HomeMy WebLinkAboutMLA21-00080 Approval, Marrowstone Inn
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DECISION – APPROVING SHORELINE VARIANCE
AND OTHER PERMITS FOR RENOVATION OF THE
MARROWSTONE INN PROPERTY –
FILE NO. MLA21-00080
Page 1 of 26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
JEFFERSON COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
621 SHERIDAN STREET
PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368
Before Hearing Examiner
Gary N. McLean
BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER
FOR JEFFERSON COUNTY
Application for a Type III Shoreline
Variance with a Shoreline Substantial
Development Permit, and a Type III
Conditional Use Permit with Major
Variance from certain use standards,
submitted by
EXTEND YOURSELF LLC –
ANDREW NORDSTROM,
Applicant
(Location: An existing legal non-conforming beach
resort comprised of cabins and other structures
generally known as “The Marrowstone Inn” on two
parcels addressed as 10 Beach Drive on
Marrowstone Island, in unincorporated Jefferson
County)
_______________________________
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
File Nos. MLA21-00080
SDP21-000012
ZON21-00049
FINDINGS OF FACT,
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DECISION APPROVING
REQUESTED PERMITS
I. SUMMARY OF DECISION.
The requested applications satisfy all applicable approval criteria and merit approval,
subject to conditions.
The proposed project is subject to compliance with all applicable development,
design, building code, engineering, and other regulations, including without limitation those
requiring verification of performance, inspections, monitoring, and maintenance associated
with conditions or mitigation measures that might be imposed consistent with this Decision
or any subsequent approval, or authorization issued by any state agency or county department
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DECISION – APPROVING SHORELINE VARIANCE
AND OTHER PERMITS FOR RENOVATION OF THE
MARROWSTONE INN PROPERTY –
FILE NO. MLA21-00080
Page 2 of 26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
JEFFERSON COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
621 SHERIDAN STREET
PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368
with jurisdiction over a particular aspect of the Project as on-site work unfolds.
II. BACKGROUND.
The applicant acquired the shoreline properties that are the subject of this Decision at
some point in 2019. (Applicant’s Hearing Memorandum, page 3). There is no dispute in this
record that the property is generally known as “The Marrowstone Inn”, and that the site has
been used as a resort for many years, since the 1940’s, rendering the structures and use as
‘grandfathered’, with legal non-conforming status as provided in applicable County codes
and policies, including JCC 18.20.260. (Staff Report, pages 1, 3; App. Memo, page 3). There
is also no dispute that use of the property as a resort and its existing buildout precedes by
decades the 10-acre minimum and 6,000 square foot maximum buildout for small-scale
tourist and recreational use found in current County codes, including without limitation JCC
18.20.350(9)(a) and JCC 18.20.350(1)(q). (App. Memo, page 3; Staff Report, pages 1, and
22-29).
The purpose of the pending applications is to authorize renovations on the property,
including improvements to buildings and infrastructure on the site, large portions of which
are located in the County’s designated Shoreline jurisdiction.
While not fully addressed in the Staff Report, the County’s Unified Development
Code allows for consolidation of associated permit applications and approvals, where the
Administrator (Community Development Director) exercises discretion to refer what might
otherwise be a Type II or other type of decision made by the Director or a staff member to
the Hearing Examiner, who considers all consolidated applications under the County’s Type
III public hearing and review process, or when the applicant determines that they would like
multiple applications for approvals to be processed collectively. (See Staff Report, pages 23-
24; JCC 18.40.520(2)(a)(i); and JCC 18.40.030(2))1. Accordingly, the pending Shoreline
applications – which are already Type III permits – have been reviewed with and are issued
in this consolidated Decision, approving the Shoreline permits as well as the associated
County Conditional Use Permit and Major Variance from use standards. To the extent the
applicant’s request for an otherwise “administrative” wetland buffer reduction (not more than
25% reduction authorized by JCC 18.22.730(9)) for one aspect of the project is meant to be
incorporated as part of this Decision, the Examiner finds and concludes that the wetland
1 JCC 18.40.030(2) reads as follows: “Optional Consolidated Permit Processing. An application that involves
two or more procedures may be processed collectively under the highest numbered procedure required for any
part of the application or processed individually under each of the procedures identified by this code. The
applicant may determine whether the application shall be processed collectively or individually. If the
application is processed under the individual procedure option, the highest numbered type procedure must be
processed prior to the subsequent lower numbered procedure.”
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DECISION – APPROVING SHORELINE VARIANCE
AND OTHER PERMITS FOR RENOVATION OF THE
MARROWSTONE INN PROPERTY –
FILE NO. MLA21-00080
Page 3 of 26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
JEFFERSON COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
621 SHERIDAN STREET
PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368
buffer reduction request merits approval as part of this Decision. In the alternative, if it is the
County’s position that the Director has already exercised authority to grant the buffer
reduction request, then such determination is hereby ratified and confirmed as part of this
Decision.
There is no dispute that this project requires a Type III Shoreline Variance with a
Shoreline Conditional Use Permit, assigned application file no. SDP-00012; as well as a
Conditional Use Permit with a Major Variance, assigned application file no. ZON2021-
00049, all of which have been combined under master file no. MLA21-00080 and are subject
to public notice, public hearing, and a decision by the Jefferson County Hearing Examiner.
The project also required a separate State Environmental Protection Act (“SEPA”) review,
which resulted in a Determination of Non-Significance, which was not appealed.
Jurisdiction of Hearing Examiner.
The County Code vests the Hearing Examiner with authority to hear and issue
decisions on applications for Type III land use decisions. (See JCC 18.40.040, explaining
Project permit application framework, Table 8-1, types of permits, decisions required, and
Table 8-2, showing final decision made by the Hearing Examiner on Type III land use
matters).
III. RECORD.
All exhibits entered into evidence as part of the record, and an audio recording of the
public hearing, are maintained by the County, and may be examined or reviewed by
contacting the County’s public records officer.
