HomeMy WebLinkAboutstamped_035 Emails with ApplicantFrom:John Sampson
To:David W. Johnson; Shannen Cartmel
Cc:Tori Masterson; andrew nordstrom
Subject:Marrowstone Inn - PRE2021-00010 - Application Submittal
Date:Friday, August 6, 2021 2:04:07 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when
opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Hi Shannen and David, Please see link below for our permit applications and supporting documents for theMarrowstone Inn project. https://we.tl/t-cRgB3dZSRQ In the link, you will find the following documents
General Application
Conditional Use Application
Variance Application
Appendices
A – History + Timeline
B – Size and Height
C – Septic History & Replacement
D – Land Area Calculation
E – Proposed Expansions
F – Land Restoration
Supplemental Application – Shoreline Development
SEPA Checklist
JARPA Form
JARPA Attachment C
Shoreline, Wetland, Fish and Wildlife Habitat, And FEMA Floodplain Assessment
Site Plan
Civil Plan
Site Survey
Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Please send us the invoice to begin the processing of the applications and let me know if thereis anything else I can provide. Thanks, John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
Exhibit 35 - Page 1 of 134
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Friday, July 2, 2021 9:01 AM
To: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Tori Masterson
<tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - PRE2021-00010
John,
Correct. As seen below please email the materials directly to David. You are welcome to CC me on
the email. I cannot begin processing it until David collects the fees.
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
EFFECTIVE TUESDAY 7/1/2021 DCD WILL BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. M-Th 9:00-12:00 1:00-4:30
DCD will maintain limited customer interaction and recommends scheduling an appointment to
meet with staff. DCD will no longer be accepting building applications by drop off or mail, you
must schedule an appointment with front staff to submit. A mask and social distancing is
required.
Please visit our website https://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/dcd to see how we can best serve you
during this time.
Email: dcd@co.jefferson.wa.us
Phone: 360-379-4450
Mail: 621 Sheridan St.; Port Townsend, WA 98368
From: David W. Johnson
Sent: Friday, July 2, 2021 8:57 AM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com; tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - PRE2021-00010
Correct. Email their application materials directly to me. We will let them know if we need anything
Exhibit 35 - Page 2 of 134
else, and I will invoice them for the fees.
From: Shannen Cartmel
Sent: Friday, July 2, 2021 8:53 AM
To: David W. Johnson <djohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: FW: [External] Marrowstone Inn - PRE2021-00010
For land use submittals, you don’t need a meeting still correct? They have already completed a pre-
app. This is a case I know I would be taking on, it was assigned to me by Austin.
From: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 1, 2021 2:45 PM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; David W. Johnson
<djohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - PRE2021-00010
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when
opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Hi Shannen, In anticipation of our permit submittals, do we need to set up a meeting with the county or dowe simply email the applications and supporting documents? Thanks,John Sampson John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Monday, June 7, 2021 7:44 AM
To: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; andrew nordstrom
<andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>; David W. Johnson <djohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - PRE2021-00010
Exhibit 35 - Page 3 of 134
Good morning John,
Please see the answers below.
1. One application is preferable.
2. Once the application is noticed to the public, this would be the time to have the community
members comment. This comment period is for support, concerns, and other comments.
They can also take part in the public hearing and make comments during the hearing if
desired. No particular format is required, just make sure the case numbers (that will be
assigned at the date of application) are included in each letter. These can be submitted via
email or written letter.
3. The permitting pathway depends on the required location of the trenches and different
utilities. If the move is waterward it would be a shoreline variance, if the move is lateral or
landward it would be a shoreline discretionary conditional use. It is possible, that this
application might not be exempt from a shoreline substantial development permit (SSDP) as
well. The SSDP would be a decision by the Jefferson County Hearing Examiner. The variance
would also be the preliminary decision by the Jefferson County Hearing Examiner and then
forwarded to the Department of Ecology (ECY) for final approval. The shoreline conditional
use permit would likely be a preliminary decision by the UDC Administrator, however, it has a
chance to be kicked to hearing, and then final approval by ECY. This process can be combined
with the zoning approvals as well, this part of the decision would just go to ECY for final
approval. But we can bring the entire proposal under one notice and one hearing if desired.
The timeline would likely be the same as discussed in pre-app. At minimum 6 months but more likely
closer to a year. The only exception is that beyond this, you would need to wait for ECY decision and
appeal periods for the shoreline projects.
I would also like to make note that the shoreline code is going through a periodic update that should
be adopted within the next few months. This might change some of the processes, but I doubt it will
substantially change the general path forward, but I will make sure to keep you informed as you go
through the process.
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
EFFECTIVE TUESDAY 7/1/2021 DCD WILL BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. M-Th 9:00-12:00 1:00-4:30
DCD will maintain limited customer interaction and recommends scheduling an appointment to
meet with staff. DCD will no longer be accepting building applications by drop off or mail, you
must schedule an appointment with front staff to submit. A mask and social distancing is
required.
Exhibit 35 - Page 4 of 134
Please visit our website https://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/dcd to see how we can best serve you
during this time.
Email: dcd@co.jefferson.wa.us
Phone: 360-379-4450
Mail: 621 Sheridan St.; Port Townsend, WA 98368
From: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Friday, June 4, 2021 6:24 PM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; andrew nordstrom
<andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>
Subject: Marrowstone Inn - PRE2021-00010
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when
opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Hi Shannen, As we dig further into our permitting pathways, we have come up with a few questions weare looking for some guidance on.
1. The variance application asks from which standards we are asking for a variance –
would the county prefer we combine all variances we are requesting into one
application or separate each variance request into its own application?
2. Andy has been interacting with neighbors and the general community more and more
since he purchased the property and has been garnering a great deal of community
support around the project. What is the process to include letters of support from
community members in the permitting process? Should these be included at the time
of conditional use permit submittal or is there a more appropriate time? Is there an
appropriate format/form that these letters should take?
3. What is the appropriate pathway for permitting approval for trenching within the
shoreline buffer? We are required to decommission the wells that currently provide
water and connect the site to county water supplies. We are also connecting all cabins
to a new septic system that is capable of handling the site’s capacity. This is all
required work and will obviously require trenching to accomplish. We are unclear
what permitting pathway this approval needs to take and the timeframe around it.
Thanks!John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
Exhibit 35 - Page 5 of 134
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
Exhibit 35 - Page 6 of 134
From:andrew nordstrom
To:Shannen Cartmel
Cc:John Sampson; Tori Masterson; David W. Johnson
Subject:Re: Marrowstone Inn - PRE2021-00010 - Application Submittal
Date:Thursday, August 12, 2021 11:37:12 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when
opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Dear Shannen,
Thank you for getting back to us with the invoices. I will send out a check today for the
permits.
Excited to start the process with you and the county as i am eager to share this beautiful piece
of land with the local community.
Have a great rest of your week!
Sincerely,
Andy Nordstrom
On Aug 12, 2021, at 11:24 AM, Shannen Cartmel
<SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us> wrote:
Andrew, John and Tori,
Please see the attached invoices that reflect the same as quoted in the pre-application
meeting. I have set up the cases. The overall land use file will be stored under MLA21-
00080. The shoreline permit will be SDP2021-00012 and the conditional use/variance
permit will be ZON2021-00049. You can pay online here:
https://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/617/Credit-Card-E-Check-Payments-for-Permits.
However, with the substantial amounts, I recommend paying by check as our
processing fees are based on every 100 dollars spend. I believe it is $2.50 for each
$100.00.
Please let me know if you have any questions. I will begin reviewing the documents
next week and let you know if I have any questions. I look forward to working with
everyone. Have a great day!
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Exhibit 35 - Page 7 of 134
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2021 2:50 PM
To: David W. Johnson <djohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: John Sampson <john@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Shannen Cartmel
<SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>; Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Subject: Re: Marrowstone Inn - PRE2021-00010 - Application Submittal
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening
attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Dear David and Shannen,
Thank you for your help with reviewing the permits. Looking forward to hearing from
you! If there are any questions or concerns please let me know.
Best regards,
Andy Nordstrom
On Sun, Aug 8, 2021 at 3:00 PM David W. Johnson <djohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us>
wrote:
Thanks!
From: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Friday, August 6, 2021 2:04 PM
To: David W. Johnson <djohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us>; Shannen Cartmel
<SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; andrew nordstrom
<andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>
Subject: Marrowstone Inn - PRE2021-00010 - Application Submittal
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening
attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Hi Shannen and David, Please see link below for our permit applications and supporting documents forthe Marrowstone Inn project. https://we.tl/t-cRgB3dZSRQ
Exhibit 35 - Page 8 of 134
In the link, you will find the following documents
General Application
Conditional Use Application
Variance Application
Appendices
A – History + Timeline
B – Size and Height
C – Septic History & Replacement
D – Land Area Calculation
E – Proposed Expansions
F – Land Restoration
Supplemental Application – Shoreline Development
SEPA Checklist
JARPA Form
JARPA Attachment C
Shoreline, Wetland, Fish and Wildlife Habitat, And FEMA Floodplain
Assessment
Site Plan
Civil Plan
Site Survey
Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Please send us the invoice to begin the processing of the applications and letme know if there is anything else I can provide. Thanks, John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the
intended recipient and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as
content subject to copyright and other intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you
may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail message or its attachments. If you believe you have
received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by reply e-mail.
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Friday, July 2, 2021 9:01 AM
To: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Tori Masterson
<tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Exhibit 35 - Page 9 of 134
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - PRE2021-00010
John,
Correct. As seen below please email the materials directly to David. You are welcome
to CC me on the email. I cannot begin processing it until David collects the fees.
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
EFFECTIVE TUESDAY 7/1/2021 DCD WILL BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. M-Th 9:00-
12:00 1:00-4:30
DCD will maintain limited customer interaction and recommends scheduling an
appointment to meet with staff. DCD will no longer be accepting building
applications by drop off or mail, you must schedule an appointment with front
staff to submit. A mask and social distancing is required.
Please visit our website https://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/dcd to see how we can best
serve you during this time.
Email: dcd@co.jefferson.wa.us
Phone: 360-379-4450
Mail: 621 Sheridan St.; Port Townsend, WA 98368
From: David W. Johnson
Sent: Friday, July 2, 2021 8:57 AM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com; tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - PRE2021-00010
Correct. Email their application materials directly to me. We will let them know if we
need anything else, and I will invoice them for the fees.
From: Shannen Cartmel
Sent: Friday, July 2, 2021 8:53 AM
To: David W. Johnson <djohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: FW: [External] Marrowstone Inn - PRE2021-00010
Exhibit 35 - Page 10 of
134
For land use submittals, you don’t need a meeting still correct? They have already
completed a pre-app. This is a case I know I would be taking on, it was assigned to
me by Austin.
From: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 1, 2021 2:45 PM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; David W. Johnson
<djohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - PRE2021-00010
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening
attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Hi Shannen, In anticipation of our permit submittals, do we need to set up a meeting withthe county or do we simply email the applications and supporting documents? Thanks,John Sampson John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the
intended recipient and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as
content subject to copyright and other intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you
may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail message or its attachments. If you believe you have
received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by reply e-mail.
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Monday, June 7, 2021 7:44 AM
To: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; andrew nordstrom
<andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>; David W. Johnson
<djohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - PRE2021-00010
Good morning John,
Please see the answers below.
Exhibit 35 - Page 11 of
134
1. One application is preferable.
2. Once the application is noticed to the public, this would be the time to have
the community members comment. This comment period is for support,
concerns, and other comments. They can also take part in the public hearing
and make comments during the hearing if desired. No particular format is
required, just make sure the case numbers (that will be assigned at the date of
application) are included in each letter. These can be submitted via email or
written letter.
3. The permitting pathway depends on the required location of the trenches and
different utilities. If the move is waterward it would be a shoreline variance, if
the move is lateral or landward it would be a shoreline discretionary
conditional use. It is possible, that this application might not be exempt from a
shoreline substantial development permit (SSDP) as well. The SSDP would be a
decision by the Jefferson County Hearing Examiner. The variance would also
be the preliminary decision by the Jefferson County Hearing Examiner and
then forwarded to the Department of Ecology (ECY) for final approval. The
shoreline conditional use permit would likely be a preliminary decision by the
UDC Administrator, however, it has a chance to be kicked to hearing, and then
final approval by ECY. This process can be combined with the zoning approvals
as well, this part of the decision would just go to ECY for final approval. But we
can bring the entire proposal under one notice and one hearing if desired.
The timeline would likely be the same as discussed in pre-app. At minimum 6 months
but more likely closer to a year. The only exception is that beyond this, you would
need to wait for ECY decision and appeal periods for the shoreline projects.
I would also like to make note that the shoreline code is going through a periodic
update that should be adopted within the next few months. This might change some
of the processes, but I doubt it will substantially change the general path forward,
but I will make sure to keep you informed as you go through the process.
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
EFFECTIVE TUESDAY 7/1/2021 DCD WILL BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. M-Th 9:00-
12:00 1:00-4:30
DCD will maintain limited customer interaction and recommends scheduling an
appointment to meet with staff. DCD will no longer be accepting building
applications by drop off or mail, you must schedule an appointment with front
staff to submit. A mask and social distancing is required.
Exhibit 35 - Page 12 of
134
Please visit our website https://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/dcd to see how we can best
serve you during this time.
Email: dcd@co.jefferson.wa.us
Phone: 360-379-4450
Mail: 621 Sheridan St.; Port Townsend, WA 98368
From: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Friday, June 4, 2021 6:24 PM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; andrew nordstrom
<andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>
Subject: Marrowstone Inn - PRE2021-00010
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening
attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Hi Shannen, As we dig further into our permitting pathways, we have come up with a fewquestions we are looking for some guidance on.
1. The variance application asks from which standards we are asking for a
variance – would the county prefer we combine all variances we are
requesting into one application or separate each variance request into its
own application?
2. Andy has been interacting with neighbors and the general community
more and more since he purchased the property and has been garnering
a great deal of community support around the project. What is the
process to include letters of support from community members in the
permitting process? Should these be included at the time of conditional
use permit submittal or is there a more appropriate time? Is there an
appropriate format/form that these letters should take?
3. What is the appropriate pathway for permitting approval for trenching
within the shoreline buffer? We are required to decommission the wells
that currently provide water and connect the site to county water
supplies. We are also connecting all cabins to a new septic system that
is capable of handling the site’s capacity. This is all required work and
will obviously require trenching to accomplish. We are unclear what
permitting pathway this approval needs to take and the timeframe
around it.
Thanks!John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
Exhibit 35 - Page 13 of
134
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the
intended recipient and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as
content subject to copyright and other intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you
may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail message or its attachments. If you believe you have
received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by reply e-mail.
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW
42.56***
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW
42.56***
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW
42.56***
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
<shorline variance invoice.pdf><Conditional Use Invoice.pdf>
Exhibit 35 - Page 14 of
134
From:Tori Masterson
To:Shannen Cartmel; andrew nordstrom
Cc:John Sampson; David W. Johnson
Subject:RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - PRE2021-00010 - Application Submittal
Date:Friday, August 13, 2021 9:06:53 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when
opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Hi Shannen, Thank you so much. We are available all morning on Thursday, 8/19. Please let us know whattime works best for you. Our main goal is to discuss the sequencing with you, particularly those tasks withdependencies and waiting periods. We are outlining our own understanding of this processand would like your feedback to confirm that we have comprehended everything correctly. All the best, Tori Masterson, Architect
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c.206.354.2619
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Friday, August 13, 2021 8:36 AM
To: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; andrew nordstrom
<andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>
Cc: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; David W. Johnson
<djohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - PRE2021-00010 - Application Submittal
Thank you both!
I appreciate that. I will do my best to highlight a timeline, but sometimes SEPA, public comment,
other agency requests can hold up permitting timelines. I have availability next week, the afternoon
of the 18th and most of the 19th. Let me know what works for you. We are now required to keep
things digital when possible due to the new surge of cases.
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
Exhibit 35 - Page 15 of
134
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2021 1:03 PM
To: andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>; Shannen Cartmel
<SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; David W. Johnson
<djohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - PRE2021-00010 - Application Submittal
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when
opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Thank you, Shannen. I echo Andy’s statement of being excited to officially start this processwith you. We are here to answer any questions that may come up and to provide any neededclarifications on our submittals so please do not hesitate to reach out. Once you have beenable to spend some time with our applications I would like to schedule a time to meet toreview the expected timeline. We can do this over zoom or in person, whichever is easiest foryou. Thank you, Tori Masterson, Architect
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c.206.354.2619
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
From: andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2021 11:37 AM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Tori Masterson
<tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; David W. Johnson <djohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: Re: [External] Marrowstone Inn - PRE2021-00010 - Application Submittal
Dear Shannen,
Thank you for getting back to us with the invoices. I will send out a check today for the permits.
Excited to start the process with you and the county as i am eager to share this beautiful piece of
land with the local community.
Have a great rest of your week!
Exhibit 35 - Page 16 of
134
Sincerely,
Andy Nordstrom
On Aug 12, 2021, at 11:24 AM, Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
wrote:
Andrew, John and Tori,
Please see the attached invoices that reflect the same as quoted in the pre-application
meeting. I have set up the cases. The overall land use file will be stored under MLA21-
00080. The shoreline permit will be SDP2021-00012 and the conditional use/variance
permit will be ZON2021-00049. You can pay online
here: https://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/617/Credit-Card-E-Check-Payments-for-Permits.
However, with the substantial amounts, I recommend paying by check as our
processing fees are based on every 100 dollars spend. I believe it is $2.50 for each
$100.00.
Please let me know if you have any questions. I will begin reviewing the documents
next week and let you know if I have any questions. I look forward to working with
everyone. Have a great day!
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2021 2:50 PM
To: David W. Johnson <djohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: John Sampson <john@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Shannen Cartmel
<SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>; Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Subject: Re: Marrowstone Inn - PRE2021-00010 - Application Submittal
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening
attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Dear David and Shannen,
Exhibit 35 - Page 17 of
134
Thank you for your help with reviewing the permits. Looking forward to hearing from
you! If there are any questions or concerns please let me know.
Best regards,
Andy Nordstrom
On Sun, Aug 8, 2021 at 3:00 PM David W. Johnson <djohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us>
wrote:
Thanks!
From: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Friday, August 6, 2021 2:04 PM
To: David W. Johnson <djohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us>; Shannen Cartmel
<SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; andrew nordstrom
<andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>
Subject: Marrowstone Inn - PRE2021-00010 - Application Submittal
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening
attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.Hi Shannen and David, Please see link below for our permit applications and supporting documents forthe Marrowstone Inn project. https://we.tl/t-cRgB3dZSRQ In the link, you will find the following documents
General Application
Conditional Use Application
Variance Application
Appendices
A – History + Timeline
B – Size and Height
C – Septic History & Replacement
D – Land Area Calculation
E – Proposed Expansions
F – Land Restoration
Supplemental Application – Shoreline Development
SEPA Checklist
JARPA Form
Exhibit 35 - Page 18 of
134
JARPA Attachment C
Shoreline, Wetland, Fish and Wildlife Habitat, And FEMA Floodplain
Assessment
Site Plan
Civil Plan
Site Survey
Cultural Resources Assessment Report
Please send us the invoice to begin the processing of the applications and letme know if there is anything else I can provide. Thanks, John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the
intended recipient and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as
content subject to copyright and other intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you
may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail message or its attachments. If you believe you have
received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by reply e-mail.
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Friday, July 2, 2021 9:01 AM
To: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Tori Masterson
<tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - PRE2021-00010
John,
Correct. As seen below please email the materials directly to David. You are welcome
to CC me on the email. I cannot begin processing it until David collects the fees.
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
EFFECTIVE TUESDAY 7/1/2021 DCD WILL BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. M-Th 9:00-
12:00 1:00-4:30
Exhibit 35 - Page 19 of
134
DCD will maintain limited customer interaction and recommends scheduling an
appointment to meet with staff. DCD will no longer be accepting building
applications by drop off or mail, you must schedule an appointment with front
staff to submit. A mask and social distancing is required.
Please visit our website https://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/dcd to see how we can best
serve you during this time.
Email: dcd@co.jefferson.wa.us
Phone: 360-379-4450
Mail: 621 Sheridan St.; Port Townsend, WA 98368
From: David W. Johnson
Sent: Friday, July 2, 2021 8:57 AM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com; tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - PRE2021-00010
Correct. Email their application materials directly to me. We will let them know if we
need anything else, and I will invoice them for the fees.
