HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 Newland11/4/2019 Re: Testimony - Planning Commission Desk
https://owa.co.jefferson.wa.us/owa/#viewmodel=ReadMessageItem&ItemID=AAMkAGM0ZTI0NjQ3LTE2OGItNGQzZi05MWNjLWE2NTE2NGZjMzFhN…1/2
Re: Testimony
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially
from unknown senders.
Peter please reload the PDF pages so we may review that information.
Mike Nilssen
(360) 473-3236
On Oct 29, 2019, at 8:33 PM, Mike Nilssen <Nilssen51@gmail.com> wrote:
Peter thank you for this evidentiary information. I have forwarded the document to our planning desk for distribution to our
fellow Planning Commission members.
Mike Nilssen
(360) 473-3236
On Oct 29, 2019, at 6:23 PM, Peter Newland <pnewland@whidbey.net> wrote:
Gree ngs Mike,
Per your sugges on, a ached is tes mony relevant to how the staff report defini on of
commercial shoo ng ranges must be changed to comply with the GMHB ruling that invalidated
the Title 8 and Title 18 Ordinances passed in 2018 and which are now back before the planning
commission. I apologize for the length of the document (28 pages including a achments) but
given the call for jus fica on and the complexity of the issue, it seems necessary to detail the
history of how easily the previous ordinances can be abused.
I will address another topic on November 5 and submit this document by reference. I trust it will
be transmi ed to the en re planning commission but am unsure of the ming. If we want
planning commission members to have the chance to review this prior to November 5, what is
the process to achieve that result?
Thank you for you assistance. I’m sorry you will not be in a endance at the hearing.
Regards,
Peter
Mike Nilssen <nilssen51@gmail.com>
Tue 10/29/2019 8:35 PM
To:Mike Nilssen <nilssen51@gmail.com>;
Cc:Peter Newland <pnewland@whidbey.net>; Planning Commission Desk <PCommissionDesk@co.jefferson.wa.us>; Lorna Smith
<ecosmithspt@gmail.com>; Cynthia Koan <cynthia.koan@gmail.com>;
11/4/2019 Re: Testimony - Planning Commission Desk
https://owa.co.jefferson.wa.us/owa/#viewmodel=ReadMessageItem&ItemID=AAMkAGM0ZTI0NjQ3LTE2OGItNGQzZi05MWNjLWE2NTE2NGZjMzFhN…2/2
Peter Newland, Board Member
Tarboo Ridge Coali on
P.O. Box 177
Quilcene, WA 98376
Avast logo This email has been checked for viruses by Avast an virus so ware.
www.avast.com
<Testimony to Planning Commission by Peter Newland.docx>
11/4/2019 Fwd: resending as 5 attachments - Planning Commission Desk
https://owa.co.jefferson.wa.us/owa/#viewmodel=ReadMessageItem&ItemID=AAMkAGM0ZTI0NjQ3LTE2OGItNGQzZi05MWNjLWE2NTE2NGZjMzFhN…1/1
Fwd: resending as 5 attachments
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially
from unknown senders.
Good morning Nichole:
Mr. Newland asked me to Forwarded these documents to be posted on the public hearing Site as public testimony for the shooting range
titles 8 and 18.
Mike Nilssen
(360) 473-3236
Begin forwarded message:
From: Peter Newland <pnewland@whidbey.net>
Date: October 29, 2019 at 10:39:47 PM PDT
To: Mike Nilssen <Nilssen51@GMail.com>
Subject: resending as 5 attachments
Please let me know if this works be er.
Peter Newland, Board Member
Tarboo Ridge Coali on
P.O. Box 177
Quilcene, WA 98376
Mike Nilssen <nilssen51@gmail.com>
Wed 10/30/2019 7:52 AM
To:Planning Commission Desk <PCommissionDesk@co.jefferson.wa.us>;
8 attachments
Testimony to Planning Commission by Peter Newland.docx; ATT00001.htm; Exhibit 2 2019 05 10 FDC Site Visit.pdf; ATT00002.htm; Exhibit
3 BoCC Public Safety Alert 6-7-19.2.pdf; ATT00003.htm; Exhibit 4 Letter to Newland and Overstreet attachment.pdf; ATT00004.htm;
11/4/2019 RE: resending as 5 attachments - Planning Commission Desk
https://owa.co.jefferson.wa.us/owa/#viewmodel=ReadMessageItem&ItemID=AAMkAGM0ZTI0NjQ3LTE2OGItNGQzZi05MWNjLWE2NTE2NGZjMzFhN…1/2
RE: resending as 5 attachments
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links,
especially from unknown senders.