Exhibits:
Staff Report, recommending approval subject to conditions, prepared by Project
Planner Shannen Cartmel, dated May 11, 2022, repeated as Ex. 52 in the following
exhibit list prepared by Staff:
Exhibit
Number Item
0 Exhibit Log Item List
1 Pre-Application Materials
2 Permit Application
3 Conditional Use Permit Supplemental Application
4 Variance Permit Supplemental Application
5 Shoreline Supplemental Application
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DECISION – APPROVING SHORELINE VARIANCE
AND OTHER PERMITS FOR RENOVATION OF THE
MARROWSTONE INN PROPERTY –
FILE NO. MLA21-00080
Page 4 of 26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
JEFFERSON COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
621 SHERIDAN STREET
PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368
6 Marrowstone Inn Timeline Narrative Appendix A
7 Marrowstone Inn Size +Height Narrative Appendix B
8 Marrowstone Inn Septic Plan Appendix C
9 Marrowstone Inn Land Area Calculation Appendix D
10 Marrowstone Inn Proposed Expansions Appendix E
11 Marrowstone Inn Restoration Plan Appendix F
12 Cultural Resource Survey (Confidential)
13 Marrowstone Inn Survey
14 Marrowstone Inn Stormwater Civil Plan
15 Marrowstone Inn Site Plan
16 SEPA Checklist
17 JARPA Application
18 JARPA Application Attachment C
19 Marrowstone Inn Shoreline, Wetland, and FEMA Floodplain Assessment
20 Determination of Completeness
21 Notice of Application Materials
22 MLA21-00080 Public Comments
23 MLA21-00080 Additional Information Request
24 Marrowstone Additional Information Request Response
25 Revised Marrowstone Inn Survey
26 Revised Marrowstone Inn Civil Plan
27 Revised Marrowstone Inn Site Plan
28 Revised Marrowstone Inn Appendix E Proposed Expansions
29 Re-Revised Marrowstone Inn Appendix E Proposed Expansions
30 Revised Marrowstone Inn Septic Plan
31 MLA21-00080 SEPA Determination Marrowstone and associated documents-emails
32 Revised Marrowstone Inn Shoreline, Wetland, and FEMA Floodplain Assessment
Report January 2022
33 Emails within County
34 Revised Marrowstone Inn Sewer Line Justification
35 Emails with Applicant
36 Emails with Ecology
37 Marrowstone Inn Traffic Impact Analysis and Public Works Review
38 Emails with Public Works - Traffic
39 Email with East Jefferson Fire and Rescue
40 General Emails
41 Emails Requesting Change to Appendix E
42 Agency SEPA-Notice of Application Comments
43 Emails Scheduling Public Hearing
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DECISION – APPROVING SHORELINE VARIANCE
AND OTHER PERMITS FOR RENOVATION OF THE
MARROWSTONE INN PROPERTY –
FILE NO. MLA21-00080
Page 5 of 26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
JEFFERSON COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
621 SHERIDAN STREET
PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368
44 Hearing Notice Materials for 4-6-2022
45 Emails Regarding Decision to Reschedule Initial Hearing
46 Rescheduled Hearing Notice Materials for 4-12-2022
47 Rescheduled Hearing Notice Materials for 5-11-2022
48 Emails Regarding Staff Report Review with Applicant
49 Emails Regarding Staff Report Progress
50 Emails Regarding Additional Information
51 OSS Site Plan
52 MLA21-00080 Final Marrowstone Inn Staff Report
53 Canterbury Public Hearing Comment
54 Marrowstone Inn Applicant Hearing Presentation 5-26-2022 (slides)
55 Applicant’s Hearing Memorandum, submitted by Applicant’s counsel, Grant S.
Degginger, dated May 19, 2022
Testimony: The public hearing for this matter was conducted using an online audio/video
platform coordinated by County staff, accessible to parties and members of the public using
sign-in details provided in public notices. The following persons provided testimony under
oath as part of the record during the open-record hearing held on May 26, 2022:
1. Shannon Cartmel, Project Planner, prepared Staff Report and served as the primary Staff
representative through the public hearing, for Jefferson County Department of Community
Development;
2. Grant Degginger, attorney for the applicant, submitted a credible and thorough Hearing
Memorandum now included in the record as Ex. 55, coordinated testimony from various
professionals and the applicant, accepted the Staff Report analysis and recommended
conditions with limited requests for corrections or changes; coordinated responses from
applicant consultants to address questions or comments made during course of the public
hearing;
3. Tori Masterson, project architect for the applicant, presented slides highlighting aspects of the
project, shoreline considerations, improvements proposed, summary of how the project
should be of benefit to environmental conditions in the area, partly by reducing impervious
surface areas, improving/updating septic infrastructure serving the site;
4. Rachel Hyland, applicant’s wetland consultant, summarized how project includes aspects that
will ensure no net loss of shoreline functions or values, including without limitation
reductions in impervious surface areas on the site, removing old septic system and
replacement with new septic system infrastructure designed to meet current requirements and
located mostly outside shoreline jurisdiction (in contrast with current system), how
revegetation of areas on the site should be of benefit to the environment;
5. Andrew “Andy” Nordstrom, the applicant, explained his personal and family fondness for the
area, his commitment to being a good neighbor, his plans to live and work on the property;
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DECISION – APPROVING SHORELINE VARIANCE
AND OTHER PERMITS FOR RENOVATION OF THE
MARROWSTONE INN PROPERTY –
FILE NO. MLA21-00080
Page 6 of 26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
JEFFERSON COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
621 SHERIDAN STREET
PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368
6. Joyce Bush, local resident, requested clarification about restaurant proposed on the site;
7. Kathleen Waldron, long-time local resident, expressed her support for the project, how she
believes it will benefit the environment;
8. Bud Ayres, community member, noted how fire hydrant included in project will improve
emergency service capabilities in the area, sees the project as a big plus for the community;
9. Carol Gonnella, local resident, says current site is an eyesore, new septic system will be good
for area, feels project will benefit the island;
10. Jim Neurenberg, community member, fully supportive of the project, spoke highly of the
applicant, believes the project will better the site and will be a very welcome development on
the island;
11. Terese Grace, local resident, expressed general concerns about traffic problems, conflicts
between car traffic, kids and cyclists; general questions about use of shed, timeline and staging
for construction workers and materials;
12. Doug Moore, community member, expressed his full support for the project, sees it as nothing
but a net benefit with respect to ecology, health and the like.
13. Helen Stusser, longtime local property owner/resident, spoke highly of the applicant, fully
supports the project.
Site Visit: The Examiner personally visited the project site and roadways in the vicinity,
stopping to take in vistas above and across water onto applicant’s property.
IV. FINDINGS OF FACT.
Based on the record, and following consideration of all the evidence, testimony,
codes, policies, regulations, and other information included therein, the undersigned issues
the following findings of fact:
1. All statements of fact included in previous or following sections of this Decision,
including without limitation those included in the Background summary, that are deemed to
be findings of fact are incorporated by reference into this section as findings of fact issued by
the Hearing Examiner.
2. The applicant and property owner in this matter is a legal entity known as Extend
Yourself LLC, represented by its managing member, Andrew Nordstrom. The applicant
acquired the properties addressed in this Decision at some point in 2019. (Application forms;
App. Hearing Memo, on page 3).
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DECISION – APPROVING SHORELINE VARIANCE
AND OTHER PERMITS FOR RENOVATION OF THE
MARROWSTONE INN PROPERTY –
FILE NO. MLA21-00080
Page 7 of 26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
JEFFERSON COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
621 SHERIDAN STREET
PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368
3. Applicant owns two adjacent parcels of property at 10 Beach Drive on Marrowstone
Island, in the far northeast corner of unincorporated Jefferson County, Washington. Access
to the property is off Beach Drive, a county road. The two parcels, numbered 921084010 and
921084011, total 8.3 acres and front two water bodies: Oak Bay and the estuary between
Oak Bay and Scow Bay (with the estuary area and Scow Bay sometimes described in file
materials and maps as part of Kilisut Harbor). Pictures of the site and a copy of the proposed
site plan are found in Exhibit 6 (Appendix A) and Exhibit 27 (site plan). For the reader’s
convenience, a copy of the site plan is republished below:
(Proposed Site Plan, Ex. 27).
