRAE
Handbook 11.1) WAC 173 (table below) limits noise from such
sources to 55db from 7am to 10pm, and 10db less at night. Planning
summary seems to have wrongly cited 400 feet of heavily wooded
buffer to the south. The 400 foot "buffer" next to the residential RV
park belongs to another property owner and is currently for sale, and
(according to its owner) may be soon logged.
d. The conditional use will not introduce noise, smoke, dust, fumes, vibra-
tions, odors or other conditions which unreasonably impact existing uses in
the vicinity of the subject parcel. Besides the eight exhaust fans and 20
HAF fans, the effectiveness of odor and light pollution are promised,
but not included as the terms of the permit. Use of the adjoining
properties for peace and quiet, and freedom from odor and light pol-
lution are not protected by conditions of the permit.
WAC 173-60-040 1111aNimunt permissible environmental noise levels. (I )No person
shall cause or permit noise to intrude into the property of.rnother person which noise exceeds the
maximum permissible noise levels set tc,rth below in this section.
(?)(a) the none limitations established are as set forth in the followin_a table after any
applicable adjustments provided for herein arc applied.
LUNA OF LUN: OF
NOISE SOT TRCF lthCE1Y1NCi
PROPERTY
Class A Class B Class C
CLASS A 55 dBA 5; dBA 60 dBA
cl_\SS H {7 60 65
c t Ass c' 60 !i` 70
(b) Between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. the noise limitations of the foregoing:
table shall he reduced by 10 dR,'1 for receiving.property within ( las A F.DNAs.
(e j At any hour of the day or night the applicable noise limitations in(a) and (b) above
may be exceeded for any receiving property by no more than:
(i) ; dBA for a total of 15 minutes in any one-hour period: or
(ii) 10 dflA tier a total of 5 minutes in any one-hour period. or
(iii) 15 (IBA for a total of 1.5 minutes in any one-hour period.
[Order 74-32. .S 173-0:1-040. filed 4122/75, effective 9;1;751
e. The location, size, and height of the buildings, structures, walls, and
fences, and screening vegetation for the conditional use will not unreason-
ably interfere with allowable development or use of neighboring properties.
This 23' tall 70x140 foot building will dwarf any neighboring structure,
and would adversely affect prospective owners considering family
homes. I am unaware of any other 8' fence, or similar screening fac-
ing any road on Marrowstone Island.
f. The pedestrian and vehicular traffic associated with the conditional use will
not be hazardous to existing and anticipated traffic in the vicinity of the
subject parcel. Truck parking for this business may be inadequate as
the truck maneuvering area used by the previous owner will be occu-
pied by the greenhouse. Recent truck delivery had to park on the
highway to offload the greenhouse.
g. The conditional use complies with all other applicable criteria and stand-
ards of this code and any other applicable state and federal law Applicant
has repeatedly described this grow factory as Hydroponic; specifi-
cally prohibited by JC Public health language of the permit applica-
tion.
h. Site is not near an airport So this criterium may not apply.
i. The conditional use will not cause significant adverse impacts on the hu-
man or natural environments that cannot be mitigated through conditions
of approval. Size and scale of this marijuana factory cannot be miti-
gated unless relocated to a site zoned commercial, which is our pref-
erence. Accidental spills of fertilizer, fungicide, or pesticide into our
sole source aquifer, or into the type F stream running to Mystery bay
shellfish farms are not amenable to mitigation without an impervious
catchment basin underlying the greenhouse, a safety measure which
is not part of the project.
j. The conditional use has merit and value for the community as a whole.
Unlike other cottage industries on the island, whose owners live on-
island, and provide products and services for immediate use by
neighbors, this is an extractive industrial business, whose product
will be packaged and sold off-island. This business model contrasts
dramatically with those of other cottage industries on Marrowstone
Island.
k. The conditional use is consistent with all relevant goals and policies of the
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan. This project is not consistent
with many elements of Marrowstone Island Community Plan, which is
referenced in the Jefferson County Comprehensive plan.—particu-
larly with respect to size and character of the operation, residents ac-
tually living on the site, and cottage industry character of the opera-
tion.