Greeting Nicole,
Attached is Exhibit 1 requested which should complete the submission. The
word document dated 5 November 2019 and 4 exhibits. All 5 items together add
up to 29 pages. Please don't hesitate to contact me if something is amiss.
My cell is 425-754-0700 should you need it.
Thanks again for noticing the discrepancy.
Regards,
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: Planning Commission Desk <PCommissionDesk@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2019 10:48 AM
To: pnewland@whidbey.net
Cc: Michael Nilssen <nilssen51@gmail.com>
Subject: Fw: resending as 5 attachments
Mr. Newland,
It looks to me that an attachment, perhaps one called Exhibit 1, is missing
from the attachments you forwarded to Mr. Nilssen as the subject line says
that there are 5 attachments, but only 4 were received. May you please
resend the missing document?
Thank you!
Nicole Allen
Office Coordinator
Jefferson County Department of Community Development
Peter Newland <pnewland@whidbey.net>
Wed 10/30/2019 4:32 PM
To:Planning Commission Desk <PCommissionDesk@co.jefferson.wa.us>;
Cc:'Mike Nilssen' <nilssen51@gmail.com>;
1 attachment
Exhibit 1 2018 11 16 Tarboo Lake Complaint to County.pdf;
11/4/2019 RE: resending as 5 attachments - Planning Commission Desk
https://owa.co.jefferson.wa.us/owa/#viewmodel=ReadMessageItem&ItemID=AAMkAGM0ZTI0NjQ3LTE2OGItNGQzZi05MWNjLWE2NTE2NGZjMzFhN…2/2
621 Sheridan Street
Port Townsend, WA 98368
Phone: (360) 379-4483
________________________________
From: Mike Nilssen <nilssen51@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2019 7:51 AM
To: Planning Commission Desk
Subject: Fwd: resending as 5 attachments
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise
caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown
senders.
Good morning Nichole:
Mr. Newland asked me to Forwarded these documents to be posted on the public
hearing Site as public testimony for the shooting range titles 8 and 18.
Mike Nilssen
(360) 473-3236
Begin forwarded message:
From: Peter Newland <pnewland@whidbey.net>
Date: October 29, 2019 at 10:39:47 PM PDT
To: Mike Nilssen <Nilssen51@GMail.com>
Subject: resending as 5 attachments
?
Please let me know if this works better.
Peter Newland, Board Member
Tarboo Ridge Coalition
P.O. Box 177
Quilcene, WA 98376
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure
under RCW 42.56***
1424 Fourth Avenue, Suite 500, Seattle, WA 98101 ● 25 West Main, Suite 234, Spokane, WA 99201
(206) 264-8600 ● (877) 264-7220 ● www.bricklinnewman.com
Reply to: Seattle Office
November 16, 2018
VIA Email to:
mfarfan@co.jefferson.wa.us;
pmorley@co.jefferson.wa.us;
phunsucker@co.jefferson.wa.us
Jefferson County
Department of Community Development
621 Sheridan St.
Port Townsend, WA 98368
RE: Clearing and Grading Violation, Tarboo Lake
Dear Ms. Farfan and Messrs. Morley and Hunsucker:
On behalf of our clients, the Tarboo Ridge Coalition, we would like to report a violation of the
Jefferson County clearing and grading code.
The violation occurred between March and November, 2018, on the following two parcels:
Parcel A: The South half of the Southeast quarter of the Southwest quarter of
Section 7, Township 28 North, Range 1 West, W.M. Parcel no. 801073003.
Parcel B: The South half of the Southwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of
Section 7, Township 28 North, Range 1 West, W.M. Parcel no. 801074004.
These two parcels together comprise 40 acres on the north side of Tarboo Lake. Both are owned
by the Fort Discovery Corporation, PO Box 660, Port Townsend, WA.
A substantial amount of ground on these properties has been cleared and graded without the
required permit. We ask the County to investigate the site and issue a notice of violation and
impose such remedial actions and penalties as the County deems appropriate.