4. There is no dispute that the two parcels have been used as a resort, and that buildings
and uses on the site predate most all County development regulations as well as State and
County Shoreline codes and policies. There is also no dispute that the use and structures on
the site qualify as legal nonconforming uses/structures, generally meaning that they are
“grandfathered” or deemed to have ‘legacy’ status, allowed to continue in place. Proposed
modifications, expansions, and the like, to legal nonconforming uses or structures are
commonly subject to appropriate review and approvals set forth in current County codes and
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DECISION – APPROVING SHORELINE VARIANCE
AND OTHER PERMITS FOR RENOVATION OF THE
MARROWSTONE INN PROPERTY –
FILE NO. MLA21-00080
Page 8 of 26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
JEFFERSON COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
621 SHERIDAN STREET
PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368
state law.2
5. The purpose of the pending applications is to authorize the applicant to move forward
with plans to update buildings and infrastructure on the property, bringing them into
compliance with current codes and environmental standards so that the property can continue
operations as a small-scale resort and tourism venue. (App. Memo, page 3; Testimony of
applicant witnesses; Ex. 54, applicant’s hearing presentation slides).
6. The Staff Report explains that the applicant’s property is an existing legal non-
conforming, grandfathered use as a beach resort (considered a “Small-Scale Tourist and
Recreation Use”), operated since the 1940s. The property consists of ten cabins ranging in
size from 265-1123 SF (7 cabins are one-story and 3 cabins are two-story, a 2,302 SF two
story Lodge, an 850 SF garage, a 605 SF barn, and two small utility buildings (263 SF and
439 SF). (Staff Report, pages 1 and 3). The ten existing cabins and other primary structures
on the applicant’s property are shown on the following aerial overview, included as part of
Ms. Masterson’s hearing presentation:
2 The Washington Supreme Court has long held that a landowner does not “vest” to the entire code at the time
a use is established, but that only the use itself is vested and a landowner must still comply with subsequent
changes to the land use code not involving that specific use. Rhod-A-Zalea v. Snohomish County, 136 Wn.2d 1,
at 6-7; 959 P.2d 1024 (1998); favorably discussed in King County Dep't of Dev. & Envtl. Servs. v. King County,
177 Wn.2d 636, 305 P.3d 240 (2013).
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DECISION – APPROVING SHORELINE VARIANCE
AND OTHER PERMITS FOR RENOVATION OF THE
MARROWSTONE INN PROPERTY –
FILE NO. MLA21-00080
Page 9 of 26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
JEFFERSON COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
621 SHERIDAN STREET
PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368
(Ex. 54, slide 8, page 9 of 40).
7. The property is currently served by two private driveways off Beach Drive as well as
a gravel road through the property known as Resort Road which takes the form of a single
loop encircling the Lodge building. Parking spaces are currently located in various spots
along Resort Road and adjacent to cabins, including some that are within applicable shoreline
buffers. (Staff Report, page 3).
8. Upland vegetation onsite is dominated by a mix of mowed lawn areas and patches of
trees and shrubs throughout. A larger forested/ shrub patch exists along the western property
boundary. Vegetation within the forested / shrub areas of the site is dominated by Pacific
Crabapple (Malus fusca), Scouler’s Willow (Salix scouleriana), English Hawthorne
(Crataegus monogyna), Nootka Rose (Rosa nutkana), and non-native invasive Himalayan
Blackberry (Rubus armeniacus). Understory and herbaceous vegetation throughout the
remainder of the site is dominated by Colonial Bentgrass (Agrostis capillaris), Tall Fescue
(Schedonorus arundinaceus), and Soft Rush (Juncus effusus). Id.
9. The parcels are zoned as Rural Residential 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres (RR 1:5), which
is the same as the designation assigned to the site in the County’s Comprehensive Plan. (Staff
Report, pages 3 and 5).
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DECISION – APPROVING SHORELINE VARIANCE
AND OTHER PERMITS FOR RENOVATION OF THE
MARROWSTONE INN PROPERTY –
FILE NO. MLA21-00080
Page 10 of 26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
JEFFERSON COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
621 SHERIDAN STREET
PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368
10. The Staff Report explains that about 5-acres of the applicant’s property is within the
County’s shoreline jurisdiction, with several shoreline designations applied to parts of the
property in various locations explained on page 4 of the Staff Report.
Project Description.
11. The full scope and details of the improvements proposed by the applicant are
specified in the application materials and consultant reports that are included as part of the
record. The applicant’s Hearing Memorandum (Ex. 55), prepared by counsel, Mr. Degginger,
and the slide presentation (Ex. 54) provided during the public hearing by the applicant’s
architect, Ms. Masterson, clearly and credibly summarize the main aspects of the renovations
and updates proposed as part of this project, with portions of such exhibits summarized in
some of the following findings of fact.
12. The applicant credibly describes this proposal in two parts: A) Modernizing Existing
Structures; and B) Environmental Protection and Infrastructure Improvements, as set forth
below:
A. Modernizing Existing Structures.
1. Existing Cabins. All of the cabins will be updated within their existing footprints, with the
exception of small landward expansions of Cabin 3 (to relocate a doorway to comply with
building code height requirements) and Cabin 5 (to move a bathroom installed by a previous
owner without a permit away from the shoreline to the east side of the cabin, a permitted
landward expansion).3
2. The Lodge. The lodge will be modernized, a new commercial kitchen will be installed, all
within the existing footprint. The stairway from the deck will be moved to the west side in
order to provide accessible restrooms on the east side of the building. The restaurant will
have a rated capacity for 51 guests. The restaurant only will be available for guests of the
Marrowstone Inn. (noted in Applicant’s Hearing Memo, and reiterated in response to
comments provided by Mr. Degginger during public hearing).
3. Replacement of three-bedroom mobile home with three one-bedroom cabins. The three-
bedroom mobile home will be removed and replaced by three stick building cabins within
the same footprint. The three one-bedroom cabins are referred to as “studios” on the site
plan, Exhibit 28. Each cabin will have a bathroom.
3 The Staff Report at page 2 contains the following statement regarding Cabin 5: “The previous owner’s
unpermitted expansion of a restroom in cabin 5 is proposed to remain and be permitted through this shoreline
permit as a landward expansion to the shoreline of Kilisut Harbor and is envisioned as restroom facilities for
the guests utilizing this cabin.” The applicant clarified that he intends to move the bathroom from its current
location, landward to the east side of the cabin, so that it is further from the shoreline. This relocation is depicted
in Exhibit 28. (App. Hearing Memo, page 4, fn. 3).
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DECISION – APPROVING SHORELINE VARIANCE
AND OTHER PERMITS FOR RENOVATION OF THE
MARROWSTONE INN PROPERTY –
FILE NO. MLA21-00080
Page 11 of 26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
JEFFERSON COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
621 SHERIDAN STREET
PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368
4. Yurts. The only other new structures will be two “glamping” yurts and a sauna outside of
the shoreline jurisdiction. Occupants of the yurts will use the bathroom facilities contained
in the lodge.
The existing three-bedroom mobile home on the site has a footprint of 2,066 square feet with
a 612 square foot deck. The total footprint of the three new cabins and the two yurts will be
less than the footprint of the existing mobile home, with each cabin expected to be between
450 and 600 square feet and the two yurts being approximately 250-300 square feet each.
The sauna will be approximately 150-200 square feet. Thus, the total footprint of the
structures following development will be11,371 square feet including decks for the 10
cabins, three “studio” cabins, and two yurts, and 4,520 square feet including decks for the
lodge, garage, barn, equipment shed, utility shed, and the new sauna with the increase in
square footage coming from the modest expansion of select cabin decks outside of the
shoreline buffer. The project will result in only a negligible increase in the existing footprint
of all site structures – 638 square feet.