I. The public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect. Consideration
shall be given to the cumulative effect of similar actions in the area. The
cumulative effect of industrial marijuana greenhouses would be cata-
strophic for the rural residential character of Marrowstone Island. As
evidenced by the seven producer/processor operations in the Glen
Cove neighborhood, there is intense pressure to replicate this type of
lucrative business wherever possible. The Liquor Board map cur-
rently shows 1100 grow operations in the state, and 14 in Jefferson
County. We are concerned that the trend toward ever-larger grow op-
erations to will render Mr Smith's operation non-competitive and
leave the island with an unsightly and degraded parcel of land, not
suitable for rural residential use.
m. In instances where all of the above findings cannot be made, the applica-
tion shall be denied. We submit that most of these criteria are not and
cannot be met by a fair consideration of the facts.
Recognizing that 1502 permits legal grows of marijuana in Washington, we
ask that it be done right. Location of these operations in commercial—or
appropriate agricultural zoning will address our concerns for reduced prop-
erty values, pollution, odor, and acrimonious neighborhood relations.
The i502 website shows only $12,500 tax revenue returning to Jefferson
County in 2016. Clearly this is insufficient to compensate our local staff for
the workload this evolving stampede represents. We observe that while the
county imposed a moratorium pending revision of marijuana code in 2015,
current code contains conflicting language and may lead to unwise plan-
ning decisions. Examples of this conflicting language include criteria for
SEPA review, and agreement with Washington State Liquor and Marijuana
Board code.
We ask that this particular permit be disapproved, and that Jefferson
County restrict these facilities to commercial/industrial zoning.
Thank You John Comstock
Patrick Hopper
From: Amy Greenbaum <agreenbaum@sinclairdigital.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 7:10 AM
To: Patrick Hopper
Subject: Marrowsrone Island industrial planned site
Hi Pat,
I understand you are lead on reviewing public comments on the proposed marijuana plant on our island.
I have to ask how did this proposal got this far. Marrowsrone Island has a community development plan in
place, and this industry does not agree with it. No one (my guess even the owner of the land)wants to live
beside an industrialized large scale operation like this..
We are a small residential island, agricultural bunch, we live in natural pastoral setting we have cottage
businesses that contribute to the community.
I object to this proposal, I think its folly for the county to have monetary gain in permit fees and the residents
have to live with this huge eyesore that impacts our community ecologically and Ceres us off course of our
community plan.
Thank you,
Amy Greenbaum
425-269-1917
..please excuse overzealous autocorrect or random typos, I'm emailing from my mobile device.
RD Crag
JUN 2 7 2017
JEFFERSON COUNTY DCD
1
Patrick Hopper
From: Carol Gonnella <carolgonnella@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2017 10:06 AM
To: Patrick Hopper
Subject: RE: Marijuarna Facility on Marrowstone Island
CIgt
1
To: Pat Hopper JUN
From: Carol Gonnella
Date: June 26, 2017 JEFF, 1 201?
RE: JEFFCO Case#ZON17-00003 RSoNCQ�
Building Permit#BLD17-000093 �//Vbcr
Hello:
My name is Carol Gonnella and I am a resident of Marrowstone Island. I am writing this letter in regard to the proposed
marijuana facility on this island. I want to stress that I am not opposed to the use,growing or selling of marihuana in the
State of Washington, but I do have major concerns about a facility being on the island of Marrowstone. As I am sure you
are aware, Marrowstone is a sleepy, quiet island witlh an "out in the country"feeling.with very little industry. Most of
its residents are retired. In the big picture, a marijuana facility does not fit the character and personality of this island.
By putting your stamp of approval on this facility, it is one step to modifying the the quality of life that is presently here.