From: Shannen Cartmel
Sent: Friday, July 2, 2021 8:53 AM
To: David W. Johnson <djohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: FW: [External] Marrowstone Inn - PRE2021-00010
For land use submittals, you don’t need a meeting still correct? They have already
completed a pre-app. This is a case I know I would be taking on, it was assigned to
me by Austin.
From: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 1, 2021 2:45 PM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; David W. Johnson
<djohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - PRE2021-00010
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening
attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.Hi Shannen, In anticipation of our permit submittals, do we need to set up a meeting withthe county or do we simply email the applications and supporting documents?
Exhibit 35 - Page 20 of
134
Thanks,John Sampson John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the
intended recipient and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as
content subject to copyright and other intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you
may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail message or its attachments. If you believe you have
received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by reply e-mail.
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Monday, June 7, 2021 7:44 AM
To: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; andrew nordstrom
<andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>; David W. Johnson
<djohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - PRE2021-00010
Good morning John,
Please see the answers below.
1. One application is preferable.
2. Once the application is noticed to the public, this would be the time to have
the community members comment. This comment period is for support,
concerns, and other comments. They can also take part in the public hearing
and make comments during the hearing if desired. No particular format is
required, just make sure the case numbers (that will be assigned at the date of
application) are included in each letter. These can be submitted via email or
written letter.
3. The permitting pathway depends on the required location of the trenches and
different utilities. If the move is waterward it would be a shoreline variance, if
the move is lateral or landward it would be a shoreline discretionary
conditional use. It is possible, that this application might not be exempt from a
shoreline substantial development permit (SSDP) as well. The SSDP would be a
decision by the Jefferson County Hearing Examiner. The variance would also
be the preliminary decision by the Jefferson County Hearing Examiner and
then forwarded to the Department of Ecology (ECY) for final approval. The
shoreline conditional use permit would likely be a preliminary decision by the
UDC Administrator, however, it has a chance to be kicked to hearing, and then
final approval by ECY. This process can be combined with the zoning approvals
Exhibit 35 - Page 21 of
134
as well, this part of the decision would just go to ECY for final approval. But we
can bring the entire proposal under one notice and one hearing if desired.
The timeline would likely be the same as discussed in pre-app. At minimum 6 months
but more likely closer to a year. The only exception is that beyond this, you would
need to wait for ECY decision and appeal periods for the shoreline projects.
I would also like to make note that the shoreline code is going through a periodic
update that should be adopted within the next few months. This might change some
of the processes, but I doubt it will substantially change the general path forward,
but I will make sure to keep you informed as you go through the process.
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
EFFECTIVE TUESDAY 7/1/2021 DCD WILL BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. M-Th 9:00-
12:00 1:00-4:30
DCD will maintain limited customer interaction and recommends scheduling an
appointment to meet with staff. DCD will no longer be accepting building
applications by drop off or mail, you must schedule an appointment with front
staff to submit. A mask and social distancing is required.
Please visit our website https://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/dcd to see how we can best
serve you during this time.
Email: dcd@co.jefferson.wa.us
Phone: 360-379-4450
Mail: 621 Sheridan St.; Port Townsend, WA 98368
From: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Friday, June 4, 2021 6:24 PM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; andrew nordstrom
<andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>
Subject: Marrowstone Inn - PRE2021-00010
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening
attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.Hi Shannen, As we dig further into our permitting pathways, we have come up with a fewquestions we are looking for some guidance on.
Exhibit 35 - Page 22 of
134
1. The variance application asks from which standards we are asking for a
variance – would the county prefer we combine all variances we are
requesting into one application or separate each variance request into its
own application?
2. Andy has been interacting with neighbors and the general community
more and more since he purchased the property and has been garnering
a great deal of community support around the project. What is the
process to include letters of support from community members in the
permitting process? Should these be included at the time of conditional
use permit submittal or is there a more appropriate time? Is there an
appropriate format/form that these letters should take?
3. What is the appropriate pathway for permitting approval for trenching
within the shoreline buffer? We are required to decommission the wells
that currently provide water and connect the site to county water
supplies. We are also connecting all cabins to a new septic system that
is capable of handling the site’s capacity. This is all required work and
will obviously require trenching to accomplish. We are unclear what
permitting pathway this approval needs to take and the timeframe
around it.
Thanks!John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the
intended recipient and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as
content subject to copyright and other intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you
may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail message or its attachments. If you believe you have
received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by reply e-mail.
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW
42.56***
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW
42.56***
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW
42.56***
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW
42.56*** <shorline variance invoice.pdf><Conditional Use Invoice.pdf>
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
Exhibit 35 - Page 23 of
134
From:John Sampson
To:Shannen Cartmel
Cc:andrew nordstrom; Tori Masterson; Rives Kitchell; Ann Boeholt
Subject:RE: [External] MLA21-00080 Notice of Application/SEPA
Date:Monday, September 13, 2021 1:51:26 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when
opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Hi Shannen, Thanks for looping us in. Do you know what aerial imagery Ecology is referencing? TheOHWM was flagged by our Biologist, Ann, and was surveyed so we are confident theconditions are represented accurately. The projection of aerial imagery can make significantdistortions from the ground conditions but Ann is available to visit the site with Ecology ifneeded. Let us know how we should proceed. Thanks! John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2021 11:15 AM
To: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; John Sampson
<john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Cc: andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>
Subject: FW: [External] MLA21-00080 Notice of Application/SEPA
Tori and John,
The below email was just received by Ecology. Please review and let me know if you would like
Ecology to work with your biologist on the OHWM location or if you just want your biologist to take a
second look.
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
Exhibit 35 - Page 24 of
134
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY) <rebs461@ECY.WA.GOV>
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2021 11:11 AM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: RE: MLA21-00080 Notice of Application/SEPA
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when
opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Shannen,
The document labeled “2021 0806_Marrowstone Inn_Appendix E_Proposed Expansions” shows an
OHWM line at the southern portion of parcel #921084011 that is waterward of where it looks like it
should be according to aerial imagery. Although this does not affect the proposal, an accurate
location of the OHWM will provide clarity on the extent of shoreline jurisdiction at the site. This is
important for both the county and the property owners to have on the record. I am available to
make this determination, so please let me know if you would like me to do this.
The bathroom in building B-5 that was constructed without permits may not meet variance criteria,
as there is already reasonable use of the parcel. A bathroom could be constructed internal to the
existing cabin or within the functionally isolated buffer without a variance.
Three entryways are proposed within the shoreline buffer. Can you please tell me whether this is a
building code requirement?
Rebecca Rothwell, MES, PWS
Wetlands Specialist/Shorelands Technical and Regulatory Lead
WA Department of Ecology | desk: 360-407-7273; cell: 360-810-0025
This communication is a public record and may be subject to disclosure per RCW 42.56.
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2021 3:32 PM
To: Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY) <rebs461@ECY.WA.GOV>; Sherrie Shold <SShold@co.jefferson.wa.us>;
Pinky Mingo <pmingo@co.jefferson.wa.us>; Scott Bancroft <Sbancroft@jeffpud.org>; Terry Duff
<TDuff@co.jefferson.wa.us>; John Fleming <JFleming@co.jefferson.wa.us>; DNR RE SEPACENTER
<SEPACENTER@dnr.wa.gov>; SEPA (DAHP) <sepa@dahp.wa.gov>; SEPADesk (DFW)
<SEPAdesk@dfw.wa.gov>; samg@portofpt.com; greg@portofpt.com; eric@portofpt.com;
btracer@ejfr.org; bgraham@jeffpud.org; dsarff@skokomish.org; Stormy Purser
<thpo@pgst.nsn.us>; romac@pgst.nsn.us; crossi@pnptc.org; sbruch@jamestowntribe.org;
thpo@jamestowntribe.org; stodd@Suquamish.nsn.us; Jolivette, Stephanie (DAHP)
<stephanie.jolivette@dahp.wa.gov>; ngauthier@jeffersontransit.com
Cc: lleach@peninsuladailynews.com; jlester@ptleader.com; jmcmacken@peninsuladailynews.com;
jeffconews@peninsuladailynews.com
Exhibit 35 - Page 25 of
134
Subject: MLA21-00080 Notice of Application/SEPA
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL
SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender
AND were expecting the attachment or the link
Good afternoon,
Please see the below notice of Type III Conditional Use, Shoreline Variance and SEPA. Due to the
delay in the email. The comment period has been extended until Monday, October 11, 2021.
All project documents are located here:
https://test.co.jefferson.wa.us/WebLinkExternal/0/fol/3249828/Row1.aspx
JEFFERSON COUNTY PUBLIC NOTICE OF TYPE III LAND USE APPLICATION,
SHORELINE VARIANCE, AND PENDING SEPA DETERMINATIONMLA21‑00080
APPLICANT:
ANDREW NORDSTROM
4014 HUNTS POINT RD
BELLEVUE WA 98004
Application Received Date: August 12, 2021
Application Complete Date: August 23, 2021
Application Notice Date: September 8, 2021
SITE ADDRESS AND PROJECT LOCATION: Parcel #'s: 921084010 and 921084011; S8 T29 R1E TAX NO. 10 (N300') and (LESS
N300'); 10 Beach Drive, Nordland, WA 98358.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND REQUIRED PERMITS/STUDIES:
ZON2021-00049: SMALL SCALE TOURIST AND RECREATION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WITH MAJOR VARIANCE AND SEPA to
bring Marrowstone Inn into conformance as Rural Recreation Lodging and Cabins. The parcels are in total 8.3 acres and per
Jefferson County Code (JCC) 18.20.350(9)(a) requires a variance from the 10‑acre parcel requirement. Additionally, the
applicants are requesting a variance from JCC 18.20.350(9)(b), to allow more than the 6000 square feet of development for
10 acres to accommodate the existing 11 rental cabins totaling 9,097 SF with an additional assembly space, garage with
caretaker’s unit above, and three utility buildings totaling 4,459 SF (excluding the caretaker's residence). The property has
been continuously operated as a grandfathered, non‑conforming beach resort since the 1940s. Part of the proposal includes
renovating and improving the existing structures, upgrading the septic system to meet current commercial standards, the
addition of a sauna, improving existing paths onsite, the addition of more gravel parking, and two "glamping" tents on the
property.
SDP2021-00012: SHORELINE VARIANCE WITH SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT to remodel and renovate
existing non‑conforming cabins. The renovations mostly include lateral, landward development within the shoreline
jurisdiction. Waterward development includes supplying existing non‑conforming cabins 1‑4 with the required septic
transport lines. There are two wetlands on‑site, a category I marine wetland and a category IV wetland, with a 300‑foot and
40‑foot buffer, respectfully. The applicants are requesting an administrative buffer reduction of 25% per JCC 18.22.730 (9).
The entryway of Cabin 2 is proposed to be located waterward of the existing entryway, but will not be the most waterward
portion of the cabin and the entryway to cabin 3 will be relocated to the eastern side of the cabin, a lateral expansion that is
parallel to the shoreline of Oak Bay. The previous unpermitted expansion of a restroom in cabin 5, which the applicants have
requested to keep and upgrade is parallel to the shoreline of Kilisut Harbor and is necessary to provide restroom facilities for
the guests utilizing this cabin. Associated access road improvements and portions of the areas where sewer lines are
Exhibit 35 - Page 26 of
134
proposed are waterward of cabins 1‑4. The septic system has been designed to minimize land disturbance in association with
the onsite contours and conditions. The proposal is the most minimally invasive option to the shoreline and is required to
bring the property into compliance. The proposal is accompanied by a Shoreline, Wetland, Fish and Wildlife Habitat, and
FEMA Floodplain assessment prepared by Soundview Consultants.
COMMENT PERIOD AND WHERE TO VIEW DOCUMENTS:
The application and any studies may be reviewed at the Jefferson County Department of Community Development. All
interested persons are invited to (a) comment on the application; (b) receive notice of and participate in any hearings; and (c)
receive a copy of the decision by submitting such written comment(s)/request(s) to the Jefferson County Department of
Community Development, Development Review Division, 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368, (360)
379‑4450. Comments concerning this application should be submitted to the Department by 4:30 p.m. on October 11, 2021.
If the last day of the comment period falls on a weekend or holiday, then the comment period shall be extended to
the first working day after the weekend or holiday. Comments submitted after this date may not be considered in the staff
report.
SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The optional DNS process of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 197‑11‑355 is
being used. This may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposal. DCD reviewed the
proposal for probable adverse environmental impacts and expects to issue a DNS. This determination is based upon a review
of the SEPA Checklist, project submissions, and other available information. Additional conditions or mitigation measures may
be required under SEPA. The SEPA Official has determined that: This will be the only opportunity to make comments related
to SEPA. There will not be another comment period after the threshold (final) SEPA determination is made. If the threshold
determination is a Determination of Non‑Significance (DNS) or a Mitigated Determination of Non‑Significance (MDNS), parties
of record may appeal the decision to the Hearing Examiner within 14 days of the final Notice of Decision. A Determination of
Significance (DS) may not be appealed to the Hearing Examiner.
PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION:
This is a Type III permit application that is subject to SEPA review. An open record hearing will be scheduled. Separate public
notice of the SEPA threshold (final) determination by the Administrator and the date of the hearing will be provided at least
15 days prior to the hearing. Appeals of the Administrator's threshold decision will be handled at the same hearing. A copy of
the staff report will be made available for inspection at no cost at least seven calendar days prior to such a hearing. The final
permit decision for this Type III permit application will be made by the Hearing Examiner. Decisions of the Hearing Examiner
may not be further appealed except to Superior Court.
APPEALS:
Appeals of SEPA decisions are described above in the SEPA Environmental Review section. The final permit decision for this
Type III permit application will be made by the Hearing Examiner. Decisions of the Hearing Examiner may not be further
appealed except to Superior Court.
Project Planner: Shannen Cartmel, 360‑379‑4450
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
Exhibit 35 - Page 27 of
134
360-379-4454
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW
42.56***
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
Exhibit 35 - Page 28 of
134
From:andrew nordstrom
To:Shannen Cartmel
Cc:John Sampson; Tori Masterson
Subject:Re: FW: ORCAA Comment on SEPA #202104944; File #MLA21-00080
Date:Tuesday, September 14, 2021 12:02:03 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when
opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Shannen,
Thank you for letting us know!
Best,
Andy Nordstrom
On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 11:50 AM Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us> wrote:
FYI another comment received today. I am forwarding these as they come in to allow you extra
time to address them.
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: Lauren Whybrew <lauren.whybrew@orcaa.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2021 11:25 AM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>; andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com
Cc: Tony Gibson <tony.gibson@orcaa.org>
Subject: ORCAA Comment on SEPA #202104944; File #MLA21-00080
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when
opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Exhibit 35 - Page 29 of
134
Greetings,
I recently reviewed an environmental checklist for the Marrowstone Inn Project
(attached). The project proposes remodeling the main lodge to include a
commercial kitchen for event purposes, remodeling and upgrading all of the existing
cabins, the mobile home and associated garage. Olympic Region Clean Air Agency
(ORCAA) has the following comments for the applicant:
ORCAA regulations require an asbestos survey for all demolition projects.
Demolition projects by definition also include renovations performed to load-bearing
structural members on the current building as part of a remodel. Prior to any
demolition project, the following must be completed:
1. A good faith asbestos survey must be conducted on the structure by a
certified Asbestos Hazardous Emergency Response Act (AHERA) building
inspector;
2. If asbestos is found during the survey, an ORCAA Asbestos Removal
Notification must be completed and all asbestos containing material must be
properly removed prior to the demolition; and,
3. If the structure is 120 sq. ft. or greater, an ORCAA Demolition Notification
must be submitted regardless of the results of the asbestos survey. There is a
mandatory 14-day waiting period after ORCAA receives notification, so we
recommend the applicant complete the Demolition Notification promptly after
receiving the survey.
*These requirements are specific to ORCAA and are not synonymous with any city
or county permitting jurisdiction requirements
Helpful Links:
A list of certified asbestos contractors is available at https://www.orcaa.org/wp-
content/uploads/2020/01/Asbestos_Contractors_Jan2020.pdf
The Demolition Notification form is available at https://www.orcaa.org/asbestos-
demolition-programs/demolition-notification/
Exhibit 35 - Page 30 of
134
If applicable, the Contractor Asbestos Removal Application is available at
https://www.orcaa.org/asbestos-demolition-programs/contractor-asbestos/
If you have any questions or concerns regarding the process, please feel free
to contact Tony Gibson (cc’d) by email or by calling our main office at 360-
539-7610.
Thank you,
Please note: I am working from home until further notice. The best way to reach me is via
email.
Lauren Whybrew, Engineer I
Olympic Region Clean Air Agency - "Clean Air is Everyone's Business!"
2940 Limited Lane NW · Olympia WA 98502 · www.orcaa.org
(360) 539-7610 ext. 107 · 1-800-422-5623
Please take notice that any records or communications with ORCAA are subject to
public disclosure under the Public Records Act (RCW 42.56) unless exempt under
applicable law.
Please consider the environment before printing this email. Thank you.
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW
42.56***
Exhibit 35 - Page 31 of
134
From:John Sampson
To:Shannen Cartmel
Cc:Tori Masterson; Rives Kitchell
Subject:RE: Marrowstone Inn - MLA21-00080 - Revision Process
Date:Thursday, September 23, 2021 9:39:11 AM
Attachments:image004.png
image006.png
image007.png
image008.png
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when
opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Hi Shannen, I wanted to follow up on some questions we have regarding our permits and any revisions weneed to make to them as well as a couple of other questions surrounding the project.
1. We are reworking our design to avoid any waterward development that would require a
shoreline variance and would like to revise the permit submittal to reflect that. If
these revisions do negate the need for a shoreline variance, how much time could we
expect to be taken off of our approval timeline?
2. We would like to clarify our conditional use permit application to include up to 12
events/weddings per year on the property which is more than the 4 allowed per JCC
18.20.380(1)(f) without an administrative (Type II) conditional (C(a)) permit
3. Is there a way to revise the applicant information from Andrew Nordstrom to his LLC?
The current owner information includes Andy’s personal address and he would like to
change that to his business information if possible
What is the process for including revisions to these applications? Do we email the revisedversions to you or is there a separate process we need to undertake? We also want to confirmthat including these revisions will not restart the clock on any of our permitting timelinesand/or comment or review periods. In addition to the questions above, we would like to understand the options we have with thecurrent mobile home that is proposed to be demolished and replaced with a new (3) unitstructure. Due to budget constraints, we are looking at options to either demolish the currentmobile home and leave the area clear for a couple of years until we are ready to build, or todemo the mobile home and place (3) studio trailers/tiny homes on wheels in its place until weare ready to build the permanent structure. Is there any timeline associated withdemolishing and replacing the mobile home? Would demolishing the mobile home and notreplacing with the new structure right away have any implications on the conditional usepermit?
ß MOBILE HOME TO BE DEMO’d AND REPLACED WITH (3) STUDIO UNITS
Is there any time limit on rebuilding the structure or other implication we should be
aware of if we demolish the mobile homes and leave clear until we are ready to rebuild?
Exhibit 35 - Page 32 of
134
Please let me know if you have any questions or if you would like to go over any of this on acall. Thanks! John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
From: John Sampson
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2021 3:46 PM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell
<Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Subject: Marrowstone Inn - MLA21-00080 - Revision Process
Hi Shannen, We are working through more development of the project and are attempting to eliminate anyextension/addition waterward of the interrupted buffer in hopes that this will allow us toavoid the need for a Shoreline Variance. Specifically, this means relocating the proposedentrances for Cabins 2, 3, and 5 . We are now also looking into a new location for Cabin 5’srestroom as Rebecca’s earlier email indicated it would not be allowed to remain where theunpermitted restroom is currently located.