B. Environmental Protection and Infrastructure Improvements.
There will be major improvements to the property’s infrastructure that will significantly
improve environmental quality, public safety both on and off the site and the visual
appearance of the development.
1. Septic System Improvements. The septic system serving the existing plumbed cabins
including those in the shoreline jurisdiction will be removed and replaced by a new system
with expanded capacity (2580 GPD) located upland with all components other than
transmission lines outside of the shoreline zone, wetlands and wetland buffers. The studio
cabins, and penthouse caretaker’s space will be served by the existing 480 GPD system
currently serving the three- bedroom mobile home. The lodge and restaurant will be served
by a new, 500 GPD septic system. Locations and layouts of the new septic systems are
depicted in Exhibit 30. The removal of the old septic systems near the shoreline will improve
water quality in the shoreline zone and within the wetlands and wetland buffers.
2. Removal of Four Existing Wells and Replacement with Domestic Water Supply from
Jefferson County PUD. Four existing domestic wells will be decommissioned and the
Applicant will bring domestic water from the Jefferson County PUD to service the site.
Decommissioning the four wells will protect aquifer recharge areas from depletion and
further protect critical areas.4 The wells serving the cabins were in a listed Saltwater
Intrusion Zone.
3. Fire Hydrant Installation. The Applicant will install a fire hydrant on the property,
improving fire and life safety for guests and nearby residents. East Jefferson Fire & Rescue
commented that the construction of the fire hydrant is a significant improvement for fire
4 In several places, the Staff Report states that the property has three wells that will be removed. The applicant
clarified that the property currently has four wells, all of which will be removed. The locations of the wells are
depicted in Exhibit 30.
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DECISION – APPROVING SHORELINE VARIANCE
AND OTHER PERMITS FOR RENOVATION OF THE
MARROWSTONE INN PROPERTY –
FILE NO. MLA21-00080
Page 12 of 26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
JEFFERSON COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
621 SHERIDAN STREET
PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368
service in the area, that it will improve the area’s fire insurance rating and lower fire
insurance premiums for nearby residents. Exhibit 52 at p. 14.
4. Removal of impervious surfaces. The Applicant will remove 8,853 square feet of
impervious surface on the property including over 4,000 square feet of impervious surface
in the shoreline zone. Exhibit 11.
5. Restoration in the shoreline jurisdiction and buffer. The Applicant will restore the area
where the septic tanks are removed and septic lines are installed. Exhibit 30.
6. Construction of a new gravel parking area further upland. There will be a new gravel
parking lot containing 30 on-site spaces located in the northeast portion of the property that
will keep vehicles out of the shoreline zone. The parking area will be landscaped and
screened from nearby residents. Three accessible parking spaces will be provided. The
parking lot layout is depicted in Exhibit 27. The lot will feature landscaping and dark sky
lighting to minimize impacts to neighbors.
Applications at issue in this hearing process.
13. As noted above, there is no dispute that this project requires a Type III Shoreline
Variance with a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit, assigned application file no. SDP-00012;
as well as a Conditional Use Permit with a Major Variance, assigned application file no.
ZON2021-00049; and, while not assigned a separate file number, the underlying proposal
also seeks approval of an administrative buffer reduction of 25% for one wetland (Wetland
“A”) from 300 feet to 225 feet.5 All of these applications for approval have been combined
under master file no. MLA21-00080 and are subject to public notice, public hearing, and a
decision by the Jefferson County Hearing Examiner. As explained below, the project also
required a separate State Environmental Protection Act (“SEPA”) review, which resulted in
a Determination of Non-Significance, which was not appealed.
Notices, Comments, SEPA review.
14. The Staff Report summarizes the application review and public noticing provided in
connection with this matter, verifying that applicable notice requirements were satisfied for
this public hearing process. (Staff Report, pages 5-6; Exhibits 21, 31, 44, 46, 47, notices and
confirmation materials).
15. Written comments from various agencies, neighboring property owners, and
interested members of the public are all included as part of the record, as credibly summarized
on pages 8-11 of the Staff Report. The Applicant correctly noted that most comments
5 See Staff Report, page 2, where buffer reduction request is identified in summary of Shoreline permit
applications; and Applicant’s Hearing Memo on page 1, where buffer reduction is expressly requested as part
of this consolidated application.
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DECISION – APPROVING SHORELINE VARIANCE
AND OTHER PERMITS FOR RENOVATION OF THE
MARROWSTONE INN PROPERTY –
FILE NO. MLA21-00080
Page 13 of 26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
JEFFERSON COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
621 SHERIDAN STREET
PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368
received by the County were positive. (Ex. 55, page 6).
16. Upon consideration of all application materials, consultant reports on relevant issues
prepared by qualified professionals, SEPA comments from agencies and individuals, and the
SEPA Checklist prepared for this proposal (Ex. 16), Staff issued a SEPA Determination of
Non-Significance (DNS) for the project on or about March 29, 2022. (Staff Report, page 5;
Ex. 31, DNS). Although the SEPA DNS expressly informed readers that such threshold
determination was subject to appeal as provided in applicable County codes and due no later
than April 12, 2022, no one did so. (Staff Report, page 5). By operation of WAC 197-11-
545 (re: Effect of no comment), if a consulted agency does not respond with written
comments within the time periods for commenting on environmental documents, the lead
agency may assume that the consulted agency has no information relating to the potential
impact of the proposal as it relates to the consulted agency's jurisdiction or special expertise;
further, lack of comment by other agencies or members of the public on environmental
documents within the applicable time period shall be construed as lack of objection to the
county’s environmental analysis.
18. Again, the record establishes that the DNS was not appealed – JCC 18.40.330
provides that a SEPA threshold determination like the DNS issued for this project may be
appealed within 14 days of issuance. Thus, the County’s SEPA determination for this
proposal stands unchallenged for purposes of considering this application.
19. During the public hearing, and in several written comments, some individuals
expressed general concerns about traffic problems that might arise in connection with this
proposal. None of the traffic comments were supported by reports or testimony from
qualified transportation professionals comparable to those relied upon by the applicant and
County staff, particularly those who prepared the traffic study and report included in the
record as Exhibit 37. The recommendations and analysis in the traffic study were not
rebutted.
20. None of the limited public comments questioning or challenging aspects of the project
were supported by professional reports or studies of comparable weight to those submitted
by the applicant or relied on by County officials, nor were they supported by credible
evidence to establish that the project will result in any significant adverse impacts of the sort
that require additional mitigation beyond that included in the SEPA DNS or the conditions
of approval recommended in the Staff Report. No one offered sufficient credible testimony
or evidence at any point through the public hearing process that would serve as a basis to
require additional environmental review, to add additional conditions or mitigation measures,
or to deny the requested permits and approvals addressed in this Decision.
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DECISION – APPROVING SHORELINE VARIANCE
AND OTHER PERMITS FOR RENOVATION OF THE
MARROWSTONE INN PROPERTY –
FILE NO. MLA21-00080
Page 14 of 26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
JEFFERSON COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
621 SHERIDAN STREET
PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368
Comprehensive Plan.