Facts
Between March and November of 2018, the Tarboo Ridge Coalition obtained aerial photographs
of the Fort Discovery Property adjacent to Tarboo Lake, on a regular basis by drone flights at about
Clearing and Grading Violation: Tarboo Lake
November 16, 2018
Page 2
300 feet elevation. The drone was launched from a boat in Tarboo Lake and flew a grid pattern of
the property.
Nov. 11, 2018 photo showing cleared and graded patches outlined in red.
Additional photos are included in Attachment 1.
The November 11 2018 aerial photo shows extensive recent clearing and grading activity on the
property. GIS methods were used to measure seven distinct areas of recently cleared and graded
areas visible on the photo (see Table 1 below). A total of 1.8 acres (78,408 square feet) at a
minimum appears to have been cleared and graded. One of the larger cleared areas involved
extensive earthmoving, with an earthen berm built along the north property boundary. The estimate
of clearing and grading area provided generally does not include earthwork associated with
expansion of the road network itself, which may represent additional clearing and grading beyond
maintenance of the pre-existing logging roads. The amount of clearing and grading measured is
more than ten times the threshold of 7,000 square feet that requires a clearing and grading permit
from Jefferson County. See JCC 18.30.070.5.
Clearing and Grading Violation: Tarboo Lake
November 16, 2018
Page 3
Table 1. GIS area measurement of cleared and graded areas from aerial photo of Nov. 11, 2018.
In addition, an earlier March 2018 photo shows road expansion and new fill dirt and a new culvert
having recently been installed across a ponded area that is probably part of a larger scrub/shrub
wetland. The expanded road in question extends east of the building area. Numerous small
wetlands are visible across the property and it is likely that other wetland impacts have occurred
in association with earthwork and construction on the property. County Critical Area regulations
require review and permitting prior to filling a wetland. See JCC 18.22.330.
At least 5 of the 7 zones identified as having been cleared and graded appear to have contained
wetlands that were filled or heavily impacted. Although field inspection is necessary to verify these
areas are indeed wetlands, inspection of the March 18, 2018 photo shows numerous areas of small
ponds and shrub vegetation scattered throughout the property that appear to be wetland complexes.
A comparison of the March 18, 2018 photo to the November 11, 2018 photo shows that some of
these probable wetland areas were filled in the clearing and grading zones (see Before and After
close up photos for various clearing zones, attached). In addition, a road was expanded to the east
of Zone 5 and the main building area that crossed a likely wetland. It appears that a pre-existing
logging trail was expanded with fill dirt and a new culvert installed across the wetland. See photos
in Attachment 1.
Finally, the November 11, 2018 photo shows numerous buildings, storage containers and other
structures are distributed across the property. No building permits have been issued. A field
inspection is necessary to determine which, if any of these structures are subject to previous “stop
work” orders and continue to be in violation of County regulations.
The extensive earthmoving, clearing and grading, and potential fill of wetlands all have potential
to impact water quality, wetlands and the receiving water body of Tarboo Lake, which is larger
than 20 acres in size and designated as a State Shoreline.
Clearing and Grading Violation: Tarboo Lake
November 16, 2018
Page 4
Conclusion
The drone overflights provide substantial evidence to conclude that unpermitted activity is
occurring at this site and probably causing destruction of wetland and damage to water quality and
wildlife habitat. Immediate investigation by the County is warranted. If violations are confirmed,
a notice of violation and stop-work order should be issued, and remedial action and penalties
should be imposed.
Please let us know how you plan to proceed and if there is any additional information we can
provide. In advance, thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Very truly yours,
BRICKLIN & NEWMAN, LLP
Alex Sidles
Attorney for the Tarboo Ridge Coalition
(206) 264-8600
sidles@bnd-law.com
cc: Client
Attachment 1
Additional photos
GIS MAPPING OF CLEARING AND GRADING ZONES 1-7 IDENTIFIED ON FORT DISCOVERY PROPERTY, FROM NOVEMBER 11, 2018 AERIAL PHOTO
1
2
3
4 5
7
6
ZONE 2 AND 6 - CLEARING AND GRADING AREA
March 18 2018 photo showing chain of wetland ponds and scrub/shrub wetlands, and recent tree cutting on left.
November 11, 2018 photo showing recent fill of wetland.