Exhibit 35 - Page 33 of
134
Cabin 2 – relocate proposed entry to the north of the cabin, inside interrupted buffer
Cabin 3 – remove proposed entry on the east side of the cabin and relocate an entry to thenorth, inside of the interrupted buffer
Cabin 5 – remove proposed entry on south side of the cabin. Relocate restroom landward ofthe interrupted buffer
Can you let us know what the process is to revise our proposal and provide an updatedAppendix E. Would the timeline of the review process shift at all/would there need to be anyextension of public notice due to a revised submission? We are attempting remove any
Exhibit 35 - Page 34 of
134
proposals that would require the shoreline variance and hopefully make the review lessonerous. We just want to make sure this won’t slow us down instead! Feel free to give me acall if you have any questions or if this isn’t totally clear. Thanks! John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
Exhibit 35 - Page 35 of
134
From:John Sampson
To:Shannen Cartmel
Cc:Tori Masterson; Rives Kitchell
Subject:RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - MLA21-00080 - Revision Process
Date:Monday, October 4, 2021 12:35:37 PM
Attachments:image003.png
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when
opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Hi Shannen, Andy would like to move forward with replacing the personal information with his LLCinformation for the notice boards and any other permitting documents. Please see below forhis preferred contact information. Will this be reflected in any online records as well or willthat remain with the original information provided? Extend Yourself LLCPO Box 539 9223 Rhody DRChimacum, WA 98325 Thanks! John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2021 8:40 AM
To: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell
<Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - MLA21-00080 - Revision Process
Good morning John,
Please see below.
18.25.700 Expiration of permits and permit exemptions.
Exhibit 35 - Page 36 of
134
The following time requirements shall apply to all permit exemptions, substantial
development permits and to any development authorized pursuant to a variance permit or
conditional use permit:
(1) Construction shall be commenced or, where no construction is involved, the use or
activity shall be commenced within two years of the effective date of the permit or permit
exemption; provided, that the administrator may authorize a single extension based on
reasonable factors, if a request for extension has been filed before the expiration date and
notice of the proposed extension is given to parties of record and the Department of
Ecology.
(2) Authorization to conduct development activities shall terminate five years after the
effective date of a permit or permit exemption; provided, that the shoreline administrator
may authorize a single extension for a period not to exceed one year based on reasonable
factors, if a request for extension has been filed before the expiration date and notice of
the proposed extension is given to parties of record and the Department of Ecology. [Ord.
7-13 Exh. A (Art. X § 11)]
In other words, before the building is removed, you would need to obtain your permit and
then is would abide by the above. Keep in mind, we are updating the shoreline master plan,
likely to take effect at the beginning of next year. I am unsure if this provision will change with
the update.
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2021 1:31 PM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell
<Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - MLA21-00080 - Revision Process
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when
opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Thanks, Shannen. For the mobile unit replacement, does that need to be finished withconstruction in the 2 year timeframe or does having an issued permit count?
Exhibit 35 - Page 37 of
134
Thanks, John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2021 10:14 AM
To: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell
<Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - MLA21-00080 - Revision Process
John,
My answers to your questions are below. Please let me know if you need more information.
1. It appears that a shoreline variance is unavoidable due to the septic line and non-residential
expansion. The note I got from Ecology when I asked was: “Any expansion that is in the buffer
that is not cut off by existing, legally established development would require a variance. I did
not agree with all of the applicant’s ideas of where exactly the buffer is cut off and where it is
not.” The application must go to a hearing regardless of the shoreline variance because of the
variance required for the conditional use.
2. If you would like to add this to the conditional use permit, it would be a permit revision, which would also
include a new notice period. The other option is to continue forward with the current permit first and then
proceed to applying for this after the decision on the current permits are issued. If you revise the permit to
include this, while the decision states it is conditional use administrative, because another portion of the
permit is a variance, this proposal would be included within the variance.
3. I noticed it as the applicant forms were filled out. Unfortunately, while we can reissue new forms for the
posted notice, the mailed notices have already gone out. Let me know if this is something you would like to
have replaced on the notice board and we can get them ready for you. Moving forward, please provide me
with the LLC information and mailing address to change in our system.
You can email me the revisions, I will review and then invoice as required. Unfortunately, these
revisions would restart the notice period and interrupt the current permit timeline.
Regarding the mobile home, the time period is 2 years. The building would need to be replaced
within 2 years of removing. The studio trailers would not count towards replacement of this
structure and would not maintain the same use as a building to allow this 2 year requirement.
Exhibit 35 - Page 38 of
134
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2021 9:39 AM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell
<Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Subject: RE: Marrowstone Inn - MLA21-00080 - Revision Process
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when
opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Hi Shannen, I wanted to follow up on some questions we have regarding our permits and any revisions weneed to make to them as well as a couple of other questions surrounding the project.
1. We are reworking our design to avoid any waterward development that would require a
shoreline variance and would like to revise the permit submittal to reflect that. If
these revisions do negate the need for a shoreline variance, how much time could we
expect to be taken off of our approval timeline?
2. We would like to clarify our conditional use permit application to include up to 12
events/weddings per year on the property which is more than the 4 allowed per JCC
18.20.380(1)(f) without an administrative (Type II) conditional (C(a)) permit
3. Is there a way to revise the applicant information from Andrew Nordstrom to his LLC?
The current owner information includes Andy’s personal address and he would like to
change that to his business information if possible
What is the process for including revisions to these applications? Do we email the revisedversions to you or is there a separate process we need to undertake? We also want to confirmthat including these revisions will not restart the clock on any of our permitting timelinesand/or comment or review periods. In addition to the questions above, we would like to understand the options we have with thecurrent mobile home that is proposed to be demolished and replaced with a new (3) unitstructure. Due to budget constraints, we are looking at options to either demolish the currentmobile home and leave the area clear for a couple of years until we are ready to build, or todemo the mobile home and place (3) studio trailers/tiny homes on wheels in its place until weare ready to build the permanent structure. Is there any timeline associated withdemolishing and replacing the mobile home? Would demolishing the mobile home and notreplacing with the new structure right away have any implications on the conditional use
Exhibit 35 - Page 39 of
134
permit?
ß MOBILE HOME TO BE DEMO’d AND REPLACED WITH (3) STUDIO UNITSIs there any time limit on rebuilding the structure or other implication we should be
aware of if we demolish the mobile homes and leave clear until we are ready to rebuild?
Please let me know if you have any questions or if you would like to go over any of this on acall. Thanks! John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
From: John Sampson
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2021 3:46 PM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell
<Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Subject: Marrowstone Inn - MLA21-00080 - Revision Process
Hi Shannen,
Exhibit 35 - Page 40 of
134
We are working through more development of the project and are attempting to eliminate anyextension/addition waterward of the interrupted buffer in hopes that this will allow us toavoid the need for a Shoreline Variance. Specifically, this means relocating the proposedentrances for Cabins 2, 3, and 5 . We are now also looking into a new location for Cabin 5’srestroom as Rebecca’s earlier email indicated it would not be allowed to remain where theunpermitted restroom is currently located. Cabin 2 – relocate proposed entry to the north of the cabin, inside interrupted buffer
Cabin 3 – remove proposed entry on the east side of the cabin and relocate an entry to thenorth, inside of the interrupted buffer
Cabin 5 – remove proposed entry on south side of the cabin. Relocate restroom landward ofthe interrupted buffer
Exhibit 35 - Page 41 of
134
Can you let us know what the process is to revise our proposal and provide an updatedAppendix E. Would the timeline of the review process shift at all/would there need to be anyextension of public notice due to a revised submission? We are attempting remove anyproposals that would require the shoreline variance and hopefully make the review lessonerous. We just want to make sure this won’t slow us down instead! Feel free to give me acall if you have any questions or if this isn’t totally clear. Thanks! John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
Exhibit 35 - Page 42 of
134
From:John Sampson
To:Shannen Cartmel
Cc:Tori Masterson; Rives Kitchell
Subject:RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - MLA21-00080 - Revision Process
Date:Monday, October 4, 2021 12:35:37 PM
Attachments:image003.png
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when
opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Hi Shannen, Andy would like to move forward with replacing the personal information with his LLCinformation for the notice boards and any other permitting documents. Please see below forhis preferred contact information. Will this be reflected in any online records as well or willthat remain with the original information provided? Extend Yourself LLCPO Box 539 9223 Rhody DRChimacum, WA 98325 Thanks! John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2021 8:40 AM
To: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell
<Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - MLA21-00080 - Revision Process
Good morning John,
Please see below.
18.25.700 Expiration of permits and permit exemptions.
Exhibit 35 - Page 43 of
134
The following time requirements shall apply to all permit exemptions, substantial
development permits and to any development authorized pursuant to a variance permit or
conditional use permit:
(1) Construction shall be commenced or, where no construction is involved, the use or
activity shall be commenced within two years of the effective date of the permit or permit
exemption; provided, that the administrator may authorize a single extension based on
reasonable factors, if a request for extension has been filed before the expiration date and
notice of the proposed extension is given to parties of record and the Department of
Ecology.
(2) Authorization to conduct development activities shall terminate five years after the
effective date of a permit or permit exemption; provided, that the shoreline administrator
may authorize a single extension for a period not to exceed one year based on reasonable
factors, if a request for extension has been filed before the expiration date and notice of
the proposed extension is given to parties of record and the Department of Ecology. [Ord.
7-13 Exh. A (Art. X § 11)]
In other words, before the building is removed, you would need to obtain your permit and
then is would abide by the above. Keep in mind, we are updating the shoreline master plan,
likely to take effect at the beginning of next year. I am unsure if this provision will change with
the update.
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2021 1:31 PM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell
<Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - MLA21-00080 - Revision Process
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when
opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Thanks, Shannen. For the mobile unit replacement, does that need to be finished withconstruction in the 2 year timeframe or does having an issued permit count?
Exhibit 35 - Page 44 of
134
Thanks, John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2021 10:14 AM
To: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell
<Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - MLA21-00080 - Revision Process
John,
My answers to your questions are below. Please let me know if you need more information.
1. It appears that a shoreline variance is unavoidable due to the septic line and non-residential
expansion. The note I got from Ecology when I asked was: “Any expansion that is in the buffer
that is not cut off by existing, legally established development would require a variance. I did
not agree with all of the applicant’s ideas of where exactly the buffer is cut off and where it is
not.” The application must go to a hearing regardless of the shoreline variance because of the
variance required for the conditional use.
2. If you would like to add this to the conditional use permit, it would be a permit revision, which would also
include a new notice period. The other option is to continue forward with the current permit first and then
proceed to applying for this after the decision on the current permits are issued. If you revise the permit to
include this, while the decision states it is conditional use administrative, because another portion of the
permit is a variance, this proposal would be included within the variance.
3. I noticed it as the applicant forms were filled out. Unfortunately, while we can reissue new forms for the
posted notice, the mailed notices have already gone out. Let me know if this is something you would like to
have replaced on the notice board and we can get them ready for you. Moving forward, please provide me
with the LLC information and mailing address to change in our system.
You can email me the revisions, I will review and then invoice as required. Unfortunately, these
revisions would restart the notice period and interrupt the current permit timeline.
Regarding the mobile home, the time period is 2 years. The building would need to be replaced
within 2 years of removing. The studio trailers would not count towards replacement of this
structure and would not maintain the same use as a building to allow this 2 year requirement.
Exhibit 35 - Page 45 of
134
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2021 9:39 AM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell
<Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Subject: RE: Marrowstone Inn - MLA21-00080 - Revision Process
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when
opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Hi Shannen, I wanted to follow up on some questions we have regarding our permits and any revisions weneed to make to them as well as a couple of other questions surrounding the project.
1. We are reworking our design to avoid any waterward development that would require a
shoreline variance and would like to revise the permit submittal to reflect that. If
these revisions do negate the need for a shoreline variance, how much time could we
expect to be taken off of our approval timeline?
2. We would like to clarify our conditional use permit application to include up to 12
events/weddings per year on the property which is more than the 4 allowed per JCC
18.20.380(1)(f) without an administrative (Type II) conditional (C(a)) permit
3. Is there a way to revise the applicant information from Andrew Nordstrom to his LLC?
The current owner information includes Andy’s personal address and he would like to
change that to his business information if possible
What is the process for including revisions to these applications? Do we email the revisedversions to you or is there a separate process we need to undertake? We also want to confirmthat including these revisions will not restart the clock on any of our permitting timelinesand/or comment or review periods. In addition to the questions above, we would like to understand the options we have with thecurrent mobile home that is proposed to be demolished and replaced with a new (3) unitstructure. Due to budget constraints, we are looking at options to either demolish the currentmobile home and leave the area clear for a couple of years until we are ready to build, or todemo the mobile home and place (3) studio trailers/tiny homes on wheels in its place until weare ready to build the permanent structure. Is there any timeline associated withdemolishing and replacing the mobile home? Would demolishing the mobile home and notreplacing with the new structure right away have any implications on the conditional use
Exhibit 35 - Page 46 of
134
permit?
ß MOBILE HOME TO BE DEMO’d AND REPLACED WITH (3) STUDIO UNITSIs there any time limit on rebuilding the structure or other implication we should be
aware of if we demolish the mobile homes and leave clear until we are ready to rebuild?
Please let me know if you have any questions or if you would like to go over any of this on acall. Thanks! John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
From: John Sampson
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2021 3:46 PM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell
<Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Subject: Marrowstone Inn - MLA21-00080 - Revision Process
Hi Shannen,
Exhibit 35 - Page 47 of
134
We are working through more development of the project and are attempting to eliminate anyextension/addition waterward of the interrupted buffer in hopes that this will allow us toavoid the need for a Shoreline Variance. Specifically, this means relocating the proposedentrances for Cabins 2, 3, and 5 . We are now also looking into a new location for Cabin 5’srestroom as Rebecca’s earlier email indicated it would not be allowed to remain where theunpermitted restroom is currently located. Cabin 2 – relocate proposed entry to the north of the cabin, inside interrupted buffer
Cabin 3 – remove proposed entry on the east side of the cabin and relocate an entry to thenorth, inside of the interrupted buffer
Cabin 5 – remove proposed entry on south side of the cabin. Relocate restroom landward ofthe interrupted buffer
Exhibit 35 - Page 48 of
134
Can you let us know what the process is to revise our proposal and provide an updatedAppendix E. Would the timeline of the review process shift at all/would there need to be anyextension of public notice due to a revised submission? We are attempting remove anyproposals that would require the shoreline variance and hopefully make the review lessonerous. We just want to make sure this won’t slow us down instead! Feel free to give me acall if you have any questions or if this isn’t totally clear. Thanks! John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
Exhibit 35 - Page 49 of
134
From:Shannen Cartmel
To:John Sampson
Cc:Tori Masterson; Rives Kitchell
Subject:RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - MLA21-00080 - Revision Process
Date:Tuesday, October 5, 2021 9:20:17 AM
Attachments:NOTICE TO APO.pdf
John,
See the attached document for the notice board. This must be printed on yellow/gold paper. I can
print a copy if you need to pick it up here, just let me know.
I cannot edit the application submitted, it is locked. I can easily swap out the application in Laserfiche
to show the new address, but remember, everything is public record. So the originally submitted one
will still be available given a public records request and during the hearing.
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Monday, October 4, 2021 12:35 PM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell
<Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - MLA21-00080 - Revision Process
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when
opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Hi Shannen, Andy would like to move forward with replacing the personal information with his LLCinformation for the notice boards and any other permitting documents. Please see below forhis preferred contact information. Will this be reflected in any online records as well or willthat remain with the original information provided? Extend Yourself LLCPO Box 539 9223 Rhody DRChimacum, WA 98325 Thanks!
Exhibit 35 - Page 50 of
134
John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2021 8:40 AM
To: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell
<Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - MLA21-00080 - Revision Process
Good morning John,
Please see below.
18.25.700 Expiration of permits and permit exemptions.
The following time requirements shall apply to all permit exemptions, substantial
development permits and to any development authorized pursuant to a variance permit or
conditional use permit:
(1) Construction shall be commenced or, where no construction is involved, the use or
activity shall be commenced within two years of the effective date of the permit or permit
exemption; provided, that the administrator may authorize a single extension based on
reasonable factors, if a request for extension has been filed before the expiration date and
notice of the proposed extension is given to parties of record and the Department of
Ecology.
(2) Authorization to conduct development activities shall terminate five years after the
effective date of a permit or permit exemption; provided, that the shoreline administrator
may authorize a single extension for a period not to exceed one year based on reasonable
factors, if a request for extension has been filed before the expiration date and notice of
the proposed extension is given to parties of record and the Department of Ecology. [Ord.
7-13 Exh. A (Art. X § 11)]
In other words, before the building is removed, you would need to obtain your permit and
then is would abide by the above. Keep in mind, we are updating the shoreline master plan,
Exhibit 35 - Page 51 of
134
likely to take effect at the beginning of next year. I am unsure if this provision will change with
the update.
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2021 1:31 PM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell
<Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - MLA21-00080 - Revision Process
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when
opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Thanks, Shannen. For the mobile unit replacement, does that need to be finished withconstruction in the 2 year timeframe or does having an issued permit count? Thanks, John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2021 10:14 AM
To: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell
<Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - MLA21-00080 - Revision Process
John,
Exhibit 35 - Page 52 of
134
My answers to your questions are below. Please let me know if you need more information.
1. It appears that a shoreline variance is unavoidable due to the septic line and non-residential
expansion. The note I got from Ecology when I asked was: “Any expansion that is in the buffer
that is not cut off by existing, legally established development would require a variance. I did
not agree with all of the applicant’s ideas of where exactly the buffer is cut off and where it is
not.” The application must go to a hearing regardless of the shoreline variance because of the
variance required for the conditional use.
2. If you would like to add this to the conditional use permit, it would be a permit revision, which would also
include a new notice period. The other option is to continue forward with the current permit first and then
proceed to applying for this after the decision on the current permits are issued. If you revise the permit to
include this, while the decision states it is conditional use administrative, because another portion of the
permit is a variance, this proposal would be included within the variance.
3. I noticed it as the applicant forms were filled out. Unfortunately, while we can reissue new forms for the
posted notice, the mailed notices have already gone out. Let me know if this is something you would like to
have replaced on the notice board and we can get them ready for you. Moving forward, please provide me
with the LLC information and mailing address to change in our system.
You can email me the revisions, I will review and then invoice as required. Unfortunately, these
revisions would restart the notice period and interrupt the current permit timeline.
Regarding the mobile home, the time period is 2 years. The building would need to be replaced
within 2 years of removing. The studio trailers would not count towards replacement of this
structure and would not maintain the same use as a building to allow this 2 year requirement.
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2021 9:39 AM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell
<Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Subject: RE: Marrowstone Inn - MLA21-00080 - Revision Process
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when
opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Hi Shannen, I wanted to follow up on some questions we have regarding our permits and any revisions weneed to make to them as well as a couple of other questions surrounding the project.
Exhibit 35 - Page 53 of
134
1. We are reworking our design to avoid any waterward development that would require a
shoreline variance and would like to revise the permit submittal to reflect that. If
these revisions do negate the need for a shoreline variance, how much time could we
expect to be taken off of our approval timeline?
2. We would like to clarify our conditional use permit application to include up to 12
events/weddings per year on the property which is more than the 4 allowed per JCC
18.20.380(1)(f) without an administrative (Type II) conditional (C(a)) permit
3. Is there a way to revise the applicant information from Andrew Nordstrom to his LLC?
The current owner information includes Andy’s personal address and he would like to
change that to his business information if possible
What is the process for including revisions to these applications? Do we email the revisedversions to you or is there a separate process we need to undertake? We also want to confirmthat including these revisions will not restart the clock on any of our permitting timelinesand/or comment or review periods. In addition to the questions above, we would like to understand the options we have with thecurrent mobile home that is proposed to be demolished and replaced with a new (3) unitstructure. Due to budget constraints, we are looking at options to either demolish the currentmobile home and leave the area clear for a couple of years until we are ready to build, or todemo the mobile home and place (3) studio trailers/tiny homes on wheels in its place until weare ready to build the permanent structure. Is there any timeline associated withdemolishing and replacing the mobile home? Would demolishing the mobile home and notreplacing with the new structure right away have any implications on the conditional usepermit?
ß MOBILE HOME TO BE DEMO’d AND REPLACED WITH (3) STUDIO UNITSIs there any time limit on rebuilding the structure or other implication we should be
aware of if we demolish the mobile homes and leave clear until we are ready to rebuild?