21. The unrebutted Staff Report and the applicant’s Hearing Brief credibly summarize
and explain how the applicant’s proposal is consistent with and implements multiple goals
and policies found in the County’s Comprehensive Plan. (Staff Report, analysis and findings
on pages 12-19; Ex. 55, pages 7-8).
Unified Development Code provisions applicable to this proposal.
22. The Examiner finds and concludes that the Staff Report analysis and findings
explaining how the pending proposal has been designed to, or can be conditioned to, comply
with applicable provisions of the County’s Unified Development Code, was not rebutted by
any credible testimony or evidence in this record. (See Staff Report, pages 19-32).
Shoreline Master Program policies and regulations.
23. The Examiner finds and concludes that the Staff Report analysis and findings
explaining how the pending proposal has been designed to, or can be conditioned to, comply
with applicable provisions of the County’s Shoreline Master Program, was not rebutted by
any credible testimony or evidence in this record. (See Staff Report, pages 33-38).
Buffer Reduction Request.
24. The Staff Report, on page 2, explains that here are two wetlands on-site, a category I
marine wetland and a category IV wetland, with a 300-foot and 40-foot buffer, respectively.
The applicant requests an administrative buffer reduction of 25% as allowed by JCC
18.22.730(9), making the wetland buffer 225 feet, rather than 300 feet. The credible
explanation justifying this limited request is summarized on page 2 of the Staff Report, and
is addressed in the Shoreline, Wetland, Fish and Wildlife Habitat, and FEMA Floodplain
Assessment prepared by Soundview Consultants (Habitat Assessment) for this project (Ex.
32), a portion of which is reprinted below:
“SVC investigated, delineated, and assessed potentially-regulated wetlands, waterbodies,
fish and wildlife habitat, and/or priority habitats or species within 300 feet of the subject
property in December 2020 and March and April 2021. Using current methodology, the site
investigations identified two potentially regulated wetlands (Wetlands A and B), and two
marine shorelines (Kilisut Harbor and Oak Bay). Wetland A is classified as a Category I
estuarine wetland and Wetland B is classified as a Category IV wetland. Wetland A is subject
to a standard 300-foot buffer and Wetland B is subject to a standard 50-foot buffer, based on
the proposed high intensity land use. However, these wetland buffers may be reduced to 225
feet and 40 feet, respectively, with the implementation measures to minimize wetland
impacts and with the protection of a vegetated corridor between the wetland and a priority
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DECISION – APPROVING SHORELINE VARIANCE
AND OTHER PERMITS FOR RENOVATION OF THE
MARROWSTONE INN PROPERTY –
FILE NO. MLA21-00080
Page 15 of 26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
JEFFERSON COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
621 SHERIDAN STREET
PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368
habitat or relatively undisturbed area, is established. Wetlands A and B and portions of the
project site along the shorelines of Kilisut Harbor and Oak Bay are also subject to the
Jefferson County Shoreline Master Program (JCSMP). All marine shorelines, regardless of
the shoreline environment designation (SED), are subject to a standard 150-foot shoreline
buffer and an additional 10-foot shoreline structure setback.” (Ex. 32, page 3, Shoreline,
Wetland, Fish and Wildlife Habitat, and FEMA Floodplain Assessment for the Marrowstone
Inn, prepared by qualified professionals with Soundview Consultants, Revised Jan. 24,
2022).
25. Based on a preponderance of evidence in the record, including without limitation the
Staff Report and Ex. 32, and testimony from applicant’s witnesses, the Examiner finds and
concludes that the applicant has satisfied all applicable approval criteria to obtain approval
of his requested buffer reduction noted above.
Conditional Use Permit and Major Variance.
26. The Staff Report, the application materials, the SEPA checklist and unchallenged
DNS, and supporting expert consultant reports including the Habitat Assessment (Ex. 32), all
comprise far more than a preponderance of unrebutted evidence showing how this application
meets all applicable approval criteria for the requested Conditional Use Permit and Major
Variance approval. There is no evidence in this record that would serve as a basis to deny
such applications.
27. As explained in the applicant’s Hearing Memo (Ex. 55), JCC 18.20.350(9) sets out
the standards for rural recreation lodging or cabins for overnight rental and conference retreat
facilities. The applicant’s conditional use permit and major variance application seeks relief
from two provisions in the standards. First, JCC 18.20.350(9)(a) requires a 10-acre minimum
lot size, but the applicant’s property is only 8.3 acres; and Second, JCC 18.20.350(9)(b) limits
the facilities to 6,000 square feet of gross floor area for fifteen built cabins or bedrooms for
overnight lodging up to a maximum of 30 rooms or cabins comprising no more than 12,000
square feet of total building area over the entire site, excluding a caretaker’s or manager’s
residence. The Staff Report states that the total building area of the existing tourist units,
assembly lodge space, garage and utility buildings, is 12,951 square feet. (Staff Report, at
page 27), whereas the applicant’s Hearing Memo notes that: “[t]he calculation in the staff
report may have understated the current building area by not including decks spaces and
barn. The figure 12,951 square feet refers to the building areas of all the structures including
preliminary proposed changes less the deck spaces and barn. The Applicant’s figures of
existing and proposed building areas including decks is [addressed in the Hearing Memo]”.
(Ex. 55, page 8, fn 5).
28. The applicant’s proposed building additions will total only 638 square feet – just
about 4 percent more than the existing building area. The 638 square feet of proposed
additions are comprised of 71 square feet of landward expansion within the shoreline, 198
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DECISION – APPROVING SHORELINE VARIANCE
AND OTHER PERMITS FOR RENOVATION OF THE
MARROWSTONE INN PROPERTY –
FILE NO. MLA21-00080
Page 16 of 26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
JEFFERSON COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
621 SHERIDAN STREET
PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368
square feet of expansion outside of the 150’ shoreline buffer but within the 225’ reduced
wetland buffer, and 369 square feet of deck expansions outside of the shoreline management
zone. There is no dispute that the applicant complies with the other requirements of JCC
18.20.350(9), or that the proposal also complies with JCC 18.20.350(10) allowing rural
restaurants subordinate to primary recreational uses. As noted during the public hearing in
response to questions from the public, the restaurant will serve only guests of the Inn – not
the general public – and will be limited to 51-seats, including outdoor seating to comply with
EPH septic system limitations. (Testimony of applicant witnesses; Ex. 55, pages 8-9).
29. Based on a preponderance of credible evidence in the record, the Examiner finds and
concludes that the applicant has satisfied all approval criteria for the requested Conditional
Use permit, including without limitation the 12 criteria set forth in JCC 18.40.530. (See Staff
Report, analysis and findings on pages 24-29; and Applicant’s Hearing Memo, on pages 9-
12).
30. Based on a preponderance of credible evidence in the record, the Examiner finds and
concludes that the applicant has satisfied all approval criteria for the requested Major
Variance, including without limitation the 6 criteria set forth in JCC 18.40.650. (See Staff
Report, all analysis and findings; and Applicant’s Hearing Memo, on pages 12-14).
Shoreline Permits.