ZONE 1 - CLEARING AND GRADING AREA
March 18, 2018 photo showing area of vegetation clearing.
November 11, 2018 photo showing earthwork and berm built along N. Property line.
ZONE 3 – CLEARING AND GRADING AREA
March 18, 2018 photo showing ponded water and potential wetlands on right
November 11, 2018 photo showing fill and grading in potential wetlands.
ZONE 4 AND 5 – NORTH BUILDING AND CLEARING AND GRADING AREAS
March 18, 2018 photo showing structures, clearing and grading areas, and dark rutted soils indicating
potential wetland soils.
November 11, 2018 photo showing additional fill of potential wetlands.
NEW ROAD CONSTRUCTION AND WETLAND FILL EAST OF BUILDING AREA AND ZONE 5
March 18, 2018 photo shows new road construction and fill in what is likely a wetland complex that extends across the road and south.
JEFFERSON COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
621 Sheridan Street | Port Townsend, WA 98368
360-379-4450 | email: dcd@co.jefferson.wa.us
http://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/260/Community-Development
May 10, 2019
Via email
Via USPS first class mail
Fort Discovery, Inc.
Attn: Joe D’Amico
250 Center Park Way
Sequim, WA 98382
Re: COM18-00191 / March 22, 2019 Summary of Jefferson County Site Visit – Parcel 801073003 and
801074004 (the Cedar Hills Property)
Mr. D’Amico –
Thank you for hosting Jefferson County and the Washington State Department of Ecology during the
March 22, 2019 coordinated site visit of the Cedar Hills Property near Tarboo Lake. Donna Frostholm, an
Associate Planner – Lead conducted this site visit on behalf of Jefferson County’s Department of
Community Development (DCD). Stuart Whitford, Environmental Public Heath (EPH) Director and Austin
Watkins, Civil Deputy Prosecuting Attorney accompanied Ms. Frostholm during this site visit.
As discussed more fully below, during this site visit, DCD investigated citizen allegations of: (1) wetland
violations, including potential development within the wetlands and their associated buffers; (2)
unpermitted clearing and grading; and (3) unpermitted structures. The purpose of this letter is twofold:
to review in detail the substantial history with you, your properties and the history between you and
Jefferson County regarding permitted and unpermitted activities; and, to describe in more detail what ,
based upon DCD’s March 22, 2019 site visit, DCD was able to confirm regarding violations of Title 15 and
Title 18 of the Jefferson County Code that have occurred an d continue to occur on your current site.
Background
On June 9, 2017, the then owner of the Cedar Hills Property, James Worthington, submitted a request
for a pre-application conference that designated Joe D’Amico (Mr. D’Amico) as his agent related to th e
2
pre-application conference. The request for a pre-application conference described the project as
follows:
This will be a private instituional (sic) gun range and training facility bringing customers
to the peninsula, both locally and from around the world. We have 40 acres RF located
near Tarboo Lake. Services to be provided include firearms safety and instruction, hunters
safety, firearms qualifications, security training, educational seminars, business retreats,
and special events. Facilities are to include gun ranges (pistol, rifle, trap shoot, archery),
classroom, shoot house, helicopter landing zone, food preparation (sic) and serving area,
restroom and showers, sleeping (sic) quarters, tent and RV sites, caretaker cabin, support
staff housing, and a pro shop. The amenities (sic) will be sited to conform to the landscape
with minimal intrusion, with the goal of providing a safe yet natural outdoor experience.
With the pre-application request, a diagram of the proposed project was included:
This diagram demonstrates knowledge of the need for septic systems and the requirement of setbacks
from neighboring properties and from Tarboo Lake. The pre-application request also contained a
diagram of where a proposed road was to be built for access across adjoining land owned by Pope
Resources.
3
On June 30, 2017, Fort Discovery Corporation’s (FDC) president, Mr. D’Amico, attended a pre-application
conference with representatives of Jefferson County Community Development and the Environmental
Health Department. At the pre-application conference, Mr. D’Amico explained that the project was to
be built in phases over 3-5 years, but that the project would start with a range, bunkhouse and bathroom.