Exhibit 35 - Page 54 of
134
Please let me know if you have any questions or if you would like to go over any of this on acall. Thanks! John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
From: John Sampson
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2021 3:46 PM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell
<Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Subject: Marrowstone Inn - MLA21-00080 - Revision Process
Hi Shannen, We are working through more development of the project and are attempting to eliminate anyextension/addition waterward of the interrupted buffer in hopes that this will allow us toavoid the need for a Shoreline Variance. Specifically, this means relocating the proposedentrances for Cabins 2, 3, and 5 . We are now also looking into a new location for Cabin 5’srestroom as Rebecca’s earlier email indicated it would not be allowed to remain where theunpermitted restroom is currently located. Cabin 2 – relocate proposed entry to the north of the cabin, inside interrupted buffer
Cabin 3 – remove proposed entry on the east side of the cabin and relocate an entry to thenorth, inside of the interrupted buffer
Exhibit 35 - Page 55 of
134
Cabin 5 – remove proposed entry on south side of the cabin. Relocate restroom landward ofthe interrupted buffer
Can you let us know what the process is to revise our proposal and provide an updatedAppendix E. Would the timeline of the review process shift at all/would there need to be anyextension of public notice due to a revised submission? We are attempting remove anyproposals that would require the shoreline variance and hopefully make the review lessonerous. We just want to make sure this won’t slow us down instead! Feel free to give me acall if you have any questions or if this isn’t totally clear. Thanks! John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
Exhibit 35 - Page 56 of
134
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW
42.56***
Exhibit 35 - Page 57 of
134
From:John Sampson
To:Shannen Cartmel
Cc:Tori Masterson; Ann Boeholt
Subject:RE: [External] Marrowstone - Ecology Comments
Date:Monday, October 18, 2021 4:36:59 PM
ALERT:BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open
attachments or click on links if you are not expecting them.
Hi Shannen,
Thanks so much - November 2nd at 11 am works for us. Let me know if that time changes. Thanks!John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2021 12:35 PM
To: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Ann Boeholt
<ann@soundviewconsultants.com>
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone - Ecology Comments
John,
How does November 2nd work? I tentatively propose around 11:00 AM.
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2021 10:30 AM
Exhibit 35 - Page 58 of
134
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Ann Boeholt
<ann@soundviewconsultants.com>
Subject: Marrowstone - Ecology Comments
ALERT: BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open attachments or
click on links if you are not expecting them.
Hi Shannen, Andy received some comments from Ecology last week and it appears that they are stillquestioning the OHWM. Please let us know when we can set up a visit with our biologist,Ann, to accompany the ecology representative onsite to verify. Thanks, John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
Exhibit 35 - Page 59 of
134
From:Ann Boeholt
To:Shannen Cartmel
Cc:andrew nordstrom; Tori Masterson; Rives Kitchell; John Sampson; David W. Johnson
Subject:RE: Marrowstone Inn, OHW verification and scheduling Public Hearing (MLA21-00080 Notice of Application/SEPA)
Date:Thursday, October 28, 2021 10:56:52 AM
Attachments:image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
image005.png
image006.png
ALERT:BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open
attachments or click on links if you are not expecting them.
Shannen, Thank you for your time. Understood.
See you next Tuesday.
Ann
Ann Boeholt, Senior PWS
Senior Environmental Planner
Soundview Consultants LLC
a: 2907 Harborview Drive, Gig Harbor, WA 98335
e: ann@soundviewconsultants.com
w: soundviewconsultants.com
p: 253.514.8952
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2021 10:52 AM
To: Ann Boeholt <ann@soundviewconsultants.com>
Cc: andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>; Tori Masterson
<tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell <Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; John Sampson
<john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; David W. Johnson <djohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: RE: Marrowstone Inn, OHW verification and scheduling Public Hearing (MLA21-00080
Notice of Application/SEPA)
Ann and Andrew,
There are several factors concerning this. As earlier mentioned, we are not yet ready for a hearing.
This has been a part of the discussion since the beginning. My words were, I can do my best to move
Exhibit 35 - Page 60 of
134
it along as quickly as possible, but best timeline would be six months from date of application. That is
generally best case scenario. Most of these cases take substantially longer, even for individual
residential cases. This is a large proposal.
Additionally, the Jefferson County hearing examiner is retiring and not taking any new complex
cases. We are currently out for bid for a new hearing examiner. This is delaying this process as well.
Due to the concern with the Ecology comment, Jefferson County has not yet reviewed all comments
to determine if any additional information is needed. Regardless of if Ecology says this will affect the
proposal or not, we will not move forward until this comment is addressed with ECY. We do not have
the staff time or availability to veer from this course right now. We will keep you updated.
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: Ann Boeholt <ann@soundviewconsultants.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2021 10:42 AM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>; Tori Masterson
<tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell <Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; John Sampson
<john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Subject: Marrowstone Inn, OHW verification and scheduling Public Hearing (MLA21-00080 Notice of
Application/SEPA)
ALERT: BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open attachments or
click on links if you are not expecting them.
Good Morning Shannon,
In my preparation for our site visit to the Marrowstone Inn property next week Tuesday (November
2, 11:00 am), I was reviewing the e-mail record and was reminded of Ecology’s September 13
Comment “Although this does not affect the proposal, an accurate location of the OHWM will
provide clarity on the extent of shoreline jurisdiction at the site”. In talking with my client, Andrew
Nordstrom, I learned that although you have everything you need for a complete application, you
are holding up the scheduling of the Public Hearing until the OHW is verified.
The OHW is very clear on the ground. We flagged it and that was picked up by Survey, providing the
best mapping accuracy possible. If the OHW as mapped by survey is not appearing to align with an
aerial photograph that Ecology is reviewing, that is likely an issue with the projection of the
photograph, not with the actual on the ground determination of the OHW. Given that and Ecology’s
Exhibit 35 - Page 61 of
134
comment that this is not going to make a difference on the proposal anyhow, we are questioning
why this verification needs to hold up the scheduling of the public hearing.
Can you please provide clarification on this matter?
Thank you very much.
Ann
Ann Boeholt, Senior PWSSenior Environmental Planner
Soundview Consultants LLC
a: 2907 Harborview Drive, Gig Harbor, WA 98335
e: ann@soundviewconsultants.com
w: soundviewconsultants.com
p: 253.514.8952
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2021 8:51 AM
To: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY)
<rebs461@ECY.WA.GOV>
Cc: andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>; Tori Masterson
<tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell <Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Ann Boeholt
<ann@soundviewconsultants.com>
Subject: RE: [External] MLA21-00080 Notice of Application/SEPA
Rebecca,
I forwarded your email on to the representatives and they have some follow up questions. Do you
mind assisting them further?
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
Exhibit 35 - Page 62 of
134
360-379-4454
From: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2021 1:51 PM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>; Tori Masterson
<tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell <Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Ann Boeholt
<ann@soundviewconsultants.com>
Subject: RE: [External] MLA21-00080 Notice of Application/SEPA
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when
opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Hi Shannen, Thanks for looping us in. Do you know what aerial imagery Ecology is referencing? TheOHWM was flagged by our Biologist, Ann, and was surveyed so we are confident theconditions are represented accurately. The projection of aerial imagery can make significantdistortions from the ground conditions but Ann is available to visit the site with Ecology ifneeded. Let us know how we should proceed. Thanks! John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2021 11:15 AM
To: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; John Sampson
<john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Cc: andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>
Subject: FW: [External] MLA21-00080 Notice of Application/SEPA
Tori and John,
The below email was just received by Ecology. Please review and let me know if you would like
Ecology to work with your biologist on the OHWM location or if you just want your biologist to take a
second look.
Exhibit 35 - Page 63 of
134
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY) <rebs461@ECY.WA.GOV>
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2021 11:11 AM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: RE: MLA21-00080 Notice of Application/SEPA
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when
opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Shannen,
The document labeled “2021 0806_Marrowstone Inn_Appendix E_Proposed Expansions” shows an
OHWM line at the southern portion of parcel #921084011 that is waterward of where it looks like it
should be according to aerial imagery. Although this does not affect the proposal, an accurate
location of the OHWM will provide clarity on the extent of shoreline jurisdiction at the site. This is
important for both the county and the property owners to have on the record. I am available to
make this determination, so please let me know if you would like me to do this.
The bathroom in building B-5 that was constructed without permits may not meet variance criteria,
as there is already reasonable use of the parcel. A bathroom could be constructed internal to the
existing cabin or within the functionally isolated buffer without a variance.
Three entryways are proposed within the shoreline buffer. Can you please tell me whether this is a
building code requirement?
Rebecca Rothwell, MES, PWS
Wetlands Specialist/Shorelands Technical and Regulatory Lead
WA Department of Ecology | desk: 360-407-7273; cell: 360-810-0025
This communication is a public record and may be subject to disclosure per RCW 42.56.
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2021 3:32 PM
To: Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY) <rebs461@ECY.WA.GOV>; Sherrie Shold <SShold@co.jefferson.wa.us>;
Pinky Mingo <pmingo@co.jefferson.wa.us>; Scott Bancroft <Sbancroft@jeffpud.org>; Terry Duff
<TDuff@co.jefferson.wa.us>; John Fleming <JFleming@co.jefferson.wa.us>; DNR RE SEPACENTER
<SEPACENTER@dnr.wa.gov>; SEPA (DAHP) <sepa@dahp.wa.gov>; SEPADesk (DFW)
<SEPAdesk@dfw.wa.gov>; samg@portofpt.com; greg@portofpt.com; eric@portofpt.com;
btracer@ejfr.org; bgraham@jeffpud.org; dsarff@skokomish.org; Stormy Purser
Exhibit 35 - Page 64 of
134
<thpo@pgst.nsn.us>; romac@pgst.nsn.us; crossi@pnptc.org; sbruch@jamestowntribe.org;
thpo@jamestowntribe.org; stodd@Suquamish.nsn.us; Jolivette, Stephanie (DAHP)
<stephanie.jolivette@dahp.wa.gov>; ngauthier@jeffersontransit.com
Cc: lleach@peninsuladailynews.com; jlester@ptleader.com; jmcmacken@peninsuladailynews.com;
jeffconews@peninsuladailynews.com
Subject: MLA21-00080 Notice of Application/SEPA
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL
SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender
AND were expecting the attachment or the link
Good afternoon,
Please see the below notice of Type III Conditional Use, Shoreline Variance and SEPA. Due to the
delay in the email. The comment period has been extended until Monday, October 11, 2021.
All project documents are located here:
https://test.co.jefferson.wa.us/WebLinkExternal/0/fol/3249828/Row1.aspx
JEFFERSON COUNTY PUBLIC NOTICE OF TYPE III LAND USE APPLICATION,
SHORELINE VARIANCE, AND PENDING SEPA DETERMINATIONMLA21‑00080
APPLICANT:
ANDREW NORDSTROM
4014 HUNTS POINT RD
BELLEVUE WA 98004
Application Received Date: August 12, 2021
Application Complete Date: August 23, 2021
Application Notice Date: September 8, 2021
SITE ADDRESS AND PROJECT LOCATION: Parcel #'s: 921084010 and 921084011; S8 T29 R1E TAX NO. 10 (N300') and (LESS
N300'); 10 Beach Drive, Nordland, WA 98358.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND REQUIRED PERMITS/STUDIES:
ZON2021-00049: SMALL SCALE TOURIST AND RECREATION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WITH MAJOR VARIANCE AND SEPA to
bring Marrowstone Inn into conformance as Rural Recreation Lodging and Cabins. The parcels are in total 8.3 acres and per
Jefferson County Code (JCC) 18.20.350(9)(a) requires a variance from the 10‑acre parcel requirement. Additionally, the
applicants are requesting a variance from JCC 18.20.350(9)(b), to allow more than the 6000 square feet of development for
10 acres to accommodate the existing 11 rental cabins totaling 9,097 SF with an additional assembly space, garage with
caretaker’s unit above, and three utility buildings totaling 4,459 SF (excluding the caretaker's residence). The property has
been continuously operated as a grandfathered, non‑conforming beach resort since the 1940s. Part of the proposal includes
renovating and improving the existing structures, upgrading the septic system to meet current commercial standards, the
addition of a sauna, improving existing paths onsite, the addition of more gravel parking, and two "glamping" tents on the
property.
SDP2021-00012: SHORELINE VARIANCE WITH SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT to remodel and renovate
existing non‑conforming cabins. The renovations mostly include lateral, landward development within the shoreline
jurisdiction. Waterward development includes supplying existing non‑conforming cabins 1‑4 with the required septic
transport lines. There are two wetlands on‑site, a category I marine wetland and a category IV wetland, with a 300‑foot and
40‑foot buffer, respectfully. The applicants are requesting an administrative buffer reduction of 25% per JCC 18.22.730 (9).
Exhibit 35 - Page 65 of
134
The entryway of Cabin 2 is proposed to be located waterward of the existing entryway, but will not be the most waterward
portion of the cabin and the entryway to cabin 3 will be relocated to the eastern side of the cabin, a lateral expansion that is
parallel to the shoreline of Oak Bay. The previous unpermitted expansion of a restroom in cabin 5, which the applicants have
requested to keep and upgrade is parallel to the shoreline of Kilisut Harbor and is necessary to provide restroom facilities for
the guests utilizing this cabin. Associated access road improvements and portions of the areas where sewer lines are
proposed are waterward of cabins 1‑4. The septic system has been designed to minimize land disturbance in association with
the onsite contours and conditions. The proposal is the most minimally invasive option to the shoreline and is required to
bring the property into compliance. The proposal is accompanied by a Shoreline, Wetland, Fish and Wildlife Habitat, and
FEMA Floodplain assessment prepared by Soundview Consultants.
COMMENT PERIOD AND WHERE TO VIEW DOCUMENTS:
The application and any studies may be reviewed at the Jefferson County Department of Community Development. All
interested persons are invited to (a) comment on the application; (b) receive notice of and participate in any hearings; and (c)
receive a copy of the decision by submitting such written comment(s)/request(s) to the Jefferson County Department of
Community Development, Development Review Division, 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368, (360)
379‑4450. Comments concerning this application should be submitted to the Department by 4:30 p.m. on October 11, 2021.
If the last day of the comment period falls on a weekend or holiday, then the comment period shall be extended to
the first working day after the weekend or holiday. Comments submitted after this date may not be considered in the staff
report.
SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The optional DNS process of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 197‑11‑355 is
being used. This may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposal. DCD reviewed the
proposal for probable adverse environmental impacts and expects to issue a DNS. This determination is based upon a review
of the SEPA Checklist, project submissions, and other available information. Additional conditions or mitigation measures may
be required under SEPA. The SEPA Official has determined that: This will be the only opportunity to make comments related
to SEPA. There will not be another comment period after the threshold (final) SEPA determination is made. If the threshold
determination is a Determination of Non‑Significance (DNS) or a Mitigated Determination of Non‑Significance (MDNS), parties
of record may appeal the decision to the Hearing Examiner within 14 days of the final Notice of Decision. A Determination of
Significance (DS) may not be appealed to the Hearing Examiner.
PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION:
This is a Type III permit application that is subject to SEPA review. An open record hearing will be scheduled. Separate public
notice of the SEPA threshold (final) determination by the Administrator and the date of the hearing will be provided at least
15 days prior to the hearing. Appeals of the Administrator's threshold decision will be handled at the same hearing. A copy of
the staff report will be made available for inspection at no cost at least seven calendar days prior to such a hearing. The final
permit decision for this Type III permit application will be made by the Hearing Examiner. Decisions of the Hearing Examiner
may not be further appealed except to Superior Court.
APPEALS:
Appeals of SEPA decisions are described above in the SEPA Environmental Review section. The final permit decision for this
Type III permit application will be made by the Hearing Examiner. Decisions of the Hearing Examiner may not be further
appealed except to Superior Court.
Project Planner: Shannen Cartmel, 360‑379‑4450
Respectfully,
Exhibit 35 - Page 66 of
134
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW
42.56***
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
Exhibit 35 - Page 67 of
134
From:andrew nordstrom
To:Shannen Cartmel
Cc:Tori Masterson; John Sampson
Subject:Hearing Date-Marrowstone
Date:Thursday, October 28, 2021 8:45:39 AM
________________________________
ALERT: BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open attachments or click on links
if you are not expecting them.
________________________________
Dear Shannen,
Hope your week is going well!
I wanted to check in about any updates on the hearing date. Its been a few weeks since the end of our public notice
period and i wanted to see what the timeline would be for moving forward with a hearing.
Thanks,
Andy Nordstrom
Exhibit 35 - Page 68 of
134
From:Tori Masterson
To:Shannen Cartmel; Ann Boeholt
Cc:andrew nordstrom; Rives Kitchell; John Sampson; David W. Johnson
Subject:RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn, OHW verification and scheduling Public Hearing (MLA21-00080 Notice of
Application/SEPA)
Date:Tuesday, November 2, 2021 9:04:18 AM
Attachments:image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
ALERT:BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open
attachments or click on links if you are not expecting them.
Hi Shannen and David, Thank you for this email. We appreciate any information that will help us make informeddecisions. We have noticed in some correspondence that our project is referred to as complex. I amcurious if you could elaborate on what portions of our proposal are deemed as such. We aremindful of our project scope and we look to both of you for guidance on how we can bring thisproperty into compliance as well as make it enjoyable destination for the Marrowstonecommunity. At this time, the focus of our proposal is to renovate the cabins and auxiliary structures intheir existing footprints, as well as bring the septic system into compliance and removevehicular parking from the shoreline. Is anything in our proposal currently consideredquestionable and unlikely to gain approval? Best regards, Tori Masterson, Architect
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c.206.354.2619
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2021 10:52 AM
To: Ann Boeholt <ann@soundviewconsultants.com>
Cc: andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>; Tori Masterson
<tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell <Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; John Sampson
<john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; David W. Johnson <djohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn, OHW verification and scheduling Public Hearing (MLA21-
00080 Notice of Application/SEPA)
Ann and Andrew,
There are several factors concerning this. As earlier mentioned, we are not yet ready for a hearing.
Exhibit 35 - Page 69 of
134
This has been a part of the discussion since the beginning. My words were, I can do my best to move
it along as quickly as possible, but best timeline would be six months from date of application. That is
generally best case scenario. Most of these cases take substantially longer, even for individual
residential cases. This is a large proposal.
Additionally, the Jefferson County hearing examiner is retiring and not taking any new complex
cases. We are currently out for bid for a new hearing examiner. This is delaying this process as well.
Due to the concern with the Ecology comment, Jefferson County has not yet reviewed all comments
to determine if any additional information is needed. Regardless of if Ecology says this will affect the
proposal or not, we will not move forward until this comment is addressed with ECY. We do not have
the staff time or availability to veer from this course right now. We will keep you updated.
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: Ann Boeholt <ann@soundviewconsultants.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2021 10:42 AM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>; Tori Masterson
<tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell <Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; John Sampson
<john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Subject: Marrowstone Inn, OHW verification and scheduling Public Hearing (MLA21-00080 Notice of
Application/SEPA)
ALERT: BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open attachments or
click on links if you are not expecting them.
Good Morning Shannon,
In my preparation for our site visit to the Marrowstone Inn property next week Tuesday (November
2, 11:00 am), I was reviewing the e-mail record and was reminded of Ecology’s September 13
Comment “Although this does not affect the proposal, an accurate location of the OHWM will
provide clarity on the extent of shoreline jurisdiction at the site”. In talking with my client, Andrew
Nordstrom, I learned that although you have everything you need for a complete application, you
are holding up the scheduling of the Public Hearing until the OHW is verified.
The OHW is very clear on the ground. We flagged it and that was picked up by Survey, providing the
best mapping accuracy possible. If the OHW as mapped by survey is not appearing to align with an
aerial photograph that Ecology is reviewing, that is likely an issue with the projection of the
Exhibit 35 - Page 70 of
134
photograph, not with the actual on the ground determination of the OHW. Given that and Ecology’s
comment that this is not going to make a difference on the proposal anyhow, we are questioning
why this verification needs to hold up the scheduling of the public hearing.
Can you please provide clarification on this matter?
Thank you very much.
Ann
Ann Boeholt, Senior PWS
Senior Environmental Planner
Soundview Consultants LLC
a: 2907 Harborview Drive, Gig Harbor, WA 98335
e: ann@soundviewconsultants.com
w: soundviewconsultants.com
p: 253.514.8952
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2021 8:51 AM
To: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY)
<rebs461@ECY.WA.GOV>
Cc: andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>; Tori Masterson
<tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell <Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Ann Boeholt
<ann@soundviewconsultants.com>
Subject: RE: [External] MLA21-00080 Notice of Application/SEPA
Rebecca,
I forwarded your email on to the representatives and they have some follow up questions. Do you
mind assisting them further?