31. There is a preponderance of credible and unrebutted evidence in the record and
application materials to demonstrate that no net loss of shoreline ecological functions will
occur as a result of this project, satisfying applicable Shoreline regulations, including without
limitation JCC 18.25.270(2). (See Staff Report on pages 16, 18, 23, and 33, which reads in
relevant part as follows:
The applicant submitted a shoreline, wetland, fish and wildlife habitat, and FEMA floodplain
assessment, completed by Soundview Consultants (Ex. 32). The proposed site restoration
and removal of portions of the impervious surface ensures no-net loss of shoreline functions
and processes. The removal includes the decommissioning and removal of the current septic
drainfield located within the buffer of one of the wetlands and Kilisut Harbor area to a portion
of the parcel completely outside the 200’ foot shoreline jurisdiction area. The proposal also
aims to reduce gravel areas by consolidating designated paths and access roads. The area of
new disturbance is minimal and will only remove landscaped grass. These combined actions
will reduce the overall footprint of impervious surfaces within the shoreline jurisdiction by
4,638 SF and improve hydrologic and water quality functions associated with Wetlands A
and B, Kilisut Harbor, and Oak Bay. The proposed parking areas and new access paths will
increase impervious surfaces on- site; however, the new impervious surfaces are located
entirely outside of the critical area buffers and shoreline setback. The applicant proposes
informal native landscaping. The addition of native trees and shrubs throughout the site will
slow surface runoff, provide increased filtration for sediments and pollutants before runoff
reaches the identified critical areas, and will increase habitat onsite for a variety of wildlife
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DECISION – APPROVING SHORELINE VARIANCE
AND OTHER PERMITS FOR RENOVATION OF THE
MARROWSTONE INN PROPERTY –
FILE NO. MLA21-00080
Page 17 of 26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
JEFFERSON COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
621 SHERIDAN STREET
PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368
species. BMPs and TESC measures will be incorporated throughout the duration of the
project to minimize and avoid construction impacts on the identified critical areas. As
conditioned to comply with this report, the project is consistent with No Net Loss
requirements.”
32. Based on this record, and as conditioned below, there is no evidence and an absence
of legal authority to support denial of the requested shoreline substantial development permit
or shoreline variance. No one offered testimony or written comments that would refute the
analysis and findings regarding the project’s compliance and consistency with relevant
Shoreline Codes, plans and policies, Comprehensive Plan Polices, or County development
regulations, as set forth in the Staff Report issued for this project. An unrebutted
preponderance of evidence in the record fully supports the analysis, findings, and
recommended conditions contained in the Staff Report. Additional conditions have been
added by the Examiner, all of which are supported by evidence in the record.
33. A preponderance of credible evidence in the record, including without limitation the
analysis provided in the Staff Report, and the DNS issued for the project without any appeal,
establishes that the applicant has met his burden to prove that the pending application satisfies
all criteria for approval of a Substantial Development Permit, including without limitation
those found in applicable county codes, the Shoreline Management Act (“SMA”, see RCW
90.58.140), and state Shoreline regulations (WAC 173-27-150). Based on the record,
including all findings included in this Decision, the Examiner finds and concludes that the
applicant’s proposal and Shoreline Substantial Development Permit application is consistent
with: all applicable policies and procedures of the SMA; applicable provisions of state and
County Shoreline regulations; and applicable provisions of the County’s Shoreline Master
Program. Accordingly, the requested Shoreline Substantial Development Permit merits
approval, subject to conditions included as part of this Decision that are necessary to assure
consistency of the applicant’s project with the SMA and the County’s Shoreline Master
Program.
34. As explained by the applicant, although the failing septic system tanks and drain field
service the Cabins located in the shoreline jurisdiction and wetland buffers will be removed
as part of this project, the applicant requires a shoreline variance to permit the new septic
system transmission lines to be located within the shoreline jurisdiction and wetland buffers.
The variance also is necessary to allow the relocation of the entry door to Cabin 3 (a landward
expansion) and the relocation of the bathroom in Cabin 5 to the landward side of the unit.
The changes total 60 square feet, and are depicted on the drawing located in Exhibit 28. The
carports in Cabins 3 and 4 which will be enclosed landward and all within the existing
building footprint. Once the new lines are installed, the disturbed area will be restored.
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DECISION – APPROVING SHORELINE VARIANCE
AND OTHER PERMITS FOR RENOVATION OF THE
MARROWSTONE INN PROPERTY –
FILE NO. MLA21-00080
Page 18 of 26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
JEFFERSON COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
621 SHERIDAN STREET
PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368
35. Based on a preponderance of evidence in the record, and all findings set forth in other
portions of this Decision, the Examiner finds and concludes that the Applicant has satisfied
the seven criteria for approval of a shoreline variance, including without limitation those set
forth in JCC 18.25.580. (See Staff Report, analysis and findings on pages 33-38; Applicant’s
Hearing Memo, pages 15-16).
36. All findings, statements of fact, and analysis provided in the unrebutted Staff Report
and the Applicant’s Hearing Memo (Ex. 55) are incorporated herein as findings of fact by the
undersigned hearing examiner, except as modified herein.
37. Consistent with authority granted in County and State regulations, the Examiner has
conditioned approval of the applicant’s project to make the proposal consistent with the
County’s shoreline master program and to mitigate or avoid potential adverse impacts.
V. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW.
1. The record includes a preponderance of evidence establishing that the pending
applications consolidated in this hearing process all satisfy applicable approval criteria and
merit approval, subject to conditions.
2. As conditioned, professional design recommendations and environmental reports
show that the requested shoreline permits and other associated permits and approvals will not
result in any net loss of shoreline ecological functions. The requested permits are fully
supported by evidence in the record and meet all applicable approval criteria. Following
notice of the application and DNS issued for the project, there were no appeals of the SEPA
threshold determination issued for this proposal. Therefore, the requested permits should be
approved.
3. Any finding or other statement contained in a previous section of this Decision that is
deemed to be a Conclusion of Law is hereby adopted as such and incorporated by reference.
VI. DECISION.
Based upon the preceding Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, evidence
presented through the course of the open record hearing, all materials contained in the
contents of the record, and the Examiner’s site visits to the area, the undersigned Examiner
APPROVES the Type III Shoreline Variance with a Shoreline Substantial Development
Permit, assigned application file no. SDP-00012; the associated request for a wetland buffer
reduction; as well as a Conditional Use Permit with a Major Variance, assigned application
file no. ZON2021-00049, all of which have been combined under master file no. MLA21-
00080, for the Marrowstone Inn renovation project, subject to the following Conditions of
Approval:
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DECISION – APPROVING SHORELINE VARIANCE
AND OTHER PERMITS FOR RENOVATION OF THE
MARROWSTONE INN PROPERTY –
FILE NO. MLA21-00080
Page 19 of 26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
JEFFERSON COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
621 SHERIDAN STREET
PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. This approval is for a Type III Conditional Use Permit approval is for an expansion of a
nonconforming Rural Recreational Lodging and Cabin small-scale recreational and tourist use,
generally known as the “Marrowstone Inn”, with a major variance from required development
requirements and a rural restaurant only, located at 10 Beach Drive on Marrowstone Island, on
two parcels, numbered 921084010 and 921084011, totaling about 8.3 acres in size. Any future
changes or modifications in uses, operations, facilities, or activities, or reviews for future permits
on this site, are subject to review for consistency with then-applicable codes and ordinances and
does not preclude subsequent reviews or determinations that new or additional permits are
needed, all of which may be subject to specific, additional conditions placed on such permits or
approvals needed to authorize future modifications or changes at the site.