As a governing body making decisions about cottage industries, I believe it is imperative that you fully analyze the
impact on a community your decision will make and attempt to mitigate any impacts to the greatest extent possible. A
much better and appropriate location would be an industrial park or a more commercial location.
On a more specific level,these are my concerns:
1. JCC 18.20.170 (o) states that the total feet of building area on the property allowed for the cottage industry must not
exceed 5000 square feet. What is the total number of square footage for the green houses and other buildings and who
and how will this requirement be monitored in the future to insure compliance?.
2. JCC 18.20.170(s) references no interference or detriment to the quiet use and enjoyment of the adjoining properties
and surrounding area. Without a doubt,this facility will impact all the residents of Marrowstone in some way, with the
greatest impact to those residents in closest proximity. I have heard stories of other residents who have marijuana
facilities close to their homes. They have reported that they suffer from many impacts but the greatest of which are the
federal helicopters that periodically hover above the facility to inspect it. We must remember: THE GROWING OF
MARIJUANA IS A FEDERAL OFFENSE. None of us in Washington State has the ability to control the inspection or
surveillance by the federal government. Thils could have an incredible detrimental influence on residential properties
and could greatly diminish the property values of those communities.
I implore you to carefully analyze and address the actual and potential impacts of an industry like this being allowed in a
residential area. I strongly believe these impacts will be substantial, and will over time, kill the golden egg that makes
this island so very special. Again, a much better location for such a facility is an industrial park or commercial location so
these impacts can be mitigated.
Thank you for considering these concerns when making your decision.
Warm regards.
Carol Gonnella
1
2
June 26, 2017
D2C2/
4 n To: Mr. Pat Hopper
Department of Community Development JUN 2 7
JEFFE
621 Sheridan Street IISQN`,Ov
Port Townsend, Wash.98368 NOCO
Mr. Hopper,
I am writing you concerning the proposed marijuana growing facility that the Jefferson County Dept. of
Community Development, County zoning commission, and the Jefferson County Commissioners are
looking at for the possibility of permitting such an enterprise to take hold of,there on Marrowstone
Island, in Jefferson County.
I am the oldest son of, Nettie Jean Gustafson, owner of the property that shares a boundary
with the proposed facility. I am also her Durable Power of Attorney. You should know that my mother,
an upstanding senior citizen of this state, is very upset about this possibility as the proposed facility is
located right next to her property on Fort Flagler Road and her property is already being negatively
affected by this proposal.At the time of this writing we have learned that she has recently lost the
possibility of a sale of her property when a prospective buyer found out about the grow operation and
pulled out of making an offer on her property. It has also come to our attention that some
representatives of the operation have been making statements to the affect that the property that is
owned by my mother is timbered and creates a needed natural buffer for an operation such as this.The
problem here, is that it is not going to be true as the family has contacted several logging firms for
estimates to log the property.This would, as a result,take away the "natural" buffer that is being
claimed as needed and remaining there to help that project. This is something that the commissioners
should be made aware of.
She has asked me contact the appropriate agencies and representatives to voice her grave
concerns for her property, investment, lively hood, and financial source of money to provide safe and
secure room and board for her life at the assistant living facility that she now resides at.This proposal is
very ill conceived in the relation that it does not have any concern for the citizens of Marrowstone Island
or the citizens of Jefferson County.This proposal from the owner/investor of the operation has only one
concern and that is of its financial success, no matter how it is accomplished or who it negatively
impacts or hurts.