Mr. D’Amico was advised that for the project proposal, a Type III Conditional Use Permit would be
required and that would include: (1) A Master Permit Application; (2) A Supplemental Application for a
Conditional Use; (3) a Project Description/Narrative; (4) A SEPA Checklist; (5) A Stormwater Plan; (6) A
Wetland Delineation, if required; and, (7) Permit fees. The pre-application notes provided to Mr.
D’Amico after the pre-application conference state that there were “No mapped wetlands or streams”
and if “streams or wetlands present, a delineation or determination will be required.”
Also at the June 30, 2017 pre-application conference, Susan Porto and Randy Marx of EPH advised Mr.
D’Amico that permits for a public water system and a septic system would be required. It appears FDC
already was aware of this before the pre-application conference because he or Ms. Scott already had
talked to Mike Deeney of Creative Design Solutions, Inc. about an on -site septic system. According to
his web site, “experience allows Mr. Deeney the ability to determine t he most cost effective system for
a given site that will meet local and state code and provide a long system
life.” http://www.cds4you.com/ExperienceSavesMoney.html.
In September of 2017, the County was advised by counsel for Reed Gunstone and The ARK Group, LLC
(TAG) that there were permit violations on property leased by Mr. D’Amico from the Gunstone family at
3501 Old Gardiner Road, Sequim, WA 98382 (the Old Gardiner Road Property). Mr. Gunstone’s counsel
claimed that there also were uses by Mr. D’Amico that violate the zoning laws, as decided in a 2009 land
use decision of the Jefferson County Hearing Examiner. Mr. Gunstone’s counsel also informed the
County that red tags placed on unpermitted structures have been removed.
Since 2005, for the Old Gardiner Road Property, the County had sought Mr. D’Amico’s compliance with
zoning limitations and the need to bring unpermitted structures and on -site sewage systems into
compliance with the Jefferson County Code. A land use dispute between Mr. D’Amico and the County
began in 2005 when Mr. D’Amico attempted to build structures on Gunstone family property without
proper permits. The County issued a stop work order to Mr. D’Amico in 2005. The land use dispute was
appealed to the Washington court of appeals, which issued its decision in 2008. Sec. Servs. Nw., Inc. v.
Jefferson Cty., 144 Wash. App. 1002, *5 (2008). The court of appeals remanded the case to the Hearing
Examiner.
After the remand from the court of appeals, Security Services Northwest (SSNW) stipulated to the
Hearing Examiner that the following structures were not part of SSNW’s nonconforming use of the Old
Gardiner Road Property in 1992, “but SSNW intends to submit an ‘after-the-fact’ building permit once
the full scope of its legal non-conforming use is established.” Mr. D’Amico has admitted under oath that
he built the following structures without permits:
4
A new bunkhouse built in about 2004. Mr. D’Amico’s November 16, 2005 Testimony, Tape 3 at
14:15-22 and 59:16-24.
A new classroom built in about 2004. Id. at 14:15-22.
A range house built in about 2000. Id., Tape 4 at 10:3-13.
See also June 11, 2009 Stipulation for Remand Hearing at 2. Mr. D’Amico admitted that neither the
bunkhouse nor the classroom contain any sanitary facilities and that a latrine had been built without
permit to serve both. Id., Tape 3 at 16:6-15. Mr. D’Amico testified that between 1988 and 2005, he never
applied for any septic, fire, electrical or structural permits. Id. at 10:23-11:1. Unpermitted structures
were red tagged by the County. Mr. D’Amico admitted under oath in 2007 that the County had the right
to post the buildings with stop work orders that had not received permits. Mr. D’Amico’s May 10, 2007
Deposition at 47:4-7. In a letter dated September 27, 2017, the County advised both Mr. D’Amico and
Mr. Gunstone that: “The County continues to expect respect for and compliance with the 2009 land use
decision and the permit requirements. After-the-fact permits for all the unpermitted structures listed
may be possible, except the SSNW gun ranges on Parcel 002363008 (owned by TAG).”
On September 15, 2017, Mr. Gunstone terminated Mr. D’Amico’s lease of the Old Gardiner Road
Property, effective October 31, 2017. On September 27, 2017, Fort Discovery Corporation purchased
the Cedar Hills Property (Parcels 8011073003 and 801074004) from James Worthington. Mr. D’Amico
decided to move the buildings he built at the Old Gardiner Road Property to the Cedar Hills Property.