2. The applicant shall obtain all required building permits, septic permits, stormwater permits
to include Fire Code review and a Stormwater Plan reviewed by the Jefferson County Department
of Public Works for the remodel and expansion of the proposed retreat center and caretaker
residence that is consistent with any conditions of approval, and shall ensure that stormwater best
management practices are in place before any construction activities take place.
3. Pursuant to JCC 18.40.560, this conditional use permit automatically expires and becomes
void if the applicant fails to file for a building permit or other necessary development permit
within three years of the effective date of the permit being granted. Extensions to the duration of
the original permit approval are prohibited. The Department of Community Development shall
not be responsible for notifying the applicant of an impending expiration.
4. Pursuant to JCC 18.40.680, this major variance approval automatically expires and becomes
void if the applicant fails to file for all required building permit or other necessary development
permit within three years of the date of the decision granting the variance. Extensions to the
duration of the original variance approval are prohibited. The department of community
development shall not be responsible for notifying the applicant of an impending expiration.
5. Prior to any construction, a temporary erosion and sedimentation control plan (TESCP) shall
be submitted and approved by Jefferson County. Construction shall be restricted to the dates
occurring between May 1 and September 30 unless a wet weather erosion control plan is
submitted and approved prior to construction.
6. Applicant is required to schedule and pay for annual inspections of the site’s fire suppression
systems, including but not limited to the building’s exits, emergency lighting, exit signs, fire
lanes, and the inspections testing and maintenance records for fire protection systems such as fire
alarms and fire sprinklers, if applicable.
7. Applicant shall abide by all applicable laws, building codes, any other ordinance or regulation
including but not limited to all applicable International Fire Code regulations, addressing and
roadway standards.
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DECISION – APPROVING SHORELINE VARIANCE
AND OTHER PERMITS FOR RENOVATION OF THE
MARROWSTONE INN PROPERTY –
FILE NO. MLA21-00080
Page 20 of 26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
JEFFERSON COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
621 SHERIDAN STREET
PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368
8. The project shall comply with the provisions of the 2018 International Building Code,
Chapter 11 for disabled access compliance, including a minimum of one (1) van accessible
disabled access parking space. The retreat center shall provide at least one space dedicated to
ADA/Accessible compliance pursuant to JCC 18.30.100(1)(b). Parking spaces for physically
accessible needs shall comply with the current ADA Design Guide, Department of Justice,
Disability Rights Section.
9. The applicant shall demonstrate compliance with minimum ADA requirements to be
determined at building permit submittal.
10. A building final acceptance/approval shall not be issued by the County until DCD has
reviewed and approved the mitigation area for compliance with the approved mitigation plan and
all permit conditions, as BMPs and TESC measures will be incorporated throughout the duration
of the project to minimize and avoid construction impacts to the identified critical areas. As
conditioned to comply with this report, the project is consistent with No Net Loss requirements.
11. Marrowstone Inn must decommission the 4 existing wells onsite pursuant to Department of
Ecology and Jefferson County Public Health requirements and connect to public water supply
from Jefferson County Public Utility District prior to operation of the rural recreational lodge,
cabins and rural restaurant.
12. Potable water supply and sewage disposal facilities adequate to serve the proposed use shall
be provided. Occupancy shall not be permitted before water supplies and sewage disposal
facilities are approved and installed.
13. The site occupancy for guests shall be limited by the septic system capacity, which includes
an existing 480 gallons per day alternative septic system and a new proposed alternative
commercial septic system sized for a peak flow of 3080 gallons per day to serve the proposed
property.
14. The applicant shall be required to obtain all required permits for remodel from Olympic
Region Clean Air Agency (ORCAA) prior to applying for any remodel or other building permits.
Proof of approved ORCAA permits shall be required at application intake for each building
permit. In the event of demolition, which by definition also includes renovations performed to
load-bearing structural members on the current building as part of a remodel, the applicant shall
complete a good faith asbestos survey of the structure by a certified Asbestos Hazardous
Emergency Response Act (AHERA) building inspector and if asbestos is found during the survey,
an Olympic Region Clean Air Agency (“ORCAA”) Asbestos Removal Notification must be
completed and all asbestos containing material must be properly removed prior to the demolition
and if the structure is 120 sq. ft. or greater, an ORCAA Demolition Notification must be submitted
regardless of the results of the asbestos survey subject to a mandatory 14-day waiting period after
ORCAA receives notification.
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DECISION – APPROVING SHORELINE VARIANCE
AND OTHER PERMITS FOR RENOVATION OF THE
MARROWSTONE INN PROPERTY –
FILE NO. MLA21-00080
Page 21 of 26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
JEFFERSON COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
621 SHERIDAN STREET
PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368
15. The project shall not introduce noise, smoke, dust, fumes, vibrations, odors, or other
conditions or which unreasonably impacts existing uses in the vicinity of the subject parcel
pursuant to JCC 18.20.350.
16. The applicant shall comply with the ORCAA and Jefferson County Fire District to reduce or
minimize smoke, fumes, and/or odors generated from retreat center operations, passenger
vehicles, commercial trucks, and construction equipment, including without limitation the
following requirements:
a. The applicant shall implement best management practices to limit noise impacts to
existing uses in the vicinity of the subject parcel and to avoid any public nuisance
pursuant to JCC 8.70.050. Compliance with the noise ordinance is required.
Deliveries shall be scheduled and delivered during normal business hours (8:00 AM
-5:00 PM);
b. 15 mph speed limit signs shall be posted along the driveway to minimize noise and
protect the driveway;
c. Construction related activities shall be limited from 7:00 AM to 10:00 PM;
d. Construction noise between 7:00 AM and 8:00 AM shall be minimized through
conducting lower noise construction activities such as staging, team meetings, plan
reviews, and material mobilization;
e. Property owner shall monitor noise and other related impacts;
f. Outdoor activities shall only occur from 8:00 AM to 10:00 PM.
g. Quiet hours at the retreat center shall be enforced between 10:00 PM and 8:00 AM;
h. Guest contracts, website language, and guest orientations shall be appropriately
implemented to emphasize the need to respect neighbors.
17. The applicant shall implement best management practices to limit dust related impacts to
existing uses in the vicinity of the subject parcel.
18. The applicant shall implement best management practices to limit light and glare generated
by the proposed structures. Per the submitted SEPA Environmental Checklist, the applicant shall
implement the following best management practices to manage light and glare: a. Outdoor safety
lights shall be located lower than 20 feet and shall be aimed low; b. Outdoor safety lights shall be
shielded or recessed so that direct glare and reflections are contained within the boundaries of the
parcel; c. Outdoor safety lights shall be directed downward and away from adjoining properties;
and d. Roll shades shall be installed on the retreat center windows to control light glare during
night time hours.
19. All proposed signs shall adhere to sign standards in JCC 18.30.150 and shall require separate
sign permits prior to being erected.
20. Lodging operators shall not allow any person to occupy overnight lodging on the premises
for more than three months in any year pursuant to JCC 18.20.350(9)(c).