Mr. Hopper,there is even a much bigger area of concern for the residents of Marrowstone
Island and the residents and citizens of Jefferson County.This concern is the fact that the citizens and
the representatives of Jefferson County have a great treasure, a great jewel in their possession that is so
rare and so valuable that it should be guarded with great care and honor.This treasure is the one thing
that very few counties or cities can claim as their own. It is a beautiful Island with a rich and historic
past. One that cannot ever be duplicated.The sad story here is that someone or several people that
have the respect and trust of its citizens may make the wrong decision and destroy this paradise and
cast it away like it had no value.The romance, beauty, intrigue, and pride that is intertwined in this
wonderful oasis with in Jefferson County, could be forever lost, never to return if this proposal of a
Marijuana Operation is allowed to go forward. Many of these residents, citizens, and owners of
Marrowstone Island have lived there for generations.They are a very proud and unique people that
regard this island as a paradise and often look to hand it down to their children.These people are the
guardians of the past, present and future of their island and are very proud of its place in history and do
not want to see it sold out to the highest bidder or for a favor. It is important that everyone realize that
this proposed industrial grow operation could be put in any of a thousand different locations other than
Marrowstone Island. I, like so many others, believe that the reason that the investors and owner picked
this place is because they viewed the occupants of the island as being push overs and they could push
things thru without opposition. I am sure that you are finding that this is very far from the truth.
In reviewing this situation, I believe that the County government, county planning and zoning
commission, and the Department of Community Development has a great and historic opportunity to
stand up and not let big money and big business control the game and get what they want at any cost to
the wonderful citizens of Jefferson County. From this point forward, history for the island will either
remain rich and a treasure,and something to pass down to all of our children and the visitors and guests
that come there or it will be forever changed and become just another trophy in someone's book and
wallet.
In closing, I wish all those of Marrowstone Island and Jefferson County a bright future and those with
the burden of having to wrestle with and make these decisions the strength to decide carefully and
wisely with their citizens and the law in equal balance for the best interest of all.
Thank you,
Respectfully,
Alan Gustafson
Patrick Hopper
From: gork70@aol.com
Sent: Monday,June 26, 2017 5:02 PM
To: Patrick Hopper
Subject: JEFFCO Case#ZON17-00003
I sent a letter some time ago strongly opposing this marijuana growing facility. As the largest owner of property on
Marrowstone Island
I am still strongly opposed to this processing facility for the same reasons stated in my original letter.
Regards, George W. King Tel 206-282-8058
2 D 3( . v, I \ L
JUN 262017
JEFFERSON COUNTY DCD
1
Patrick Hopper
From: Melvin & Karen Lake <mklake@earthlink.net>
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2017 2:13 PM
To: Patrick Hopper
Subject: Stop Industrialization of Marrowstone Island
Pat Hopper
Department of Community Development
621 Sheridan Street
Port Townsend, WA 98368
Please be advised:
As property owners on Marrowstone Island since 1989, we are against the Industrialization of Marrowstone Island, a
rural, residential community.
This is in reference to: JEFFCO Case#ZON17-00003
Building Permit#BLD17-000093
We are unable to attend the Public Hearing on 27 June 2017 at 1 pm at the Jefferson County Courthouse, however,this
is our protest/vote against the Marijuana growing and processing facility proposed to be built on Marrowstone Island
located near Fort Flagler State Park, and just north of Smitty's, an established camping park.
This Marijuana growing and processing facility ignores our Island Development Plan, and will risk our rural residential
zoning and community
Melvin & Karen Lake
1342 E Marrowstone Rd.
Nordland, WA 98358
Sent from Karen's iPad
illgaI \ •
1.
JUN 262017
JEFFERSON COUNT,DCD
1
Patrick Hopper
From: Jacqueline Witt <jacquelinewitt2011@hotmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2017 1:32 PM
To: Patrick Hopper
Subject: STOP/REJECT ZONE CHANGE CONSIDERATION ON MARROWSTONE ISLAND
STOP/REJECT, application for zone change on Flagler Road on Marrowstone Island please! I live across the
street from this property and absolutely do not agree with a change of zones. We are residents on the island
and choose to raise our families as stated in MICA guidelines...We have a community association as many
other homeowners for the residents security and peace of mind...NO business for zone change is o.k.. There
are plenty of appropriately zoned properties for this business off of our island...please do not
compromise. Thank You...Sincerely, Extremely concerned citizen and resident Jacqueline on Mumby Road.