On October 23, 2017, the County advised Mr. Gunstone and Mr. D’Amico the requirements that must
be met for moving the buildings from the Old Gardiner Road Property to the Tarboo Property, including
that:
“All necessary permits and rights of way for moving the buildings and placing them at another
location in Jefferson County must be obtained before attempting to move the buildings.”
“At any new location in Jefferson County, the moved buildings must meet the per mit
requirements for sewage and water, zoning requirements for setback or other applicable County
building requirements.”
Subsequently, FDC moved the buildings Mr. D’Amico built from the Old Gardiner Road Property to the
Cedar Hills Property. Mr. D’Amico never obtained any permits for the buildings before or after the
buildings were moved to the Cedar Hills Property. Thus, FDC moved buildings built without any permits
at the Old Gardiner Property and that were red tagged by the County to the Cedar Hills P roperty.
FDC attempted to apply for a County permit for stormwater and a County foundation permit. DCD asked
FDC whether it intended to pursue a conditional use permit for that included a commercial shooting
5
facility. But FDC never answered that question. Ultimately, both applications were determined to be
incomplete by the County on October 26, 2018. FDC has not submitted any applications for new permits
for the Cedar Hills Property as of the date of this letter.
On October 17, 2018, Mr. D’Amico advised DCD that he intended to install a foundation for buildings at
the Cedar Hills Property on or shortly after October 20 and 21, 2018, even though he did not yet have
any foundation permit. As a result of this conversation, DCD issued a Notice of Volunta ry Correction
which stated that: ‘Putting in a foundation without a permit would be a violation of Jefferson County’s
Uniform Development Code (UDC), 18.50.020(1) JCC, which states: “It is a violation of this UDC for any
person to initiate or maintain, or to cause to be initiated or maintained, any use, alteration, construction,
location, or demolition of any structure, land, or property within Jefferson County without first obtaining
permits or authorizations required by this UDC.’”
Subsequently, DCD received information that the permit violations described earlier were occurring at
the Cedar Hills Property and began an investigation. A request for site access was made, and FDC made
the Cedar Hills Property available for inspection on March 22, 2019.
Wetlands and Wetlands Buffers
During the March 22nd site visit, DCD confirmed the following critical area ordinance violations: (1) the
removal, excavation, grading, or dredging of material of any kind within a regulated wetland or its buffer,
Jefferson County Code (JCC) 18.22.310(1); (2) the dumping or discharging of any material or placement
of any fill in a regulated wetland or its buffer, JCC 18.22.310(2); and (3) modification of and activities
within regulated wetland buffers JCC 18.22.310(9) and JCC 18.22.330(3).
DCD informally reviewed FDC’s wetland report prepared by Westech Company in July 2018, which
described on-site wetlands, including a map depicting the location each wetland identified by Westech.
The report received by DCD did not include supporting data located in the appendices (wetland data
forms, wetland rating forms, and wetland maps). During the site visit DCD did not verify Westech’s
delineated wetland boundaries or wetland ratings.
However, based on plot data collected during the March 22nd site visit by DCD and Ecology more
wetlands are present on the site than was identified by Westech’s July 2018 report. Attached Figure 1
demonstrates the approximate location of areas that were investigated during the site visit. The results
are as follows:
One plot was determined to be non-wetland (flagged as TP 1);
Three plots were determined to be wetland (flagged as TP 2, 3, 4);
One soil sampling location was determined to be wetland (flagged as SS 1); and,
6
One area was identified as having wetland hydrology (no soil sample or flagging was placed at
this location because it may be offsite).
The next step in the DCD process is for FDC to apply for after -the-fact critical area permitting. FDC’s
biologist needs to return to the site to delineate and rate all on-site wetlands and to rate all off-site
wetlands for the purposes of determining protective buffers as needed. Given the deficiencies in the
Westech report submitted, such as missing supporting data appendices and missing wetland
delineations, and additional wetlands confirmed by DCD, a revised wetland report will be required for
permitting. It should be noted that there may be more unidentified wetland areas on the property than
is shown in the attached Figure 1.
Stormwater
During the March 22nd site visit, DCD confirmed that more than 2,000 square feet of new development
and more than 7,000 square feet of new land disturbing activities occurred on the site. Therefore, a
stormwater permit is required under JCC 18.30.070. The next step in the DCD process is for FDC to apply
for a stormwater permit.