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
Exhibit 35 - Page 71 of
134
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2021 1:51 PM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>; Tori Masterson
<tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell <Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Ann Boeholt
<ann@soundviewconsultants.com>
Subject: RE: [External] MLA21-00080 Notice of Application/SEPA
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when
opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Hi Shannen, Thanks for looping us in. Do you know what aerial imagery Ecology is referencing? TheOHWM was flagged by our Biologist, Ann, and was surveyed so we are confident theconditions are represented accurately. The projection of aerial imagery can make significantdistortions from the ground conditions but Ann is available to visit the site with Ecology ifneeded. Let us know how we should proceed. Thanks! John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2021 11:15 AM
To: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; John Sampson
<john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Cc: andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>
Subject: FW: [External] MLA21-00080 Notice of Application/SEPA
Tori and John,
The below email was just received by Ecology. Please review and let me know if you would like
Ecology to work with your biologist on the OHWM location or if you just want your biologist to take a
second look.
Exhibit 35 - Page 72 of
134
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY) <rebs461@ECY.WA.GOV>
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2021 11:11 AM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: RE: MLA21-00080 Notice of Application/SEPA
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when
opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Shannen,
The document labeled “2021 0806_Marrowstone Inn_Appendix E_Proposed Expansions” shows an
OHWM line at the southern portion of parcel #921084011 that is waterward of where it looks like it
should be according to aerial imagery. Although this does not affect the proposal, an accurate
location of the OHWM will provide clarity on the extent of shoreline jurisdiction at the site. This is
important for both the county and the property owners to have on the record. I am available to
make this determination, so please let me know if you would like me to do this.
The bathroom in building B-5 that was constructed without permits may not meet variance criteria,
as there is already reasonable use of the parcel. A bathroom could be constructed internal to the
existing cabin or within the functionally isolated buffer without a variance.
Three entryways are proposed within the shoreline buffer. Can you please tell me whether this is a
building code requirement?
Rebecca Rothwell, MES, PWS
Wetlands Specialist/Shorelands Technical and Regulatory Lead
WA Department of Ecology | desk: 360-407-7273; cell: 360-810-0025
This communication is a public record and may be subject to disclosure per RCW 42.56.
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2021 3:32 PM
To: Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY) <rebs461@ECY.WA.GOV>; Sherrie Shold <SShold@co.jefferson.wa.us>;
Pinky Mingo <pmingo@co.jefferson.wa.us>; Scott Bancroft <Sbancroft@jeffpud.org>; Terry Duff
<TDuff@co.jefferson.wa.us>; John Fleming <JFleming@co.jefferson.wa.us>; DNR RE SEPACENTER
<SEPACENTER@dnr.wa.gov>; SEPA (DAHP) <sepa@dahp.wa.gov>; SEPADesk (DFW)
<SEPAdesk@dfw.wa.gov>; samg@portofpt.com; greg@portofpt.com; eric@portofpt.com;
Exhibit 35 - Page 73 of
134
btracer@ejfr.org; bgraham@jeffpud.org; dsarff@skokomish.org; Stormy Purser
<thpo@pgst.nsn.us>; romac@pgst.nsn.us; crossi@pnptc.org; sbruch@jamestowntribe.org;
thpo@jamestowntribe.org; stodd@Suquamish.nsn.us; Jolivette, Stephanie (DAHP)
<stephanie.jolivette@dahp.wa.gov>; ngauthier@jeffersontransit.com
Cc: lleach@peninsuladailynews.com; jlester@ptleader.com; jmcmacken@peninsuladailynews.com;
jeffconews@peninsuladailynews.com
Subject: MLA21-00080 Notice of Application/SEPA
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL
SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender
AND were expecting the attachment or the link
Good afternoon,
Please see the below notice of Type III Conditional Use, Shoreline Variance and SEPA. Due to the
delay in the email. The comment period has been extended until Monday, October 11, 2021.
All project documents are located here:
https://test.co.jefferson.wa.us/WebLinkExternal/0/fol/3249828/Row1.aspx
JEFFERSON COUNTY PUBLIC NOTICE OF TYPE III LAND USE APPLICATION,
SHORELINE VARIANCE, AND PENDING SEPA DETERMINATIONMLA21‑00080
APPLICANT:
ANDREW NORDSTROM
4014 HUNTS POINT RD
BELLEVUE WA 98004
Application Received Date: August 12, 2021
Application Complete Date: August 23, 2021
Application Notice Date: September 8, 2021
SITE ADDRESS AND PROJECT LOCATION: Parcel #'s: 921084010 and 921084011; S8 T29 R1E TAX NO. 10 (N300') and (LESS
N300'); 10 Beach Drive, Nordland, WA 98358.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND REQUIRED PERMITS/STUDIES:
ZON2021-00049: SMALL SCALE TOURIST AND RECREATION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WITH MAJOR VARIANCE AND SEPA to
bring Marrowstone Inn into conformance as Rural Recreation Lodging and Cabins. The parcels are in total 8.3 acres and per
Jefferson County Code (JCC) 18.20.350(9)(a) requires a variance from the 10‑acre parcel requirement. Additionally, the
applicants are requesting a variance from JCC 18.20.350(9)(b), to allow more than the 6000 square feet of development for
10 acres to accommodate the existing 11 rental cabins totaling 9,097 SF with an additional assembly space, garage with
caretaker’s unit above, and three utility buildings totaling 4,459 SF (excluding the caretaker's residence). The property has
been continuously operated as a grandfathered, non‑conforming beach resort since the 1940s. Part of the proposal includes
renovating and improving the existing structures, upgrading the septic system to meet current commercial standards, the
addition of a sauna, improving existing paths onsite, the addition of more gravel parking, and two "glamping" tents on the
property.
SDP2021-00012: SHORELINE VARIANCE WITH SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT to remodel and renovate
existing non‑conforming cabins. The renovations mostly include lateral, landward development within the shoreline
jurisdiction. Waterward development includes supplying existing non‑conforming cabins 1‑4 with the required septic
Exhibit 35 - Page 74 of
134
transport lines. There are two wetlands on‑site, a category I marine wetland and a category IV wetland, with a 300‑foot and
40‑foot buffer, respectfully. The applicants are requesting an administrative buffer reduction of 25% per JCC 18.22.730 (9).
The entryway of Cabin 2 is proposed to be located waterward of the existing entryway, but will not be the most waterward
portion of the cabin and the entryway to cabin 3 will be relocated to the eastern side of the cabin, a lateral expansion that is
parallel to the shoreline of Oak Bay. The previous unpermitted expansion of a restroom in cabin 5, which the applicants have
requested to keep and upgrade is parallel to the shoreline of Kilisut Harbor and is necessary to provide restroom facilities for
the guests utilizing this cabin. Associated access road improvements and portions of the areas where sewer lines are
proposed are waterward of cabins 1‑4. The septic system has been designed to minimize land disturbance in association with
the onsite contours and conditions. The proposal is the most minimally invasive option to the shoreline and is required to
bring the property into compliance. The proposal is accompanied by a Shoreline, Wetland, Fish and Wildlife Habitat, and
FEMA Floodplain assessment prepared by Soundview Consultants.
COMMENT PERIOD AND WHERE TO VIEW DOCUMENTS:
The application and any studies may be reviewed at the Jefferson County Department of Community Development. All
interested persons are invited to (a) comment on the application; (b) receive notice of and participate in any hearings; and (c)
receive a copy of the decision by submitting such written comment(s)/request(s) to the Jefferson County Department of
Community Development, Development Review Division, 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368, (360)
379‑4450. Comments concerning this application should be submitted to the Department by 4:30 p.m. on October 11, 2021.
If the last day of the comment period falls on a weekend or holiday, then the comment period shall be extended to
the first working day after the weekend or holiday. Comments submitted after this date may not be considered in the staff
report.
SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The optional DNS process of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 197‑11‑355 is
being used. This may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposal. DCD reviewed the
proposal for probable adverse environmental impacts and expects to issue a DNS. This determination is based upon a review
of the SEPA Checklist, project submissions, and other available information. Additional conditions or mitigation measures may
be required under SEPA. The SEPA Official has determined that: This will be the only opportunity to make comments related
to SEPA. There will not be another comment period after the threshold (final) SEPA determination is made. If the threshold
determination is a Determination of Non‑Significance (DNS) or a Mitigated Determination of Non‑Significance (MDNS), parties
of record may appeal the decision to the Hearing Examiner within 14 days of the final Notice of Decision. A Determination of
Significance (DS) may not be appealed to the Hearing Examiner.
PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION:
This is a Type III permit application that is subject to SEPA review. An open record hearing will be scheduled. Separate public
notice of the SEPA threshold (final) determination by the Administrator and the date of the hearing will be provided at least
15 days prior to the hearing. Appeals of the Administrator's threshold decision will be handled at the same hearing. A copy of
the staff report will be made available for inspection at no cost at least seven calendar days prior to such a hearing. The final
permit decision for this Type III permit application will be made by the Hearing Examiner. Decisions of the Hearing Examiner
may not be further appealed except to Superior Court.
APPEALS:
Appeals of SEPA decisions are described above in the SEPA Environmental Review section. The final permit decision for this
Type III permit application will be made by the Hearing Examiner. Decisions of the Hearing Examiner may not be further
appealed except to Superior Court.
Project Planner: Shannen Cartmel, 360‑379‑4450
Exhibit 35 - Page 75 of
134
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW
42.56***
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
Exhibit 35 - Page 76 of
134
From:andrew nordstrom
To:Shannen Cartmel
Subject:Re: MLA21-00080 Comments
Date:Tuesday, November 2, 2021 5:34:39 PM
ALERT:BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open
attachments or click on links if you are not expecting them.
Shannen,
Thank you for your time today and for your continued help with the project.
Looking forward to hearing from you tomorrow about the additional information requests.
Have a nice evening.
Warm regards,
Andy Nordstrom
On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 4:47 PM Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us> wrote:
John, Andrew, Tori and Ann,
As discussed with John at the site visit this morning, I have uploaded all comments to the
Laserfiche file located here:
https://test.co.jefferson.wa.us/WebLinkExternal/0/fol/3327168/Row1.aspx
Also, I expect to have the additional information request out to you all by tomorrow end of
day. Have a great rest of the day!
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
Exhibit 35 - Page 77 of
134
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW
42.56***
Exhibit 35 - Page 78 of
134
From:Shannen Cartmel
To:Tori Masterson; Ann Boeholt
Cc:andrew nordstrom; Rives Kitchell; John Sampson; David W. Johnson
Subject:RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn, OHW verification and scheduling Public Hearing (MLA21-00080 Notice of
Application/SEPA)
Date:Wednesday, November 3, 2021 3:07:02 PM
Attachments:image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
Tori,
The hearing examiner will be retiring at the end of November, we only have a contact for two days a
month. At this point it would likely be impossible to obtain this step, that quickly, especially given the
need for additional information. Even then, we are only 3 months into this process and at minimum
six months is expected, as we had previously discussed, but that clock stops as soon as I request
additional information. There is no preferential treatment, this stands for almost all cases going to
hearing at this point now and other applicants are being told the same information. I do believe the
same would be true of a shoreline variance for residential development, although, to my knowledge,
we currently don’t have any proposed.
That being said, our director updated us today in regards to the hearing examiner search. The notice
has been revised and resubmitted to obtain more applicants. We expect and hope to have a hearing
examiner by the 1st of the new year.
As a side note, I also want to say that I don’t think this delay should cause a concern at this point in
the project, because it is not yet ready to go to hearing and hopefully by the time the project is
ready for hearing, this will no longer be a concern.
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 3, 2021 11:32 AM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>; Ann Boeholt
<ann@soundviewconsultants.com>
Cc: andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>; Rives Kitchell
<Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; David W.
Johnson <djohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: Re: [External] Marrowstone Inn, OHW verification and scheduling Public Hearing (MLA21-
00080 Notice of Application/SEPA)
Exhibit 35 - Page 79 of
134
ALERT: BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open attachments or
click on links if you are not expecting them.
Hi Shannen,
Thank you so much for the additional insight. John relayed most of this same message to me
yesterday afternoon after your discussions at the property. We are continuously grateful for your
attention and thorough communication.
We are considering reaching out to Mr Butler to see if there is any influence he may have with the
hearings examiner. We would like to understand if it is standard policy for a hearings examiner to be
able to choose what they take on vs. taking on projects in the order of submittal. From our
standpoint this seems to imply that they are giving preferential treatment to residential proposals.
We do not want to second guess the process but we do need to advocate for our project as much as
possible.
Best regards,
Tori Masterson, Architect
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Tuesday, November 2, 2021 4:57 PM
To: Tori Masterson; Ann Boeholt
Cc: andrew nordstrom; Rives Kitchell; John Sampson; David W. Johnson
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn, OHW verification and scheduling Public Hearing (MLA21-
00080 Notice of Application/SEPA)
Tori,
I apologize for the confusion. I don’t want to define this project as inherently “complex”. The County
is simply processing the permits required for the proposal and approval based on what you submit.
The hearing examiner specifically let the county know he would not be reviewing any “complex”
cases – cases that garner significant public comment, cases that have several parts (i.e. more than
one review or several proposals wrapped together), or cases that will be time consuming to both
review materials for. Shoreline variances themselves tend to be complex cases in regards to hearings
specifically. If you need me to further clarify, I can give it my best attempt. This was second hand
knowledge passed down to all planners. I will get back to everyone with an update on our hearing
examiner bid as soon as I know more.
I spoke with John today onsite and discussed that some portions of the variance – i.e. expanding the
buildings might not be able to meet variance criteria – the same position the County has held since
Exhibit 35 - Page 80 of
134
the pre-app. John and I talked about this at the site today and I am sure he can pass on some of the
conversation. Please let me know if you have additional questions. I will be sending a request based
on some of the comments, ecology determination, and some other factors that have been discussed
before as being needed.
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 2, 2021 9:03 AM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>; Ann Boeholt
<ann@soundviewconsultants.com>
Cc: andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>; Rives Kitchell
<Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; David W.
Johnson <djohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn, OHW verification and scheduling Public Hearing (MLA21-
00080 Notice of Application/SEPA)
ALERT: BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open attachments or
click on links if you are not expecting them.
Hi Shannen and David, Thank you for this email. We appreciate any information that will help us make informeddecisions. We have noticed in some correspondence that our project is referred to as complex. I amcurious if you could elaborate on what portions of our proposal are deemed as such. We aremindful of our project scope and we look to both of you for guidance on how we can bring thisproperty into compliance as well as make it enjoyable destination for the Marrowstonecommunity. At this time, the focus of our proposal is to renovate the cabins and auxiliary structures intheir existing footprints, as well as bring the septic system into compliance and removevehicular parking from the shoreline. Is anything in our proposal currently consideredquestionable and unlikely to gain approval? Best regards, Tori Masterson, Architect
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
th
Exhibit 35 - Page 81 of
134
6113 13 Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c.206.354.2619
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2021 10:52 AM
To: Ann Boeholt <ann@soundviewconsultants.com>
Cc: andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>; Tori Masterson
<tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell <Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; John Sampson
<john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; David W. Johnson <djohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn, OHW verification and scheduling Public Hearing (MLA21-
00080 Notice of Application/SEPA)
Ann and Andrew,
There are several factors concerning this. As earlier mentioned, we are not yet ready for a hearing.
This has been a part of the discussion since the beginning. My words were, I can do my best to move
it along as quickly as possible, but best timeline would be six months from date of application. That is
generally best case scenario. Most of these cases take substantially longer, even for individual
residential cases. This is a large proposal.
Additionally, the Jefferson County hearing examiner is retiring and not taking any new complex
cases. We are currently out for bid for a new hearing examiner. This is delaying this process as well.
Due to the concern with the Ecology comment, Jefferson County has not yet reviewed all comments
to determine if any additional information is needed. Regardless of if Ecology says this will affect the
proposal or not, we will not move forward until this comment is addressed with ECY. We do not have
the staff time or availability to veer from this course right now. We will keep you updated.
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: Ann Boeholt <ann@soundviewconsultants.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2021 10:42 AM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>; Tori Masterson
<tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell <Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; John Sampson
<john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Subject: Marrowstone Inn, OHW verification and scheduling Public Hearing (MLA21-00080 Notice of
Application/SEPA)
Exhibit 35 - Page 82 of
134
ALERT: BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open attachments or
click on links if you are not expecting them.
Good Morning Shannon,
In my preparation for our site visit to the Marrowstone Inn property next week Tuesday (November
2, 11:00 am), I was reviewing the e-mail record and was reminded of Ecology’s September 13
Comment “Although this does not affect the proposal, an accurate location of the OHWM will
provide clarity on the extent of shoreline jurisdiction at the site”. In talking with my client, Andrew
Nordstrom, I learned that although you have everything you need for a complete application, you
are holding up the scheduling of the Public Hearing until the OHW is verified.
The OHW is very clear on the ground. We flagged it and that was picked up by Survey, providing the
best mapping accuracy possible. If the OHW as mapped by survey is not appearing to align with an
aerial photograph that Ecology is reviewing, that is likely an issue with the projection of the
photograph, not with the actual on the ground determination of the OHW. Given that and Ecology’s
comment that this is not going to make a difference on the proposal anyhow, we are questioning
why this verification needs to hold up the scheduling of the public hearing.
Can you please provide clarification on this matter?
Thank you very much.
Ann
Ann Boeholt, Senior PWSSenior Environmental Planner
Soundview Consultants LLC
a: 2907 Harborview Drive, Gig Harbor, WA 98335
e: ann@soundviewconsultants.com
w: soundviewconsultants.com
p: 253.514.8952
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2021 8:51 AM
To: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY)
Exhibit 35 - Page 83 of
134
<rebs461@ECY.WA.GOV>
Cc: andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>; Tori Masterson
<tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell <Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Ann Boeholt
<ann@soundviewconsultants.com>
Subject: RE: [External] MLA21-00080 Notice of Application/SEPA
Rebecca,
I forwarded your email on to the representatives and they have some follow up questions. Do you
mind assisting them further?
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2021 1:51 PM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>; Tori Masterson
<tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell <Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Ann Boeholt
<ann@soundviewconsultants.com>
Subject: RE: [External] MLA21-00080 Notice of Application/SEPA
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when
opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Hi Shannen, Thanks for looping us in. Do you know what aerial imagery Ecology is referencing? TheOHWM was flagged by our Biologist, Ann, and was surveyed so we are confident theconditions are represented accurately. The projection of aerial imagery can make significantdistortions from the ground conditions but Ann is available to visit the site with Ecology ifneeded. Let us know how we should proceed. Thanks! John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
Exhibit 35 - Page 84 of
134
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2021 11:15 AM
To: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; John Sampson
<john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Cc: andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>
Subject: FW: [External] MLA21-00080 Notice of Application/SEPA
Tori and John,
The below email was just received by Ecology. Please review and let me know if you would like
Ecology to work with your biologist on the OHWM location or if you just want your biologist to take a
second look.
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY) <rebs461@ECY.WA.GOV>
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2021 11:11 AM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: RE: MLA21-00080 Notice of Application/SEPA
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when
opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Shannen,
The document labeled “2021 0806_Marrowstone Inn_Appendix E_Proposed Expansions” shows an
OHWM line at the southern portion of parcel #921084011 that is waterward of where it looks like it
should be according to aerial imagery. Although this does not affect the proposal, an accurate
location of the OHWM will provide clarity on the extent of shoreline jurisdiction at the site. This is
important for both the county and the property owners to have on the record. I am available to
make this determination, so please let me know if you would like me to do this.
The bathroom in building B-5 that was constructed without permits may not meet variance criteria,
as there is already reasonable use of the parcel. A bathroom could be constructed internal to the
existing cabin or within the functionally isolated buffer without a variance.
Exhibit 35 - Page 85 of
134
Three entryways are proposed within the shoreline buffer. Can you please tell me whether this is a
building code requirement?
Rebecca Rothwell, MES, PWS
Wetlands Specialist/Shorelands Technical and Regulatory Lead
WA Department of Ecology | desk: 360-407-7273; cell: 360-810-0025
This communication is a public record and may be subject to disclosure per RCW 42.56.