Dixeci \ .
I�
JUN 2 6 2017
JEFFERSON,.•L.OUNTY DCD
1
Patrick Hopper
From: John Gonnella <jgonnellal@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2017 8:48 AM
To: Patrick Hopper
Subject: Proposed Industry on Marrowstone Island
Pat,
I am writing to you to voice my strong opposition to the proposed Marijuana facility on Marrowstone Island.
I am not in opposition to this individuals right to pursue his business venture. Unfortunately,the location he has chosen
is totally inappropriate for the size,scope and nature of this business. I am equally concerned for the precedent this
could establish if it were allowed to be established.
A very strong argument can be made for this business to be located in an industrial zoned area.
Obviously, it would have a huge impact on our rural environment and would offer no positive benefits to our
community. I suspect the detriments are well known to you and will be expressed again tomorrow at the public hearing.
Unfortunately, I will be out of town or I would be in attendance to lend my voice in strong opposition to this proposal.
I ask you and those who serve with you to oppose this building permit and preserve this island for those who have
chosen to live here and for the many visitors who visit to enjoy the quiet, safe rural community Marrowstone Island has
been for decades.
Sincerely,
John Gonnella
120 Beach Drive
Nordland, Wa Reference:JEFFCO Case#ZON17-00003
REM
` f'
Building Permit# BLD17-000093
JUN 2 6 201?
JEFFERSON COUNTY DC®
1
1 4•at
Kellie .
Ra an M.A.Ed. 1-
Ragan,
40 Strawberry Lane JUN 2 6 207?
Nordland,Washington
JEF.F RSQN CO.,
DCO
June 23, 2017
Pat Hopper
Department of Community Development
621 Sheridan
Port Townsend WA 98368
SUBJECT:JeffCo Case#:ZON1700003, Bldg Permit# BLD17-000093
Dear Mr. Hopper:
This is to voice my opposition to the proposed marijuana growing and processing plant(proposed
project)on Flagler Road on the island.
Chapter Five of the 1978 Marrowstone Island Community Development Plan (plan) clearly identifies
goals and policies regarding commerce and industry to ensure that the unique rural character of the
island is preserved. As noted on page 18 of the plan:
• cottage businesses should employ no more than two persons outside the immediate family,
• be contained within the primary residence or common outbuildings, and
• not adversely affect the use,value,or enjoyment of adjacent properties;
• Intensive commercial activities should be considered incompatible with the rural character of
the island, and industrial activities are considered urban land use and should not be considered
compatible with the goals and policies of this plan.
The scope of the proposed project(10,000 sq.ft.),the built environment requirements of operating a
processing plant, potential infrastructure requirements, and anticipated intensive commercial activity
are in direct conflict with the plan. My concerns include but are not limited to:
• Light, noise, olfactory,ground, and surface water pollution,
• Handling of industrial waste and by-products,
• Adverse impact on adjacent properties as a result of industrial activities,
• Increased burden on emergency response services(law enforcement,fire)
• Disregard for the Marrowstone Community Plan
a
JeffCo Case#: ZON1700003, Bldg Permit# BLD17-000093
Ragan Opposition
Page 2 of 2
Per the current Jefferson County Growth Management Plan, Chapter 7-Economic Development,
Jefferson County has already identified industrial and manufacturing sites including the Port of Port
Townsend, Port Townsend Industrial Park, Glen Cove, Eastview,Quilcene Industrial Area, and
Irondale/Hadlock UGA.
The proposed project is just plain wrong for the island, and if approved,could adversely impact that
character of the island for perpetuity.
Thank you for considering the above.