Unpermitted Buildings
During the March 22nd site visit, DCD confirmed that the following three unpermitted structures on were
on site: (1) an instruction and meeting area building; (2) a bathroom build ing; and (3) an accessory
building. DCD believes that these are the same unpermitted structures built by Mr. D’Amico at the Old
Gardiner Road Property.
Jefferson County has adopted the 2015 International Building under JCC 15.05.30. Under R 105.1 of the
2015 International Building Code, under which building permits are required unless the work exempt is
under R 105.2. Based upon our site visit, the structures moved to the Cedar Hills Property do not appear
to be exempt. The next step in the DCD process is for FDC to apply for after-the-fact building permits for
these structures.
Land Use / Health and Safety Permitting
Based upon the March 22nd site visit observations and FDC’s statements, it appears that FDC intends to
build and operate a commercial shooting facility as defined under JCC 18.10.030 in the near future. The
zoning designation for the Cedar Hills Property is Inholding Forest 20 (IF 20). IF 20 allows a commercial
shooting facility as a Conditional Use. The next step in the DCD process is for FD C to apply for a
Conditional Use permit for an outdoor commercial shooting facility. FDC is cautioned that failure to
provide a SEPA Checklist for the original scope of the project would likely result in FDC having to re -do
the entire SEPA Checklist process. That could be costly.
·TP t -up land
·,p 2 -we.+lcmd, , p:.,-vJeJ-la.Y)C{
. TP4 - we.
+l ca-d
·S�'l..-weA-1aV'd
·Obse.rvahcn o..f
weA-laf\ct {mtljbe, of ,f -'i'i .J-t).
�
-r'P?:>, --f"P4 ·.
�TOU.r\c( hA� \:)et1,,
1cxa.p� �,t:4, �c:u:ti&; weA·land
; ":' ft)-Gt� (b �
P, I l °'W'CA.\t..v; o. \s) .
GIS MAPPING OF CLEARING AND GRADING ZONES 1-7 IDENTIFIED ON FORT DISCOV ERY PROPERTY, FROM NOVEMBER U, 2018 AERIAL PHOTO
Figure 1
FORT DISCOVERY CORP.
250 Center Park Way
Sequim, WA 98382
1-877-876-4750
June 19, 2019
Philip Hunsucker
Chief Civil Deputy Prosecuting Attorney
Jefferson County
1820 Jefferson St
Port Townsend, WA 98368
Via email to phunsucker@co.jefferson.wa.us
Re: Non-Commercial Shooting at Cedar Hills Recreational Facility
Philip:
Thank you for calling me this morning and expressing the concerns of the Tarboo Ridge Coalition that
unpermitted shooting is occurring at the Cedar Hills Recreational Facility. Apparently the TRC saw a
picture of some pistol target stands and immediately concluded that commercial shooting was
occurring.
The TRC is incorrect. There is no commercial shooting at the facility. Instead the owner of the
property and his guests on very rare occasions shoot there but no money ever changes hands. I looked
at the definition of “commercial shooting facility” under ch. 8.50 JCC. The activity at the facility falls
within JCC § 8.50.220(15)(a) (“The term ‘commercial shooting facility’ does not include … Any
portion of a privately owned property used for lawful shooting practice solely by its owner or the
owner’s guests without payment of any compensation to the owner of the privately owned property or
to any other person.”).
Let me know if you have any further questions.
Respectfully,
Greg Overstreet, General Counsel
Fort Discovery Corp.
1-800-859-3463
greg@ssnwhq.com
Peter Newland
5 November 2019
Testimony to the Jefferson County Planning Commission
The 10-16-2019 Jefferson County Staff Report definition of commercial shooting facilities creates
a loophole for abuse that threatens compliance with the GMA.
PREAMBLE
It is a fallacy to suggest that the Commercial Shooting Facility ordinances have nothing to do
with Fort Discovery. It is fiction to believe the ordinances target Fort Discovery. These
ordinances treat each and every gun range applicant equally whether their identity is known or
not. (1)
Prior to the 2018 ordinances that the GMHB overturned, all gun ranges required conditional use
permits (CUP). The overturned ordinances changed that requirement by creating a new
classification of “privately owned property used for lawful shooting practice” which does not
require a CUP. (See staff report page 21 of 45 (15b).