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2021 3:32 PM
To: Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY) <rebs461@ECY.WA.GOV>; Sherrie Shold <SShold@co.jefferson.wa.us>;
Pinky Mingo <pmingo@co.jefferson.wa.us>; Scott Bancroft <Sbancroft@jeffpud.org>; Terry Duff
<TDuff@co.jefferson.wa.us>; John Fleming <JFleming@co.jefferson.wa.us>; DNR RE SEPACENTER
<SEPACENTER@dnr.wa.gov>; SEPA (DAHP) <sepa@dahp.wa.gov>; SEPADesk (DFW)
<SEPAdesk@dfw.wa.gov>; samg@portofpt.com; greg@portofpt.com; eric@portofpt.com;
btracer@ejfr.org; bgraham@jeffpud.org; dsarff@skokomish.org; Stormy Purser
<thpo@pgst.nsn.us>; romac@pgst.nsn.us; crossi@pnptc.org; sbruch@jamestowntribe.org;
thpo@jamestowntribe.org; stodd@Suquamish.nsn.us; Jolivette, Stephanie (DAHP)
<stephanie.jolivette@dahp.wa.gov>; ngauthier@jeffersontransit.com
Cc: lleach@peninsuladailynews.com; jlester@ptleader.com; jmcmacken@peninsuladailynews.com;
jeffconews@peninsuladailynews.com
Subject: MLA21-00080 Notice of Application/SEPA
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL
SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender
AND were expecting the attachment or the link
Good afternoon,
Please see the below notice of Type III Conditional Use, Shoreline Variance and SEPA. Due to the
delay in the email. The comment period has been extended until Monday, October 11, 2021.
All project documents are located here:
https://test.co.jefferson.wa.us/WebLinkExternal/0/fol/3249828/Row1.aspx
JEFFERSON COUNTY PUBLIC NOTICE OF TYPE III LAND USE APPLICATION,
SHORELINE VARIANCE, AND PENDING SEPA DETERMINATIONMLA21‑00080
APPLICANT:
ANDREW NORDSTROM
4014 HUNTS POINT RD
BELLEVUE WA 98004
Application Received Date: August 12, 2021
Application Complete Date: August 23, 2021
Application Notice Date: September 8, 2021
Exhibit 35 - Page 86 of
134
SITE ADDRESS AND PROJECT LOCATION: Parcel #'s: 921084010 and 921084011; S8 T29 R1E TAX NO. 10 (N300') and (LESS
N300'); 10 Beach Drive, Nordland, WA 98358.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND REQUIRED PERMITS/STUDIES:
ZON2021-00049: SMALL SCALE TOURIST AND RECREATION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WITH MAJOR VARIANCE AND SEPA to
bring Marrowstone Inn into conformance as Rural Recreation Lodging and Cabins. The parcels are in total 8.3 acres and per
Jefferson County Code (JCC) 18.20.350(9)(a) requires a variance from the 10‑acre parcel requirement. Additionally, the
applicants are requesting a variance from JCC 18.20.350(9)(b), to allow more than the 6000 square feet of development for
10 acres to accommodate the existing 11 rental cabins totaling 9,097 SF with an additional assembly space, garage with
caretaker’s unit above, and three utility buildings totaling 4,459 SF (excluding the caretaker's residence). The property has
been continuously operated as a grandfathered, non‑conforming beach resort since the 1940s. Part of the proposal includes
renovating and improving the existing structures, upgrading the septic system to meet current commercial standards, the
addition of a sauna, improving existing paths onsite, the addition of more gravel parking, and two "glamping" tents on the
property.
SDP2021-00012: SHORELINE VARIANCE WITH SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT to remodel and renovate
existing non‑conforming cabins. The renovations mostly include lateral, landward development within the shoreline
jurisdiction. Waterward development includes supplying existing non‑conforming cabins 1‑4 with the required septic
transport lines. There are two wetlands on‑site, a category I marine wetland and a category IV wetland, with a 300‑foot and
40‑foot buffer, respectfully. The applicants are requesting an administrative buffer reduction of 25% per JCC 18.22.730 (9).
The entryway of Cabin 2 is proposed to be located waterward of the existing entryway, but will not be the most waterward
portion of the cabin and the entryway to cabin 3 will be relocated to the eastern side of the cabin, a lateral expansion that is
parallel to the shoreline of Oak Bay. The previous unpermitted expansion of a restroom in cabin 5, which the applicants have
requested to keep and upgrade is parallel to the shoreline of Kilisut Harbor and is necessary to provide restroom facilities for
the guests utilizing this cabin. Associated access road improvements and portions of the areas where sewer lines are
proposed are waterward of cabins 1‑4. The septic system has been designed to minimize land disturbance in association with
the onsite contours and conditions. The proposal is the most minimally invasive option to the shoreline and is required to
bring the property into compliance. The proposal is accompanied by a Shoreline, Wetland, Fish and Wildlife Habitat, and
FEMA Floodplain assessment prepared by Soundview Consultants.
COMMENT PERIOD AND WHERE TO VIEW DOCUMENTS:
The application and any studies may be reviewed at the Jefferson County Department of Community Development. All
interested persons are invited to (a) comment on the application; (b) receive notice of and participate in any hearings; and (c)
receive a copy of the decision by submitting such written comment(s)/request(s) to the Jefferson County Department of
Community Development, Development Review Division, 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368, (360)
379‑4450. Comments concerning this application should be submitted to the Department by 4:30 p.m. on October 11, 2021.
If the last day of the comment period falls on a weekend or holiday, then the comment period shall be extended to
the first working day after the weekend or holiday. Comments submitted after this date may not be considered in the staff
report.
SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The optional DNS process of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 197‑11‑355 is
being used. This may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposal. DCD reviewed the
proposal for probable adverse environmental impacts and expects to issue a DNS. This determination is based upon a review
of the SEPA Checklist, project submissions, and other available information. Additional conditions or mitigation measures may
be required under SEPA. The SEPA Official has determined that: This will be the only opportunity to make comments related
to SEPA. There will not be another comment period after the threshold (final) SEPA determination is made. If the threshold
determination is a Determination of Non‑Significance (DNS) or a Mitigated Determination of Non‑Significance (MDNS), parties
of record may appeal the decision to the Hearing Examiner within 14 days of the final Notice of Decision. A Determination of
Significance (DS) may not be appealed to the Hearing Examiner.
PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION:
This is a Type III permit application that is subject to SEPA review. An open record hearing will be scheduled. Separate public
Exhibit 35 - Page 87 of
134
notice of the SEPA threshold (final) determination by the Administrator and the date of the hearing will be provided at least
15 days prior to the hearing. Appeals of the Administrator's threshold decision will be handled at the same hearing. A copy of
the staff report will be made available for inspection at no cost at least seven calendar days prior to such a hearing. The final
permit decision for this Type III permit application will be made by the Hearing Examiner. Decisions of the Hearing Examiner
may not be further appealed except to Superior Court.
APPEALS:
Appeals of SEPA decisions are described above in the SEPA Environmental Review section. The final permit decision for this
Type III permit application will be made by the Hearing Examiner. Decisions of the Hearing Examiner may not be further
appealed except to Superior Court.
Project Planner: Shannen Cartmel, 360‑379‑4450
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW
42.56***
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
Exhibit 35 - Page 88 of
134
From:John Sampson
To:Shannen Cartmel
Cc:Tori Masterson; andrew nordstrom
Subject:Marrowstone Inn - Updated Appendix - New Development
Date:Wednesday, November 3, 2021 10:16:22 AM
Attachments:Stubbed Attachments.htm
This message's contents have been archived by the Barracuda Message Archiver.
2021 1103_Marrowstone Inn_Appendix E_New Development_updated.pdf (1.4M)
ALERT:BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open
attachments or click on links if you are not expecting them.
Hi Shannen, Following up on our conversation yesterday, I wanted to confirm that updating our AppendixE – Proposed Expansions will not require a new public comment period. The revisions wehave made include only the removal of proposed expansions, including the removal ofproposed new entrances to cabins 2 and 3, the removal of the unpermitted bathroomextension to cabin 5, and the removal of a proposed new entrance to cabin 10. I haveattached the updated version here for your review, let me know if you see anything thatwould require a new public comment period. If not, we will move forward with formallysubmitting this revision. Thanks, John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
Exhibit 35 - Page 89 of
134
From:Tori Masterson
To:Shannen Cartmel; Ann Boeholt
Cc:andrew nordstrom; Rives Kitchell; John Sampson; David W. Johnson
Subject:Re: [External] Marrowstone Inn, OHW verification and scheduling Public Hearing (MLA21-00080 Notice of
Application/SEPA)
Date:Wednesday, November 3, 2021 11:32:27 AM
Attachments:image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
ALERT:BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open
attachments or click on links if you are not expecting them.
Hi Shannen,
Thank you so much for the additional insight. John relayed most of this same message to me
yesterday afternoon after your discussions at the property. We are continuously grateful for
your attention and thorough communication.
We are considering reaching out to Mr Butler to see if there is any influence he may have with
the hearings examiner. We would like to understand if it is standard policy for a hearings
examiner to be able to choose what they take on vs. taking on projects in the order of
submittal. From our standpoint this seems to imply that they are giving preferential treatment
to residential proposals. We do not want to second guess the process but we do need to
advocate for our project as much as possible.
Best regards,
Tori Masterson, Architect
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Tuesday, November 2, 2021 4:57 PM
To: Tori Masterson; Ann Boeholt
Cc: andrew nordstrom; Rives Kitchell; John Sampson; David W. Johnson
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn, OHW verification and scheduling Public Hearing
(MLA21-00080 Notice of Application/SEPA)
Tori,
I apologize for the confusion. I don’t want to define this project as inherently “complex”. The County
is simply processing the permits required for the proposal and approval based on what you submit.
The hearing examiner specifically let the county know he would not be reviewing any “complex”
cases – cases that garner significant public comment, cases that have several parts (i.e. more than
one review or several proposals wrapped together), or cases that will be time consuming to both
review materials for. Shoreline variances themselves tend to be complex cases in regards to hearings
Exhibit 35 - Page 90 of
134
specifically. If you need me to further clarify, I can give it my best attempt. This was second hand
knowledge passed down to all planners. I will get back to everyone with an update on our hearing
examiner bid as soon as I know more.
I spoke with John today onsite and discussed that some portions of the variance – i.e. expanding the
buildings might not be able to meet variance criteria – the same position the County has held since
the pre-app. John and I talked about this at the site today and I am sure he can pass on some of the
conversation. Please let me know if you have additional questions. I will be sending a request based
on some of the comments, ecology determination, and some other factors that have been discussed
before as being needed.
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 2, 2021 9:03 AM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>; Ann Boeholt
<ann@soundviewconsultants.com>
Cc: andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>; Rives Kitchell
<Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; David W.
Johnson <djohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn, OHW verification and scheduling Public Hearing (MLA21-
00080 Notice of Application/SEPA)
ALERT: BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open attachments or
click on links if you are not expecting them.
Hi Shannen and David,
Thank you for this email. We appreciate any information that will help us make informeddecisions.
We have noticed in some correspondence that our project is referred to as complex. I amcurious if you could elaborate on what portions of our proposal are deemed as such. We aremindful of our project scope and we look to both of you for guidance on how we can bring thisproperty into compliance as well as make it enjoyable destination for the Marrowstonecommunity.
At this time, the focus of our proposal is to renovate the cabins and auxiliary structures intheir existing footprints, as well as bring the septic system into compliance and removevehicular parking from the shoreline. Is anything in our proposal currently consideredquestionable and unlikely to gain approval?
Exhibit 35 - Page 91 of
134
Best regards,
Tori Masterson, Architect
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c.206.354.2619
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2021 10:52 AM
To: Ann Boeholt <ann@soundviewconsultants.com>
Cc: andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>; Tori Masterson
<tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell <Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; John Sampson
<john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; David W. Johnson <djohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn, OHW verification and scheduling Public Hearing (MLA21-
00080 Notice of Application/SEPA)
Ann and Andrew,
There are several factors concerning this. As earlier mentioned, we are not yet ready for a hearing.
This has been a part of the discussion since the beginning. My words were, I can do my best to move
it along as quickly as possible, but best timeline would be six months from date of application. That is
generally best case scenario. Most of these cases take substantially longer, even for individual
residential cases. This is a large proposal.
Additionally, the Jefferson County hearing examiner is retiring and not taking any new complex
cases. We are currently out for bid for a new hearing examiner. This is delaying this process as well.
Due to the concern with the Ecology comment, Jefferson County has not yet reviewed all comments
to determine if any additional information is needed. Regardless of if Ecology says this will affect the
proposal or not, we will not move forward until this comment is addressed with ECY. We do not have
the staff time or availability to veer from this course right now. We will keep you updated.
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: Ann Boeholt <ann@soundviewconsultants.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2021 10:42 AM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>; Tori Masterson
Exhibit 35 - Page 92 of
134
<tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell <Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; John Sampson
<john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Subject: Marrowstone Inn, OHW verification and scheduling Public Hearing (MLA21-00080 Notice of
Application/SEPA)
ALERT: BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open attachments or
click on links if you are not expecting them.
Good Morning Shannon,
In my preparation for our site visit to the Marrowstone Inn property next week Tuesday (November
2, 11:00 am), I was reviewing the e-mail record and was reminded of Ecology’s September 13
Comment “Although this does not affect the proposal, an accurate location of the OHWM will
provide clarity on the extent of shoreline jurisdiction at the site”. In talking with my client, Andrew
Nordstrom, I learned that although you have everything you need for a complete application, you
are holding up the scheduling of the Public Hearing until the OHW is verified.
The OHW is very clear on the ground. We flagged it and that was picked up by Survey, providing the
best mapping accuracy possible. If the OHW as mapped by survey is not appearing to align with an
aerial photograph that Ecology is reviewing, that is likely an issue with the projection of the
photograph, not with the actual on the ground determination of the OHW. Given that and Ecology’s
comment that this is not going to make a difference on the proposal anyhow, we are questioning
why this verification needs to hold up the scheduling of the public hearing.
Can you please provide clarification on this matter?
Thank you very much.
Ann
Ann Boeholt, Senior PWSSenior Environmental Planner
Soundview Consultants LLC
a: 2907 Harborview Drive, Gig Harbor, WA 98335
e: ann@soundviewconsultants.com
w: soundviewconsultants.com
p: 253.514.8952
Exhibit 35 - Page 93 of
134
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2021 8:51 AM
To: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY)
<rebs461@ECY.WA.GOV>
Cc: andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>; Tori Masterson
<tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell <Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Ann Boeholt
<ann@soundviewconsultants.com>
Subject: RE: [External] MLA21-00080 Notice of Application/SEPA
Rebecca,
I forwarded your email on to the representatives and they have some follow up questions. Do you
mind assisting them further?
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2021 1:51 PM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>; Tori Masterson
<tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Rives Kitchell <Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Ann Boeholt
<ann@soundviewconsultants.com>
Subject: RE: [External] MLA21-00080 Notice of Application/SEPA
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when
opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Hi Shannen,
Thanks for looping us in. Do you know what aerial imagery Ecology is referencing? TheOHWM was flagged by our Biologist, Ann, and was surveyed so we are confident theconditions are represented accurately. The projection of aerial imagery can make significantdistortions from the ground conditions but Ann is available to visit the site with Ecology ifneeded. Let us know how we should proceed.
Thanks!
John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
Exhibit 35 - Page 94 of
134
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2021 11:15 AM
To: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; John Sampson
<john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Cc: andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>
Subject: FW: [External] MLA21-00080 Notice of Application/SEPA
Tori and John,
The below email was just received by Ecology. Please review and let me know if you would like
Ecology to work with your biologist on the OHWM location or if you just want your biologist to take a
second look.
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY) <rebs461@ECY.WA.GOV>
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2021 11:11 AM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: RE: MLA21-00080 Notice of Application/SEPA
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when
opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Shannen,
The document labeled “2021 0806_Marrowstone Inn_Appendix E_Proposed Expansions” shows an
OHWM line at the southern portion of parcel #921084011 that is waterward of where it looks like it
should be according to aerial imagery. Although this does not affect the proposal, an accurate
location of the OHWM will provide clarity on the extent of shoreline jurisdiction at the site. This is
important for both the county and the property owners to have on the record. I am available to
make this determination, so please let me know if you would like me to do this.
Exhibit 35 - Page 95 of
134
The bathroom in building B-5 that was constructed without permits may not meet variance criteria,
as there is already reasonable use of the parcel. A bathroom could be constructed internal to the
existing cabin or within the functionally isolated buffer without a variance.
Three entryways are proposed within the shoreline buffer. Can you please tell me whether this is a
building code requirement?
Rebecca Rothwell, MES, PWS
Wetlands Specialist/Shorelands Technical and Regulatory Lead
WA Department of Ecology | desk: 360-407-7273; cell: 360-810-0025
This communication is a public record and may be subject to disclosure per RCW 42.56.
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2021 3:32 PM
To: Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY) <rebs461@ECY.WA.GOV>; Sherrie Shold <SShold@co.jefferson.wa.us>;
Pinky Mingo <pmingo@co.jefferson.wa.us>; Scott Bancroft <Sbancroft@jeffpud.org>; Terry Duff
<TDuff@co.jefferson.wa.us>; John Fleming <JFleming@co.jefferson.wa.us>; DNR RE SEPACENTER
<SEPACENTER@dnr.wa.gov>; SEPA (DAHP) <sepa@dahp.wa.gov>; SEPADesk (DFW)
<SEPAdesk@dfw.wa.gov>; samg@portofpt.com; greg@portofpt.com; eric@portofpt.com;
btracer@ejfr.org; bgraham@jeffpud.org; dsarff@skokomish.org; Stormy Purser
<thpo@pgst.nsn.us>; romac@pgst.nsn.us; crossi@pnptc.org; sbruch@jamestowntribe.org;
thpo@jamestowntribe.org; stodd@Suquamish.nsn.us; Jolivette, Stephanie (DAHP)
<stephanie.jolivette@dahp.wa.gov>; ngauthier@jeffersontransit.com
Cc: lleach@peninsuladailynews.com; jlester@ptleader.com; jmcmacken@peninsuladailynews.com;
jeffconews@peninsuladailynews.com
Subject: MLA21-00080 Notice of Application/SEPA
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL
SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender
AND were expecting the attachment or the link
Good afternoon,
Please see the below notice of Type III Conditional Use, Shoreline Variance and SEPA. Due to the
delay in the email. The comment period has been extended until Monday, October 11, 2021.
All project documents are located here:
https://test.co.jefferson.wa.us/WebLinkExternal/0/fol/3249828/Row1.aspx
JEFFERSON COUNTY PUBLIC NOTICE OF TYPE III LAND USE APPLICATION,
SHORELINE VARIANCE, AND PENDING SEPA DETERMINATIONMLA21‑00080
APPLICANT:
ANDREW NORDSTROM
4014 HUNTS POINT RD
BELLEVUE WA 98004
Application Received Date: August 12, 2021
Exhibit 35 - Page 96 of
134
Application Complete Date: August 23, 2021
Application Notice Date: September 8, 2021
SITE ADDRESS AND PROJECT LOCATION: Parcel #'s: 921084010 and 921084011; S8 T29 R1E TAX NO. 10 (N300') and (LESS
N300'); 10 Beach Drive, Nordland, WA 98358.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND REQUIRED PERMITS/STUDIES:
ZON2021-00049: SMALL SCALE TOURIST AND RECREATION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WITH MAJOR VARIANCE AND SEPA to
bring Marrowstone Inn into conformance as Rural Recreation Lodging and Cabins. The parcels are in total 8.3 acres and per
Jefferson County Code (JCC) 18.20.350(9)(a) requires a variance from the 10‑acre parcel requirement. Additionally, the
applicants are requesting a variance from JCC 18.20.350(9)(b), to allow more than the 6000 square feet of development for
10 acres to accommodate the existing 11 rental cabins totaling 9,097 SF with an additional assembly space, garage with
caretaker’s unit above, and three utility buildings totaling 4,459 SF (excluding the caretaker's residence). The property has
been continuously operated as a grandfathered, non‑conforming beach resort since the 1940s. Part of the proposal includes
renovating and improving the existing structures, upgrading the septic system to meet current commercial standards, the
addition of a sauna, improving existing paths onsite, the addition of more gravel parking, and two "glamping" tents on the
property.
SDP2021-00012: SHORELINE VARIANCE WITH SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT to remodel and renovate
existing non‑conforming cabins. The renovations mostly include lateral, landward development within the shoreline
jurisdiction. Waterward development includes supplying existing non‑conforming cabins 1‑4 with the required septic
transport lines. There are two wetlands on‑site, a category I marine wetland and a category IV wetland, with a 300‑foot and
40‑foot buffer, respectfully. The applicants are requesting an administrative buffer reduction of 25% per JCC 18.22.730 (9).