Sincerely
4.744 --
Kellie Ragan, Island Resident since 1979
40 Strawberry Lane
Nordland, WA 98358
Patrick Hopper
DJrTjFrom: Catherine Furnia <cmfurnia@gmail.com>Sent: Friday,June 23, 2017 12:38 PM
To: Patrick Hopper
Subject: Marrowstone Island/Olympus Gardens public hearing JUN117
JEFFERSGPL COUNJ U
Dear Patrick, co
Please print and present the following to the hearing examiner, Mr. Stephen Causseaux, on June 27, 2017 at the
public hearing regarding the Olympus Gardens application for permit on Marrowstone Island:
To Whom it May Concern,
I am writing to state that I am against Olympus Gardens LLC/Austin Smith being granted a permit to establish
a marijuana grow and processing operation on Marrowstone Island.
According to the Marrowstone Island Community Development Plan which was approved and certified by the
Jefferson County Board of Commissioners on March 20th, 1978, Olympus Gardens, and any future marijuana
grow/processing operations are in direct violation of the community development plan. If the county believe
that a subsequent development plan has somehow superseded ours, they have not notified the residents of
Marrowstone Island by public notice or in any other form. Resolution number 23-78 states without any
ambiguity that our plan has precedence over any other plan. Therefore, there can be no argument to be made by
Mr. Smith or his representative that will be legally sound.
Marrowstone Island is a small, rural community. The Marrowstone Island Community Development plan lays
out the size of businesses to be allowed on the island as "Home or cottage businesses are activies such as a
beauty parlor, tax accounting, sign painting, etc. Home or cottage businesses should: (a) employ no more than
two persons outside of the immediate family. Mr Smith's plan includes more than two persons outside the
immediate family, unless he plans on having his minor children process marijuana.
Also, according to the plan "Home based businesses on the Island should : ...(b) not aversely affect the use,
value, or enjoyment of adjacent properties." Property values of properties next to marijuana farms and
processing operations are generally devalued by 10% by assessors around the country due to the stench, light
pollution, and activity of these businesses.
Olympus Gardens has no reason to build on Marrowstone Island since they are using a greenhouse. There are
better locations in light industrial areas near Port Townsend, where there are already existing marijuana
operations, where Mr. Smith can locate his business.
Finally, of interest, I contacted the US Navy spokesperson for Indian Island, she conferred with the Navy's real
estate office and the legal office. They confirmed that state Highway 116, as it crosses Indian Island, is actually
on federal property. The federal government owns the property, and the road is built on it.
This means that every time Mr. Smith or one of his associates transports marijuana, in any form, they will be
breaking federal law and subject to arrest,just as they would be for transporting a controlled substance in
a National Park.
Please consider that the Marrowstone Island Community Development Plan, approved by the county in 1978,
and never rescinded, is effectively the law on Marrowstone Island, and clearly shows that Olympus Gardens,
LLC/Austin Smith, have no standing for being granted a permit to have a business on Marrowstone Island.
i
Sincerely,
Catherine McConnachie
Geraldine Furnia
Gene McConnachie
Teresa Furnia
2
Patrick Hopper
From: Shuri, Frank <Frank_Shuri@golder.com>
Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 5:34 PM
To: Patrick Hopper
Subject: Opposition Marijuana Growing Operation on Marrowstone Island
Dear Mr. Hopper—I am resending my email of 4-30-2017 in opposition to the proposed marijuana growing operation on
Marrowstone Island:
JEFFCO Case#ZON17-00003
Building Permit# BLD17-000093
I request that this email (including my previous email)serve as my comment to the Public Hearing scheduled for June 27,
2017 on this matter and be entered into the record, since I will not be able to attend in person.
In summary, as discussed below,the proposed marijuana growing operation is an industrial\commercial enterprise that
is inconsistent with the rural\residential character of the Island and violates the Marrowstone Island Development
Plan. I respectfully request that it be disapproved.