A KNOWN ABUSE
In March 2018, prior to filing a complete application or applying for any permits and before the
final ordinances for commercial shooting facilities were adopted, Fort Discovery Inc. commenced
construction of a substantial shooting facility near Tarboo Lake. In November 2019, based on
drone reconnaissance photos, TRC filed complaints (Exhibit 1) with local, state and federal
agencies noting violations of the clean water act, illegal clearing and grading and wetland filling.
On March 22, 2019 state and county inspectors toured Fort Discovery’s construction site. On May
10, 2019 Jefferson County notified Fort Discovery Inc. (Exhibit 2) of their findings which verified
the reported violations and many others, including siting buildings that violate the uniform
building code, a latrine with a holding tank filled with 1800 gallons of raw sewage, and the
construction of a 50-yard pistol range.
On June 7, 2019 TRC notified the BoCC that Fort Discovery’s pistol range posed a danger to the
public because it had no safety features and aims directly into an area open to public recreation.
(Exhibit 3)
On July 10, 2019 Jefferson County DCD responded to TRC (Exhibit 4), quoting JCC
8.50.220(15), and stating that the County accepted Fort Discovery’s explanation that this 50-yard
pistol range is used by “the owner of the property and his guests shoot there on very rare
occasions but no money ever changes hands.”
(1) Fort Discovery was represented on the moratorium review committee, provide testimony at the public hearings and
has spent 22 months in secret discussions with County staff about “the Ordinance’s effect on Joseph D’Amico’s/Fort
Discovery Corporation’s business plans for property located near Tarboo Lake”
(2) Stop Work Orders were not issued, and Fort Discovery is continuing with construction.
Page 1 of 3
TRC RECOMMENDS REINSTATING CUP FOR NON-COMMERCIAL GUN RANGES
Justification
Prior to the 2018 ordinances that the GMHB overturned, all gun ranges required conditional use
permits, regardless of whether the ranges were commercial or non-commercial. Now, however,
the County’s proposed Title 18 ordinance would require CUPs only for commercial ranges. The
County’s proposed ordinance also sets a 150-acre cap on shooting ranges that applies to
commercial ranges but not to non-commercial ranges.
The failure to require CUPs for non-commercial ranges means that non-commercial ranges will
be not subject to scrutiny regarding their environmental impacts and safety provisions. This is
unacceptable, because bullets from non-commercial ranges are just as dangerous as bullets from
commercial ranges. Noise, traffic, and lead contamination from non-commercial ranges are just as
harmful as from commercial ranges. To mitigate these impacts, non-commercial ranges should be
subject to the same CUP requirement as commercial ranges.
Non-commercial ranges should also count against the 150-acre cap, just as commercial ranges do.
The purpose of the 150-cap is to protect the forestry industry from incompatible land uses. A non-
commercial gun range impedes forestry just as much as a commercial range does. Therefore, non-
commercial ranges should count against the 150-acre cap.
To be clear, requiring a CUP for a non-commercial gun range does not create a no-shooting zone.
In fact, nothing in any of these ordinances creates a no-shooting zone. These ordinances only
regulate the establishment of gun ranges; they do not regulate where guns can be fired.
NEEDED CHANGES TO TITLE 18
The following changes are needed to clarify that CUPs are required for non-commercial gun
ranges, and that non-commercial gun ranges count against the 150-acre cap:
Title 18 ordinance, section 18.20.135(5) (p.20 of 25): “In order to preserve the overall character
of forest resource lands within the county, while complying with the supremacy principle stated in
WAC 365-196-725, the county will not permit more than 0.5 percent of the total forest resource
lands for use as outdoor commercial shooting facilities in the county.”
Title 18 ordinance, section 18.20.350(1j) (p.22 of 25): “Outdoor commercial shooting facilities.”
Title 18 ordinance, Table 3A-1: “Outdoor commercial shooting facility.” (Allowed as a
conditional use.)
Page 2 of 3
EXHIBITS
(1) TRC Complaint to County, State and Federal Agencies, dated March 2018.
(2) Jefferson County DCD Letter to Fort Discovery Inc. dated 22 March 2019.
(3) TRC Letter to Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners, dated 7 June 2019.
(4) Charnas to Newland Letter with Overstreet attachment, dated 10 July 2019.
Page 3 of 3