The entryway of Cabin 2 is proposed to be located waterward of the existing entryway, but will not be the most waterward
portion of the cabin and the entryway to cabin 3 will be relocated to the eastern side of the cabin, a lateral expansion that is
parallel to the shoreline of Oak Bay. The previous unpermitted expansion of a restroom in cabin 5, which the applicants have
requested to keep and upgrade is parallel to the shoreline of Kilisut Harbor and is necessary to provide restroom facilities for
the guests utilizing this cabin. Associated access road improvements and portions of the areas where sewer lines are
proposed are waterward of cabins 1‑4. The septic system has been designed to minimize land disturbance in association with
the onsite contours and conditions. The proposal is the most minimally invasive option to the shoreline and is required to
bring the property into compliance. The proposal is accompanied by a Shoreline, Wetland, Fish and Wildlife Habitat, and
FEMA Floodplain assessment prepared by Soundview Consultants.
COMMENT PERIOD AND WHERE TO VIEW DOCUMENTS:
The application and any studies may be reviewed at the Jefferson County Department of Community Development. All
interested persons are invited to (a) comment on the application; (b) receive notice of and participate in any hearings; and (c)
receive a copy of the decision by submitting such written comment(s)/request(s) to the Jefferson County Department of
Community Development, Development Review Division, 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368, (360)
379‑4450. Comments concerning this application should be submitted to the Department by 4:30 p.m. on October 11, 2021.
If the last day of the comment period falls on a weekend or holiday, then the comment period shall be extended to
the first working day after the weekend or holiday. Comments submitted after this date may not be considered in the staff
report.
SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The optional DNS process of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 197‑11‑355 is
being used. This may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposal. DCD reviewed the
proposal for probable adverse environmental impacts and expects to issue a DNS. This determination is based upon a review
of the SEPA Checklist, project submissions, and other available information. Additional conditions or mitigation measures may
be required under SEPA. The SEPA Official has determined that: This will be the only opportunity to make comments related
to SEPA. There will not be another comment period after the threshold (final) SEPA determination is made. If the threshold
determination is a Determination of Non‑Significance (DNS) or a Mitigated Determination of Non‑Significance (MDNS), parties
of record may appeal the decision to the Hearing Examiner within 14 days of the final Notice of Decision. A Determination of
Significance (DS) may not be appealed to the Hearing Examiner.
Exhibit 35 - Page 97 of
134
PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION:
This is a Type III permit application that is subject to SEPA review. An open record hearing will be scheduled. Separate public
notice of the SEPA threshold (final) determination by the Administrator and the date of the hearing will be provided at least
15 days prior to the hearing. Appeals of the Administrator's threshold decision will be handled at the same hearing. A copy of
the staff report will be made available for inspection at no cost at least seven calendar days prior to such a hearing. The final
permit decision for this Type III permit application will be made by the Hearing Examiner. Decisions of the Hearing Examiner
may not be further appealed except to Superior Court.
APPEALS:
Appeals of SEPA decisions are described above in the SEPA Environmental Review section. The final permit decision for this
Type III permit application will be made by the Hearing Examiner. Decisions of the Hearing Examiner may not be further
appealed except to Superior Court.
Project Planner: Shannen Cartmel, 360‑379‑4450
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW
42.56***
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW
42.56***
Exhibit 35 - Page 98 of
134
From:Shannen Cartmel
To:John Sampson
Cc:Tori Masterson; andrew nordstrom
Subject:RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - Updated Appendix - New Development
Date:Thursday, November 4, 2021 10:59:25 AM
I will officially take it, however, further review will continue after all documents from the additional
information request are fulfilled. I am working on it now and anticipate it will be sent out shortly.
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 4, 2021 10:13 AM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; andrew nordstrom
<andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - Updated Appendix - New Development
ALERT: BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open attachments or
click on links if you are not expecting them.
Hi Shannen, Thanks for the confirmation. Do we need to do anything else to formally submit the revisionor will you add the document we sent to our application? Thanks,John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Wednesday, November 3, 2021 3:10 PM
Exhibit 35 - Page 99 of
134
To: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; andrew nordstrom
<andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - Updated Appendix - New Development
John,
This draft as proposed would not trigger the need for a new notice/comment period. As ECY and Ann
work to determine the appropriate changes for the buffer from the estuary, we can address any
needs that may occur to the parking lot proposal or other affected items.
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 3, 2021 10:16 AM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; andrew nordstrom
<andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>
Subject: Marrowstone Inn - Updated Appendix - New Development
ALERT: BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open attachments or
click on links if you are not expecting them.
Hi Shannen, Following up on our conversation yesterday, I wanted to confirm that updating our AppendixE – Proposed Expansions will not require a new public comment period. The revisions wehave made include only the removal of proposed expansions, including the removal ofproposed new entrances to cabins 2 and 3, the removal of the unpermitted bathroomextension to cabin 5, and the removal of a proposed new entrance to cabin 10. I haveattached the updated version here for your review, let me know if you see anything thatwould require a new public comment period. If not, we will move forward with formallysubmitting this revision. Thanks, John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
Exhibit 35 - Page 100 of
134
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW
42.56***
Exhibit 35 - Page 101 of
134
From:Tori Masterson
To:Shannen Cartmel; andrew nordstrom; John Sampson; Ann Boeholt
Cc:Helena Smith; Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY); dave@hulbertcc.com; Shold Designer; Seth Rodman; Todd Hulbert -
Hulbert Custom Construction (todd@hulbertcc.com); Rives Kitchell
Subject:RE: MLA21-00080 Additional Information Request
Date:Thursday, November 4, 2021 5:22:39 PM
ALERT:BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open
attachments or click on links if you are not expecting them.
Hello Shannen, We have received the additional information requests and have a few questions: Traffic Impact Analysis
Thank you for forwarding to the Owner the TIA Checklist & Appendix C from Public
Works.
We have spoken with multiple traffic engineers who have each responded that the TIA
request is very broad. They would like to know what specifically Public Works is
requiring from the study. They stated that without more specific information they will
have a hard time developing their scope.
Our larger concern is that without a defined scope for the TIA we will not be able to
provide an accurate study that meets the requirements of Public Works on the first
attempt.
Septic
We would like to request more specific information as to what components of the septic
proposal would be disputed in meeting the variance criteria. For example:
Will the gravity-fed waste lines located waterward of cabins be disputed?
(highlighted in yellow below)
Exhibit 35 - Page 102 of
134
Will the septic tank & pump placements lateral of existing shoreline structures
but within the buffers be disputed?
(highlighted in yellow below)
Will the septic lines located laterally of the existing buildings (between the structures)
within the shoreline & wetland buffers be disputed?
(highlighted in yellow below)
Exhibit 35 - Page 103 of
134
Please note that the above diagrams reference the originally proposed OHWM. We
understand that as this is adjusted it will also impact the buffers and setbacks.
Our septic designer has designed the system to minimize the crossing of septic and
water lines. As well, they have used best practices to design a reliable gravity-fedsystem.
During the design phase, the septic designer received input from the biologist,
the civil engineer, and the installer. It was determined by all professional
consultants that crossing water & septic lines was strongly discouraged and that
locating septic tight lines in the buffer was preferred from an environmental
standpoint.
OHWM
We are working with our biologist to evaluate the impacts and timeline for re-
evaluating the OHWM and making the necessary adjustments. Ann will reach out with
any questions.
Thank you again and we look forward to receiving your input. Best regards, Tori Masterson, Architect
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c.206.354.2619
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
Exhibit 35 - Page 104 of
134
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Thursday, November 4, 2021 11:18 AM
To: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; andrew nordstrom
<andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>; John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Ann Boeholt
<ann@soundviewconsultants.com>
Cc: Helena Smith <HSmith@co.jefferson.wa.us>; Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY) <rebs461@ECY.WA.GOV>
Subject: [External] MLA21-00080 Additional Information Request
Good morning,
Please see the attached additional information request. As always, please let me know if you have
any questions. Happy Thursday!
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
Exhibit 35 - Page 105 of
134
From:Ann Boeholt
To:Shannen Cartmel; Tori Masterson; andrew nordstrom; John Sampson
Cc:Helena Smith; Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY)
Subject:RE: MLA21-00080 Additional Information Request
Date:Thursday, November 4, 2021 4:52:55 PM
Attachments:image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
ALERT:BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open
attachments or click on links if you are not expecting them.
Shannen, The following questions have come up regarding interrupted buffers:
While onsite earlier this week, we were discussing the language in JCC18.25.270.4.c for interruptions
of shoreline buffers. i.e. that only lawfully established hardened surfaces or paved roads provide
enough of a disruption to “functionally isolate” from the shoreline or critical areas. But, the
language in the Critical Areas Code is different, and it says “wetland buffers do not include areas that
are functionally and effectively disconnected from the wetland by an existing, legally established
road or another substantial developed surface”. (JCC 18.22.730(6)(b). This does not say anything
about a road needing to be “hardened or anything other than gravel. If gravel is considered
impervious, a gravel road is interrupting many (though obviously not all) buffer functions. How has
the County been implementing this?
Also, would a cabin be a considered an interruption of the buffer? Or just a buffer encroachment?
In other words, if a legally existing non-conforming cabin is within the buffer, does the buffer
continue on the opposite side of the cabin or does the horizontal extent of the buffer at that
location stop at the cabin?
Thank you.
Ann
Ann Boeholt, Senior PWS
Senior Environmental Planner
Soundview Consultants LLC
a: 2907 Harborview Drive, Gig Harbor, WA 98335
e: ann@soundviewconsultants.com
w: soundviewconsultants.com
p: 253.514.8952
Exhibit 35 - Page 106 of
134
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Thursday, November 4, 2021 11:18 AM
To: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; andrew nordstrom
<andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>; John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Ann Boeholt
<ann@soundviewconsultants.com>
Cc: Helena Smith <HSmith@co.jefferson.wa.us>; Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY) <rebs461@ECY.WA.GOV>
Subject: MLA21-00080 Additional Information Request
Good morning,
Please see the attached additional information request. As always, please let me know if you have
any questions. Happy Thursday!
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
Exhibit 35 - Page 107 of
134
From:andrew nordstrom
To:John Fleming; Shannen Cartmel
Subject:Re: FW: Traffic Impact Study: Marrowstone Inn
Date:Thursday, November 4, 2021 2:24:31 PM
ALERT:BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open
attachments or click on links if you are not expecting them.
Shannen and John,
Thank you both for your help.
John my apologies on not cc’ing shannen on the previous email.
Have a great rest of your day.
Regards,
Andy Nordstrom
On Thu, Nov 4, 2021 at 2:17 PM Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us> wrote:
Andrew,
Please see the attached from PW.
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: John Fleming
Sent: Thursday, November 4, 2021 12:57 PM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: FW: Traffic Impact Study: Marrowstone Inn
Exhibit 35 - Page 108 of
134
Hi Shannen:
Applicant Andrew Nordstrom sent me this message, without copy to you.
I have attached information that DCD can share with applicants regarding TIAs.
Public Works does not make recommendations to applicants regarding who to hire for
consulting engineering.
Thank you,
John
All e-mail sent to this address has been received by the Jefferson County e-mail system and is therefore subject to
the Public Records Act, a state law found at RCW 42.56.
From: andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 4, 2021 11:49 AM
To: John Fleming <JFleming@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: Traffic Impact Study: Marrowstone Inn
ALERT: BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open
attachments or click on links if you are not expecting them.
Dear John Fleming,
Hope your having a good day.
Exhibit 35 - Page 109 of
134
My name is Andy and I am the owner/operator of Marrowstone Inn located at 10 Beach
Drive, Nordland WA.
Our public comment period resulted in a couple requests for a traffic impact analysis (TIA).
The next steps for the project is to have a TIA prepared.
I am sure you are quite busy at the moment but wanted to reach out to you for further
insight. Are there any third party engineers that the county recommends and preferred
format of TIA?
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Regards,
Andy Nordstrom
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW
42.56***
Exhibit 35 - Page 110 of
134
From:John Sampson
To:Shannen Cartmel
Cc:Tori Masterson; andrew nordstrom
Subject:RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - Updated Appendix - New Development
Date:Thursday, November 4, 2021 10:13:40 AM
ALERT:BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open
attachments or click on links if you are not expecting them.
Hi Shannen, Thanks for the confirmation. Do we need to do anything else to formally submit the revisionor will you add the document we sent to our application? Thanks,John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Wednesday, November 3, 2021 3:10 PM
To: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; andrew nordstrom
<andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: [External] Marrowstone Inn - Updated Appendix - New Development
John,
This draft as proposed would not trigger the need for a new notice/comment period. As ECY and Ann
work to determine the appropriate changes for the buffer from the estuary, we can address any
needs that may occur to the parking lot proposal or other affected items.
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
Exhibit 35 - Page 111 of
134
From: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 3, 2021 10:16 AM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; andrew nordstrom
<andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>
Subject: Marrowstone Inn - Updated Appendix - New Development
ALERT: BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open attachments or
click on links if you are not expecting them.
Hi Shannen, Following up on our conversation yesterday, I wanted to confirm that updating our AppendixE – Proposed Expansions will not require a new public comment period. The revisions wehave made include only the removal of proposed expansions, including the removal ofproposed new entrances to cabins 2 and 3, the removal of the unpermitted bathroomextension to cabin 5, and the removal of a proposed new entrance to cabin 10. I haveattached the updated version here for your review, let me know if you see anything thatwould require a new public comment period. If not, we will move forward with formallysubmitting this revision. Thanks, John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
Exhibit 35 - Page 112 of
134
From:John Fleming
To:Brent Butler
Cc:Amanda Hunt; Shannen Cartmel
Subject:Traffic Impact Studies/ CRAB Mobility Discussion
Date:Monday, November 8, 2021 2:47:25 PM
Attachments:Stubbed Attachments.htm
This message's contents have been archived by the Barracuda Message Archiver.
JC Ordinance 04 0702 07.pdf (2.4M)
JC Ordinance 08 0710 06 Attachment - Chapter 18 30 Development Stds.pdf (179.8K)
JC Ordinance 08 0710 06.pdf (224.1K)
Jefferson Comp Plan 12-2018 Appendix C Transportation Tech Doc.pdf (4.0M)
Traffic Impact Analysis Checklist.pdf (125.6K)
Hi Brent:
Good to meet with you, Shannen and Amanda today.
Please see below and attached for items I have shared with them recently.
Sincerely,
John Fleming PE
Public Works
Development Review Engineer
ODT Project Manager
360-301-6563 cell
360-385-9217 desk
360-385-9160 main
From: John Fleming
Sent: Thursday, November 4, 2021 10:58 AM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: FW: GoToMeeting Invitation - Traffic Impact Studies/ CRAB Mobility Discussion
Hi Shannen:
Regarding the “Traffic Impact Studies/ CRAB Mobility Discussion”
Topics of Discussion:
1. When are Traffic Impact Analysis Reports required?
The attached checklist is PW’s guide for when to request a TIA.
Please see the first section “Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Required?” with thresholds for 5
characteristics checked.
2. When is CRAB Mobility analysis appropriate to be the only traffic analysis completed for a
project?
When the above TIA checklist’s 5 characteristics are below the thresholds given.
Exhibit 35 - Page 113 of
134
3. Safety vs Road Service Issues
4. Non-motorized transportation LOS
5. Transportation Section of Comprehensive Plan
Relevant JCC chapter 18.30.020 (5) General Development Standards:
(5) All land use activities shall be served by appropriate transportation facilities. Transportation
facilities shall be adequate to meet the level of service standards adopted in the Jefferson County
Comprehensive Plan and the appropriate design standards referenced in JCC 18.30.080(1)(a). If
transportation facilities would become inadequate, the applicant shall be required to provide
necessary improvements and/or implement alternative measures such as transportation demand
management (TDM), project phasing, or other measures acceptable to Jefferson County that will
maintain the adopted level of service standards and meet design standards. If transportation
facilities are not adequate, Jefferson County shall not approve the proposed development.
Transportation facilities shall be deemed adequate if necessary improvements are planned and
designated funding is secured in the Jefferson County Six-Year Transportation Improvement
Program. [Ord. 4-07 § 2; Ord. 8-06 § 1]
I have attached the BOCC ordinances that helped shape the current Jefferson County Code, so you
can see when “Level of Service “ made it into the code, as a threshold for acceptability for traffic on
roads.
Thank you,
John
-----Original Appointment-----
From: John Fleming
Sent: Wednesday, November 3, 2021 3:33 PM
To: Amanda Hunt
Subject: Accepted: GoToMeeting Invitation - Traffic Impact Studies/ CRAB Mobility Discussion
When: Monday, November 8, 2021 1:30 PM-2:00 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada).
Where: GTM
Hi Amanda:
I am assuming this is in response to the email I have sent you on
1. October 1, 2021 at 10:01 am regarding SEPA comments
2. October 21, 2021 at 3:30 pm regarding CRAB etc.
3. October 26, 2021 at 12:07 pm regarding pre-app comments for traffic
If so, then I believe I am informed enough to participate in the meeting.
If not, do you want to send more information to clarify what I will be contributing to the meeting?
Thank you,
John
Exhibit 35 - Page 114 of
134
From:Ann Boeholt
To:Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY)
Cc:andrew nordstrom; Tori Masterson; John Sampson; Shannen Cartmel
Subject:RE: Marrowstone Inn Ordinary High Water Mark
Date:Wednesday, November 10, 2021 5:55:13 PM
Attachments:Stubbed Attachments.htm
This message's contents have been archived by the Barracuda Message Archiver.
LiDAR OHW Exhibit.pdf (356.9K)
Madrone.jpg (10.5M)
Shoreline OHW 11.10.21.pdf (2.1M)
ALERT:BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open
attachments or click on links if you are not expecting them.
Thank you Rebecca. Of course. Understood! Yes, I could make the 18th work. I prefer first thing in
the morning. I’d like to be able to leave there at 10:00 if possible. Meanwhile, and since the water
level will be lower that week than this week, here are some photos you might find interesting.
These photos were taken this morning, during the high tide which was confirmed to be 9.48 feet at
Port Townsend. The Port Townsend MHHW is 8.52 feet, so this was roughly a foot above MHHW
and getting pretty close to where one would expect OHW to be.
Kilisut Harbor, it is a low energy marine environment. In a low energy marine environment, one
would NOT expect wave run-up and such. To the south, it is a high energy marine environment.
Because of this simple condition, one would expect the OHW on the high energy marine shoreline to
be higher than along the low energy marine shoreline. Furthermore, the waters coming into Kilisut
Harbor on an incoming tide are from the north. Whereas, coming into Oak Bay, the waters must
circle around Marrowstone Island or funnel through Portage Canal. This is significant because the
nearest tidal datum station to the southern tip of Marrowstone Island is across the water, over at
Bush Point, and the nearest tidal datum station to the north is Port Townsend. See below:
Exhibit 35 - Page 115 of
134
Per the NOAA tidal datum station, we learn that the MHHW at Port Townsend is .83 feet lower than
the MHHW at Bush Point (9.35 feet relative to MLLW). So, one could also expect from this alone
that the OHW of a shoreline closer to Bush Point would be around 1 foot higher (give or take) than
the OHW of a shoreline closer to Port Townsend. Add to this the additional high energy wave runup
along the shoreline of Oak Bay, and you would expect the OHW along Oak Bay to be substantially
higher than that within Kilisut Harbor. That is what we are finding and what the photos taken today
illustrate.
My research supports SVC’s initial OHW mark for the most part, but I would agree that in a few
places the OHW could be moved slightly further landward. It would not be correct to move the
OHW to the landward edge of the American dune grass (by the large Pacific madrone) as you
contemplated last week. See the additional photo taken today of that area attached. Look close to
see your pink flag—well landward of the water level. Note that American dunegrass is not a good
indicator of the OHW in a low energy marine environment. Ian Hutchinson only guessed at its salt
tolerance and did state that it should be considered carefully.
Exhibit 35 - Page 116 of
134
Ann
Ann Boeholt, Senior PWSSenior Environmental Planner
Soundview Consultants LLC
a: 2907 Harborview Drive, Gig Harbor, WA 98335
e: ann@soundviewconsultants.com
w: soundviewconsultants.com
p: 253.514.8952
From: Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY) <rebs461@ECY.WA.GOV>
Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2021 4:35 PM
To: Ann Boeholt <ann@soundviewconsultants.com>
Subject: RE: Marrowstone Inn Ordinary High Water Mark
Hi Ann,
My husband just had rotator cuff surgery, and I need to be here to assist him while he recovers. I
think by next week I should be able to leave him home alone to do a site visit. I’m available on
Thursday the 18th. Would that work for you?
Rebecca Rothwell, MES, PWS
Wetlands Specialist/Shorelands Technical and Regulatory Lead
WA Department of Ecology | desk: 360-407-7273; cell: 360-810-0025
This communication is a public record and may be subject to disclosure per RCW 42.56.