Sincerely, leet1
Frank S. Shuri
176 Baldwin Rd. JUN 2 6 2017
Nordland, WA 98358 JEFF
ERS(?N COUNTY OCD
From:Shuri, Frank
Sent: Sunday,April 30, 2017 4:22 PM
To: 'phopper@co.jefferson.wa.us'<phopper@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: Opposition Marijuana Growing Operation on Marrowstone Island
Dear Mr. Hopper—I understand that an indoor marijuana growing operation involving an area of 10,920 square feet is
being proposed for a property located at 9272 Flagler Road on Marrowstone Island. I am opposed to allowing this
proposal to proceed, because the scale of this operation is so large that it is a commercial\ industrial venture not
compatible with the Marrowstone Community Development Plan. Potential adverse impacts from increased traffic,
noise, and lighting required for such a facility are incompatible with the rural residential character of the Island and this
Plan.
On this basis, I ask you and the other members of the Planning Commission to disapprove this proposal for marijuana
growing operations on Marrowstone Island.
Thank you,
Frank S. Shuri
176 Baldwin Rd.
Nordland, WA 98358
1
/
June 19,2017 •
ilk,
416
Patrick Hopper, Project Manager �4c
Jefferson County Dept of Community Development -40
621 Sheridan St
Port Townsend, WA 98368
Dear Sir,
I am strongly opposed to the proposal that a marijuana processing industry be allowed on Flager Road
on Marrowstone Island. It seems to me that Jefferson County is quickly moving to become an eyesore
equivalent to the ugly Sequim to Port Angeles route.We have industrial parks which should be where
even a small industry should be located. I am sure you have received a multitude of other strong
objections to this proposal.
I would like to receive information about how this has occurred and what options the many concerned
citizens of Marrowstone Island have as well as notice of any future meetings planned concerning this
affair.
Thank you for your consideration of my concern,
Leah Brown
1300 Schwartz Rd
Nordland, WA 98368
Patrick Hopper
From: George Tsitsas <marrowstonepots@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 9:53 AM
To: Patrick Hopper
Subject: Marrowstone Island Marijuana Farming
Apparently, we have some residents of Marrowstone Island who don't know the difference between
Marijuana farming and Industrialization. This type of activity is legal and should be allowed where
it is proposed. It isn't even visible to anyone so I'm not quite sure why the objection. I use the
medical marijuana tincture and cream and find it very useful for pain without any side effects.
I am supportive of this function as I am sure a lot of other silent people are but please do not release
my name to the public since I don't care to hear their complaints.
George Chechopoulos
Marrowstone Island Resident
If
JFR JUN
4 ?017
FFRSoN t;01.40.% 000
(jut, l`k1 )phi
L at i3
tae-t► ficu,znti,,;, CI
Pa 14dp pef
10 2- St-1411f 41-eitit-k
rzel _ --_
rJe- ii Lo c S.e - Zo 60003,
T���t int n
oi Per,,vu i- B i_D i 1 -000013
Nk-IL,;.k_ 1'� . c o (1
��' peal ,� fo �e�P �"�� 'l/vL (AAA tT��;S J✓te (qa c
Iw�cjvx t askz 01151 ..Ei ,,� la f)ay" .Imo.
. Pe.rwiiKc� �.dh �( ;�.) -Ca cc.. -
.�c S e
-Le A/L .tiatiJ%fuk2
CCwrvt.t,L„i 1 ' tet a
e�yt,,ati }
� (fie'�;ti
- tS
,
C'wt s hsokLe t 1t r _
e e x441 Zr". a-J�Q �(�A, \f-e- P
u k r Fn,ir;oQ .e CC" t tr C11/0 1`, e-_1 i ro-Nca.
OIlJ6'AQ �L - rlY kind; C/•VN TF.(..j" CGGiY�V�f�l� �1 �t t0%.- 5
�pY u 6\4.t t..-u'Wi Os, V.,- 14 IL�. �
C om- h"Q
Dear Mr. Causseaux
I am writing to oppose Austin Smith from having a marijuana grow and processing INDUSTRY on
Marrowstone Island. I know many others are speaking of the actual concerns, codes, permits relating to
this industry. I live 4 properties south of his proposed site-9064 Flagler Rd. I have lived here 38 years.
I speak to the fact that most of the residents feel that we are Stewards of our 6.3 sq. mile island. Our
Marrowstone Island Community Association (MICA)approved,along with the county, the Marrowstone
Plan of 1978,which outlines this caring. MICA has committees that research, actively pursue, and give
information to the community: Salt water intrusion;well water testing for salinity;shellfish toxins;
cemetery; emergency preparedness, ham radio operators, FRS radios,scholarships for EMT training;
bridge to be built at causeway to allow salmon back into Kilisut Harbor/Mystery Bay; Bird/Wildlife
reports; Marrowstone Citizens of the year;volunteer fire department;volunteer EMT services(we
bought our own ambulance in the early 1980-shad bake sales and Marrowstone tee shirt sales to help
pay for it....response time, 3-5 minutes—(the Only volunteer EMTs/ambulance in the US at the time).
Our community spirit is shown in the Polar Bear Dip-Jan; Citizen(s) of the Year-May;Tractor Days,-May;
Strawberry Festival-June; Island yard sales,with%of proceeds going to Marrowstone Emergency
Services; Harvest Festival-Oct;Santa by Boat-Dec and many other impromptu events. The Next
Door and Yahoo internet"Bulletin Boards"for concerns,events,help, lost dogs,storm warnings,
memorial services, sometimes cougar, bear sightings---which I,and many others are happy to see
(from a distance!). There have always been bald eagles that fly over my place,and head back to their
area behind Smitty's trailer park,which is 520 ft.from Austin Smith's property.
This marijuana industry has no place on this small island---there are industrial parks where this type of
business belongs. I do not see how this type of business shows any community spirit.
Sincerely,Yvonne Otterness, 9064 Flagler Rd. Nordland,360-385-3276
0 r n ,---....._ , _9 _
f
7
• C.-- - (-7
�Q( CoMJ� ISSlaJctS) ��,�
mac.,�.._,r- of
Vv p-,( ,— Jr° ,..—.) :,....1 ct�./.1L
, iJ v i—/a�
,.)- s ,r0/-',P`_,s
s c-k=,/--I-51: P -6-----r rc 0
} c ( ,a, _ ,,t_
r^ e o/G 0.1-/j` ye
A -F:
3 "C.-. sC iso A-1,,t- ; i- i
-11
-F.,.o
iJ
C ,
V cf�, vn/'% `fes P � �.r S l�
/ K 0, cc 1 G 'i-' rA- c *-
lJ G
1 �' ) i
� ((\.�,arc cr/'� � M p v
Cr S�' 1 � c ��r�, cr.r, ,r
io k V r‹. 7
vie �_1 '
- c
i � j G � e- d-
1
i
‘r2
,r IG /s a
r -I rn5 (j (4_54_
Foctk A ret rn P5� -s
1 S d I I7 °P)
, i 5 Ve r
5 Ay/ Le-- r ( cl-et5
c;1-q- (J)Jc -±D 5 se-A--{--Hel
62 /S GL I <t C. Ge tl rl/(f`�
� ms
1,q \t S A r t u e s i3O
a Fro, `�(�'� , 3 k r 5 aur 5 r--
6-(A)12-e--%r -4- f`e-
I ►` v� - 5 ( o- -COV ,e6r5
G/Y 4-7; �' Lt.) `'Mr: am- 7-,--70 res
re .rt a( 07- 5 �� i 55 � �
a.r. 6 c �c� 5 Lcs , m
h2en
OU
o ct cpa.
4 1 h `2 W �.l'� \ C Y\ e
r l y\ °e V e-r- V d
A 1/0 y
J r