From: Ann Boeholt <ann@soundviewconsultants.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2021 3:13 PM
To: Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY) <rebs461@ECY.WA.GOV>
Subject: Marrowstone Inn Ordinary High Water Mark
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL
SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND
were expecting the attachment or the link
Hello Rebecca,
I have been following up our site visit with some good research. I am awaiting site photos taken
Exhibit 35 - Page 117 of
134
during this morning’s high tide which was above MHHW and likely was very close to where OHW is
expected to be.
I wanted to check on your availability to head back up there together to formally re-stake the OHW.
Tomorrow is rather short notice, but I could make it work, or possibly Friday afternoon?
Ann
Ann Boeholt, Senior PWSSenior Environmental Planner
Soundview Consultants LLC
a: 2907 Harborview Drive, Gig Harbor, WA 98335
e: ann@soundviewconsultants.com
w: soundviewconsultants.com
p: 253.514.8952
Exhibit 35 - Page 118 of
134
From:John Sampson
To:Shannen Cartmel
Cc:andrew nordstrom; Tori Masterson
Subject:RE: [External] MLA21-00080 Additional Information Request
Date:Monday, November 15, 2021 5:06:22 PM
Attachments:image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
ALERT:BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open
attachments or click on links if you are not expecting them.
Hi Shannen, In our efforts to move forward with the TIA, we have gotten two bids for the work. Because ofthe lack of clarity on the requirements or focus of the TIA, the bids came back withconsiderably different proposed scopes and fees. Do you have any more information fromPublic Works on what the focus of the TIA should be? For reference, the proposed scopes ofeach bid are listed below. Please let us know if one or both of these proposed scopes wouldsatisfy the county requirements. Proposal 1 ANTICIPATED WORK TASKSTask 1. Trip Generation. This task includes forecasting the number of net new tripsgenerated by the proposaland based on the project description above. Subtasks include preparing preliminary trafficdistribution and peakhour assignments.Task 2. Verify Scope with Jefferson County. This task includes verifying the scope of thetraffic impact analysiswith County staff, based on the output from Task 1. This task includes establishing the studymethodology,verifying the study area, and understanding other critical traffic needs to address or focus onin the trafficimpact analysis. Task 3. Field Investigation. This task includes a field investigation to review the existing siteand current trafficconditions. Field measurements will be made to assess pavement widths and sightlines at thesite access and atkey locations in the study area.Task 4. Collect Data. This task includes collecting traffic volume data int eh study area andadjusting that databased on time-of-year and COVID-19 impacts on traffic. The intent is to confirm theadjustment factors withcounty staff. The cost estimate assumes collection of afternoon (4-6 PM) peak hourintersection turningmovement volumes at up to 3 intersections. Data collection subtasks also include compiling acrash history andevaluating crash trends and future impacts.Task 5. Vehicle Circulation. This task includes using design vehicle templates to assessphysical vehicle impacts
Exhibit 35 - Page 119 of
134
on Robbins Road and on the site. Subtasks include plotting vehicle turn-diagrams on curvedsection of RobinsRoad northeast of the resort and also reviewing the onsite circulation and sightlines.Task 6. Traffic Operations. This task includes evaluating traffic conditions and levels-of-service in the study areaand the resort access.Task 7. Traffic Impact Analysis Report. This task includes compiling the findings from aboveinto a traffic impactanalysis report for your submittal to the county Proposal 2
project coordination via e-mail and phone
inspect the site and roads near the site
review community comments
conduct site Trip Generation estimate using national data: proposed - existing
obtain readily available traffic volume data for roads near the site
inspect 5-years of accident data obtained from the WSDOT near the site
conduct operational/safety inspection
respond to community comment in the Transportation Memorandum
prepare and electronically submit a draft Transportation Memorandum to the team
for feedback
incorporate team feedback, presumed to be minor and my final internal edits
finalize, sign and electronically submit the Traffic Update Letter to the team for
submittal to Jefferson County
Thanks,John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Friday, November 5, 2021 6:37 PM
To: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; andrew nordstrom
<andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>; John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Ann Boeholt
<ann@soundviewconsultants.com>
Cc: Helena Smith <HSmith@co.jefferson.wa.us>; Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY) <rebs461@ECY.WA.GOV>;
dave@hulbertcc.com; Shold Designer <designer@cottonshold.com>; Seth Rodman
<seth@zenovic.net>; Todd Hulbert - Hulbert Custom Construction (todd@hulbertcc.com)
<todd@hulbertcc.com>; Rives Kitchell <Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Subject: RE: [External] MLA21-00080 Additional Information Request
Exhibit 35 - Page 120 of
134
Tori,
I will be having a meeting with public works next week. I can attempt to gain more information from
public works. The concerns to address some of the neighbors comments would be safety and traffic
increase from the use. While the use has had a historical similar operation, it has been abandoned
for some time, if it is restored, it is likely to expect traffic increase from tourists.
Regarding the septic, there is nothing specifically that I foresee being disputed. Its actually a matter
of proving there are no alternatives. It is part of the variance criteria in Jefferson County Code (JCC)
18.25.580 (1-6).
18.25.580 Variance permit criteria.
(1) The purpose of a variance is to grant relief to specific bulk or dimensional requirements set
forth in this program where there are extraordinary or unique circumstances relating to the
property such that the strict implementation of this program would impose unnecessary hardships
on the applicant/proponent or thwart the policies set forth in RCW 90.58.020. Use restrictions may
not be varied. In authorizing a variance, special conditions may be attached to the permit by the
county or the Department of Ecology to control any undesirable effects of the proposed use. Final
authority for variance permit decisions shall be granted by the Department of Ecology.
(2) Variances will be granted in any circumstance where denial would result in a thwarting of the
policy enumerated in RCW 90.58.020. In all instances extraordinary circumstances shall be
shown and the public interest shall suffer no substantial detrimental effect.
(3) Variances may be authorized, provided the applicant/proponent can demonstrate all of the
following:
(a) That the strict application of the bulk or dimensional criteria set forth in this program
precludes or significantly interferes with a reasonable permitted use of the property;
(b) That the hardship described above is specifically related to the property, and is the result
of conditions such as irregular lot shape, size, or natural features and the application of this
program, and not, for example, from deed restrictions or the applicant’s/proponent’s own
actions;
(c) That the design of the project will be compatible with other permitted activities in the area
and will not cause adverse effects on adjacent properties or the shoreline environment;
(d) That the variance authorized does not constitute a grant of special privilege not enjoyed
by the other properties in the area, and will be the minimum necessary to afford relief;
(e) That the public interest will suffer no substantial detrimental effect;
(f) That the public rights of navigation and use of the shorelines will not be materially
interfered with by the granting of the variance; and
(g) Mitigation is provided to offset unavoidable adverse impacts caused by the proposed
Exhibit 35 - Page 121 of
134
development or use.
(4) In the granting of all variances, consideration shall be given to the cumulative environmental
impact of additional requests for like actions in the area. For example, if variances were granted to
other developments in the area where similar circumstances exist, the total of the variances
should also remain consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58.020 and should not produce
significant adverse effects to the shoreline ecological functions and processes or other users.
(5) Other factors that may be considered in the review of variance requests include the
conservation of valuable natural resources and the protection of views from nearby roads,
surrounding properties and public areas. In addition, variance requests based on the
applicant’s/proponent’s desire to enhance the view from the subject development may be granted
where there are no likely detrimental effects to existing or future users, other features or shoreline
ecological functions and/or processes, and where reasonable alternatives of equal or greater
consistency with this program are not available. In platted residential areas, variances shall not be
granted that allow a greater height or lesser shore setback than what is typical for the immediate
block or area.
(6) Permits and/or variances applied for or approved under other county codes shall not be
construed as shoreline permits under this program. [Ord. 7-13 Exh. A (Art. IX § 5)]
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 4, 2021 5:13 PM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>; andrew nordstrom
<andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>; John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Ann Boeholt
<ann@soundviewconsultants.com>
Cc: Helena Smith <HSmith@co.jefferson.wa.us>; Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY) <rebs461@ECY.WA.GOV>;
dave@hulbertcc.com; Shold Designer <designer@cottonshold.com>; Seth Rodman
<seth@zenovic.net>; Todd Hulbert - Hulbert Custom Construction (todd@hulbertcc.com)
<todd@hulbertcc.com>; Rives Kitchell <Rives@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Subject: RE: MLA21-00080 Additional Information Request
ALERT: BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open attachments or
click on links if you are not expecting them.
Hello Shannen, We have received the additional information requests and have a few questions:
Exhibit 35 - Page 122 of
134
Traffic Impact Analysis
Thank you for forwarding to the Owner the TIA Checklist & Appendix C from Public
Works.
We have spoken with multiple traffic engineers who have each responded that the TIA
request is very broad. They would like to know what specifically Public Works is
requiring from the study. They stated that without more specific information they will
have a hard time developing their scope.
Our larger concern is that without a defined scope for the TIA we will not be able to
provide an accurate study that meets the requirements of Public Works on the first
attempt.
Septic
We would like to request more specific information as to what components of the septic
proposal would be disputed in meeting the variance criteria. For example:
Will the gravity-fed waste lines located waterward of cabins be disputed?
(highlighted in yellow below)
Will the septic tank & pump placements lateral of existing shoreline structures
but within the buffers be disputed?
(highlighted in yellow below)
Exhibit 35 - Page 123 of
134
Will the septic lines located laterally of the existing buildings (between the structures)
within the shoreline & wetland buffers be disputed?
(highlighted in yellow below)
Please note that the above diagrams reference the originally proposed OHWM. We
understand that as this is adjusted it will also impact the buffers and setbacks.
Our septic designer has designed the system to minimize the crossing of septic and
Exhibit 35 - Page 124 of
134
water lines. As well, they have used best practices to design a reliable gravity-fed
system.
During the design phase, the septic designer received input from the biologist,
the civil engineer, and the installer. It was determined by all professional
consultants that crossing water & septic lines was strongly discouraged and that
locating septic tight lines in the buffer was preferred from an environmental
standpoint.
OHWM
We are working with our biologist to evaluate the impacts and timeline for re-
evaluating the OHWM and making the necessary adjustments. Ann will reach out with
any questions.
Thank you again and we look forward to receiving your input. Best regards, Tori Masterson, Architect
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c.206.354.2619
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Thursday, November 4, 2021 11:18 AM
To: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; andrew nordstrom
<andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>; John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Ann Boeholt
<ann@soundviewconsultants.com>
Cc: Helena Smith <HSmith@co.jefferson.wa.us>; Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY) <rebs461@ECY.WA.GOV>
Subject: [External] MLA21-00080 Additional Information Request
Good morning,
Please see the attached additional information request. As always, please let me know if you have
any questions. Happy Thursday!
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
Exhibit 35 - Page 125 of
134
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
Exhibit 35 - Page 126 of
134
From:John Sampson
To:Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY); Shannen Cartmel
Cc:Helena Smith; Racheal Villa; Tori Masterson; andrew nordstrom
Subject:RE: [External] MLA21-00080 Additional Information Request
Date:Tuesday, January 25, 2022 1:23:57 PM
Attachments:Stubbed Attachments.htm
This message's contents have been archived by the Barracuda Message Archiver.
Revised Marrowstone Inn Shoreline, Wetland, and FEMA Floodplain Assessment Report January 2022 .pdf (8.1M)
ALERT:BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open
attachments or click on links if you are not expecting them.
Shannen and Rebecca, Please see attached report revised to include the additional updates requested. Thanks!John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
From: Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY) <rebs461@ECY.WA.GOV>
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2022 12:03 PM
To: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Shannen Cartmel
<SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: Helena Smith <HSmith@co.jefferson.wa.us>; Racheal Villa
<racheal@soundviewconsultants.com>; Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; andrew
nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: [External] MLA21-00080 Additional Information Request
Hi John,
Thank you for including the information about how we came to a final determination of the OHWM
in Appendix D. Can you please include a statement about the November 18 follow-up site visit for
the OHWM determination in two places:
1. The third paragraph of the executive summary
2. The first paragraph of the methods section (chapter 3).
Exhibit 35 - Page 127 of
134
These statements should also direct the reader to Appendix D for more information.
Thanks!
Rebecca Rothwell, Shoreline Planner
WA Department of Ecology | desk: 360-407-7273; cell: 360-810-0025
This communication is a public record and may be subject to disclosure per RCW 42.56.
From: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2022 10:26 AM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: Helena Smith <HSmith@co.jefferson.wa.us>; Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY) <rebs461@ECY.WA.GOV>;
Racheal Villa <racheal@soundviewconsultants.com>; Tori Masterson
<tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: [External] MLA21-00080 Additional Information Request
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE THE WASHINGTON STATE EMAIL
SYSTEM - Take caution not to open attachments or links unless you know the sender AND
were expecting the attachment or the link
Hi Shannen, See attached for our updated wetland and shoreline report as requested by Rebecca. Pleaselet us know what the next steps are in order to get on the calendar for a hearing as quickly aspossible. Thanks! John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2022 9:42 AM
To: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Cc: Helena Smith <HSmith@co.jefferson.wa.us>; Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY) <rebs461@ECY.WA.GOV>;
Racheal Villa <racheal@soundviewconsultants.com>; Tori Masterson
<tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: [External] MLA21-00080 Additional Information Request
Exhibit 35 - Page 128 of
134
John,
Yes our hearing examiner has been selected. Once you submit the final 2 documents, I will begin
further review and we can hold a meeting if desired to go over anything else needed, clarifications,
and next steps.
The application review and staff report will take a significant amount of time, but we can evaluate it
at that time and then talk about when scheduling a hearing would be appropriate.
As a heads up, I do believe we are running low on hourly fees left for review, I will get back to you on
this once you submit the final documents.
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2022 6:21 PM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: Helena Smith <HSmith@co.jefferson.wa.us>; Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY) <rebs461@ECY.WA.GOV>;
Racheal Villa <racheal@soundviewconsultants.com>; Tori Masterson
<tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: [External] MLA21-00080 Additional Information Request
ALERT: BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open attachments or
click on links if you are not expecting them.
Hi Shannen, We have heard through the grapevine that a new hearing examiner was hired! That’s greatnews. We will have our updated wetland and shoreline report ready to submit within thenext couple of days. Once that is submitted and barring any other comments on your end, Ibelieve we should be ready to get on the calendar for a hearing. Can you let us know theexpected timeline for that hearing? Thanks,John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
Exhibit 35 - Page 129 of
134
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Wednesday, January 5, 2022 1:07 PM
To: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Cc: Helena Smith <HSmith@co.jefferson.wa.us>; Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY) <rebs461@ECY.WA.GOV>;
Racheal Villa <racheal@soundviewconsultants.com>; Tori Masterson
<tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: [External] MLA21-00080 Additional Information Request
Thank you John. I will begin to look through it next week. Given Rebecca’s email, once I have a
chance to review the new submittal, we can look at scheduling a meeting to discuss any concerns.
Have a great rest of the week!
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
From: John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>
Sent: Monday, January 3, 2022 3:42 PM
To: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Cc: Helena Smith <HSmith@co.jefferson.wa.us>; Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY) <rebs461@ECY.WA.GOV>;
Racheal Villa <racheal@soundviewconsultants.com>; Tori Masterson
<tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; andrew nordstrom <andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: MLA21-00080 Additional Information Request
ALERT: BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open attachments or
click on links if you are not expecting them.
Hi Shannen, Please see attached for our response to the request for information from 11.04.2021 as well asupdated drawings and diagrams that reflect the changes made. Included is the requestedTraffic Impact Analysis, Septic justification, clarification re: OHWM, and the removal of theinterrupted buffer from our proposal. Please let me know if there is anything else I can provide or if I can answer any questions.
Exhibit 35 - Page 130 of
134
Thanks,John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
From: Shannen Cartmel <SCartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Sent: Thursday, November 4, 2021 11:18 AM
To: Tori Masterson <tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; andrew nordstrom
<andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com>; John Sampson <john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com>; Ann Boeholt
<ann@soundviewconsultants.com>
Cc: Helena Smith <HSmith@co.jefferson.wa.us>; Rothwell, Rebecca (ECY) <rebs461@ECY.WA.GOV>
Subject: [External] MLA21-00080 Additional Information Request
Good morning,
Please see the attached additional information request. As always, please let me know if you have
any questions. Happy Thursday!
Respectfully,
Shannen Cartmel
Lead Associate Planner
Jefferson County Community Development
scartmel@co.jefferson.wa.us
360-379-4454
***Email may be considered a public record subject to public disclosure under RCW 42.56***
Exhibit 35 - Page 131 of
134
From:John Sampson
To:Shannen Cartmel
Subject:Marrowstone - Updates
Date:Monday, February 14, 2022 9:47:57 AM
ALERT:BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open
attachments or click on links if you are not expecting them.
Hey Shannen, Just wanted to check in and see if there is any update now that the requested documentswere submitted. I’m trying to get a general sense of where we are with the process and whatwe can generally expect moving forward so I can set some expectations for Andy (hearingdate, other concerns about the project/applications, etc). Feel free to give me a call if it’seasiest to just talk through. Thanks!John Sampson
HOEDEMAKER PFEIFFER LLC
6113 13th Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
206.545.8434 c. 509.551.6647
www.hoedemakerpfeiffer.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient
and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged information, as well as content subject to copyright and other
intellectual property laws. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, copy, or distribute this e-mail
message or its attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail message in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail.
Exhibit 35 - Page 132 of
134
From:andrew nordstrom
To:Helena Smith
Cc:john@Hoedemakerpfeiffer.com; tori@hoedemakerpfeiffer.com; Shannen Cartmel; Barbara Ehrlichman;
Degginger, Grant; Shold Designer; Racheal Villa; <dave@hulbertcc.com>
Subject:Re: Scheduling Public Hearing for MLA21-00080 Marrowstone Inn Proposal
Date:Thursday, February 17, 2022 9:18:10 AM
ALERT:BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open
attachments or click on links if you are not expecting them.
Dear Helena,
Thank you for your email. My team and i are incredibly excited to start moving forward with
the permitting process.
I have cc’d additional members of my team to weigh in on the date, time and their availability.
If there are no other available dates towards the end of March or early April that are not on a
Tuesday then we will be available for the current time provided on April 19th from 1:00 to
5:00pm. We are eager to move into the next stage of the permit process and will be flexible if
earlier dates are available. Let me know what we can do on our end to help with this process
and moving forward.
In the meantime is the staff report and recommendation completed? If so let me know when
we can access this to prepare for the hearing. Additionally will the hearing still be held over
video or will it be in person?
I so appreciate your help.
Sincerely,
Andy Nordstrom
c. 206-650-3573
andrewlnordstrom@gmail.com
On Feb 17, 2022, at 8:33 AM, Helena Smith <HSmith@co.jefferson.wa.us>
wrote:
Good morning,
My name is Helena Smith and I am emailing as clerk for the Jefferson County Hearing
Examiner.
The Marrowstone Inn conditional use permit application and shoreline variance
application will be reviewed by the Hearing Examiner in a public hearing.
As an involved party, I am contacting you to learn your availability for the hearing.
Would you be available for a public hearing on April 19th from 1:00PM to 5:00PM?
Exhibit 35 - Page 133 of
134
Please let me know if you can attend. If you cannot attend, please provide several
alternate days in April. I will keep you updated on hearing scheduling.
Sincerely,
<image001.png>
H Smith, MPP
Planning Technician
Jefferson County Community Development
621 Sheridan St., Port Townsend, WA 98368
Mon-Thurs 9am - 4:30pm, closed from 12-1
Ph: 360-379-4484
http://www.co.jefferson.wa.us
DCD will maintain limited customer interaction and recommends scheduling an
appointment to meet with staff. DCD will no longer be accepting building
applications by drop off or mail, you must schedule an appointment with front
staff to submit. A mask and social distancing is required.
Please visit our website https://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/dcd to see how we can best
serve you during this time.
Email: dcd@co.jefferson.wa.us
Phone: 360-379-4450
Mail: 621 Sheridan St.; Port Townsend, WA 98368
All e-mail sent to this address has been received by the Jefferson County e-mailsystem and is therefore subject to the Public Records Act, a state law found atRCW 42.56. Under the Public Records law the County must release this e-mail andits contents to any person who asks to obtain a copy (or for inspection) of this e-mail unless it is also exempt from production to the requester according to statelaw, including RCW 42.56 and other state laws.
Exhibit 35 - Page 134 of
134