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DECISION – APPROVING SHORELINE VARIANCE
AND OTHER PERMITS FOR RENOVATION OF THE
MARROWSTONE INN PROPERTY –
FILE NO. MLA21-00080
Page 22 of 26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
JEFFERSON COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
621 SHERIDAN STREET
PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368
21. New residential development shall not be permitted pursuant to JCC 18.20.350(9)(d). New
residential development includes the subdivision or sale of land for year-round or second-home
residential housing that is owner-occupied or rented.
22. All contractors and personnel shall be familiar with the inadvertent discovery plan as attached
to this permit. If any possible historic, archaeological and/or cultural artifacts are inadvertently
discovered, the applicant shall immediately stop all work on the project and shall notify the
Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Jefferson County Department
of Community Development, and affected tribes.
23. Any modifications, changes, and/or additions to the stamped, approved site plan dated May
9, 2022 shall be resubmitted for review and approval by Jefferson County Department of
Community Development. Proposed changes may require modifications to the conditional
use/variance permit.
24. Pursuant to JCC 18.40.580, a conditional use permit granted under Article VIII of JCC
Chapter 18.40 shall continue to be valid upon a change of ownership of the site, business, service,
use or structure that was the subject of the permit application. No other use is allowed without
approval of an additional conditional use permit.
25. Pursuant to JCC 18.40.530(b): The conditional use will be served by adequate infrastructure
including roads, fire protection, water, wastewater disposal, and stormwater control. The
applicant will be required to add a fire hydrant for proper fire protection.
26. Ecology- Solid waste management specific condition. All grading and filling of land must
utilize only clean fill. All other materials may be considered solid waste and permit approval may
be required from the local jurisdictional health department prior to filling. All removed debris
resulting from this project must be disposed of at an approved site. Contact the local jurisdictional
health department for proper management of these materials.
27. Ecology- Water quality/watershed resources unit specific condition. Erosion control
measures must be in place prior to any clearing, grading, or construction. These control measures
must be effective to prevent stormwater runoff from carrying soil and other pollutants into surface
water or storm drains that lead to waters of the state. Sand, silt, clay particles, and soil will damage
aquatic habitat and are considered to be pollutants.
28. Ecology- Water quality/watershed resources unit specific condition. Any discharge of
sediment, laden runoff or other pollutants to waters of the state is in violation of Chapter 90.48
RCW, Water Pollution Control, and WAC 173-201A, Water Quality Standards for Surface
Waters of the State of Washington, and is subject to enforcement action.
29. Ecology- Additional permits specific condition. The applicant shall contact the Washington
State Department of Ecology to determine if additional permits or studies are required.
Construction site operators must apply for a permit at least 60 days prior to discharging
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DECISION – APPROVING SHORELINE VARIANCE
AND OTHER PERMITS FOR RENOVATION OF THE
MARROWSTONE INN PROPERTY –
FILE NO. MLA21-00080
Page 23 of 26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
JEFFERSON COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
621 SHERIDAN STREET
PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368
stormwater from construction activities and must submit it on or before the date of the first public
notice.
SHORELINE PERMIT CONDITIONS
30. This conditional shoreline variance APPROVAL from Jefferson County that requires a
variance permit from the Washington State Department of Ecology (ECY). Activities approved
under this variance permit shall not begin until ECY has issued its written approval of this
shoreline application.
31. This shoreline substantial development permit (SSDP) APPROVAL from Jefferson County
is conditioned, and only valid upon Department of Ecology approval of a shoreline variance for
this project.
32. This project is conditioned upon revegetation into perpetuity as outlined in a landscape plan
approved by the Director, as minor repairs and expansions shown on the approved site plan are
mostly lateral or landward with waterward portion of this proposal consisting of septic transport
lines restricted by the on-site conditions.
33. Any future permits on this site are subject to review for consistency with applicable codes
and ordinances and do not preclude review of, and amending the conditions of the permit issued
by the hearing examiner
34. Work within jurisdiction of the Shoreline Master Program other than as described above shall
receive separate review from this Department.
35. Construction shall be in substantial compliance with the site plan (Appendix E) revised on
April 12, 2022, and requested to be conditionally approved by Jefferson County Hearing
Examiner on May 26, 2022 as it exists now or is hereafter amended by Jefferson County and/or
Washington Department of Ecology.
36. Substantial progress towards completion of the project shall be performed within two years
of the issuance of the permit.
37. Authorization to conduct development activities shall terminate five years after the effective
date of this permit; 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.
38. No construction activities or staging is permitted within the shoreline buffer other than those
activities expressly allowed in this permit.
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DECISION – APPROVING SHORELINE VARIANCE
AND OTHER PERMITS FOR RENOVATION OF THE
MARROWSTONE INN PROPERTY –
FILE NO. MLA21-00080
Page 24 of 26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
JEFFERSON COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
621 SHERIDAN STREET
PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368
39. No fill or other materials may be placed in the waters or intertidal areas of Jefferson County.
A building permit application approval shall be required from Jefferson County prior to any
construction activities.
40. A septic permit application approval shall be required from Jefferson County Department of
Environmental Health prior to any land disturbing work.
41. A stormwater permit application approval shall be required from Jefferson County DCD prior
to any grading or land disturbance for any paths or parking areas.
42. All contractors and personnel shall be familiar with the inadvertent discovery plan as attached
to this permit. If any possible historic, archaeological and/or cultural artifacts are inadvertently
discovered, the applicant shall immediately stop all work on the project and shall notify the
Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Jefferson County Department
of Community Development, and affected tribes.
43. The applicant shall implement and comply with all recommendations, best management
practices, mitigation measures, and the like, as set forth in the Shoreline, Wetland, Fish and
Wildlife Habitat, and FEMA Floodplain Assessment prepared for this project by Soundview
Consultants, as submitted on January 25, 2022. (Ex. 32).
44. Prior to the certificate of occupancy for any buildings, the Applicant/property owner shall
provide assurance to the satisfaction of the Administrator that the all buildings are compliant with
the no-net loss requirements with the approved Shoreline, Wetland, Fish and Wildlife Habitat,
and FEMA Floodplain Assessment and all permit conditions. The assurance can be in the form of
a site visit and one of the following: a notice on title, a conservation easement, or a similar
mechanism as approved by the Director in such a form approved by the Jefferson County
Prosecuting Attorney’s Office
Conditions added by the Examiner:
A. All construction and hospitality business activities on the premises shall be consistent
with the approved site plan and compliant with current County codes, state regulations,
health and safety codes, and federal law applicable to any aspect of the project or business
operations.
B. The Permittee shall obtain any associated permit, lease, license, or approval required
by any state, federal, tribal, or other regulatory body with jurisdiction over any aspect of
the project or proposed business operations. Any conditions of regulatory agency
permits, leases, licenses, or approvals issued for any aspect of this project shall be
considered conditions of approval for this permit and are incorporated herein by this
reference.
C. The Permittee shall comply with all professional report conclusions and
recommendations submitted in connection with the pending applications and associated
approvals issued by the County for this project, as approved, referenced, relied-upon,
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DECISION – APPROVING SHORELINE VARIANCE
AND OTHER PERMITS FOR RENOVATION OF THE
MARROWSTONE INN PROPERTY –
FILE NO. MLA21-00080
Page 25 of 26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
JEFFERSON COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
621 SHERIDAN STREET
PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368
and/or modified by the County.
D. Pursuant to JCC 18.40.580, a conditional use permit granted under Article VIII of
JCC Chapter 18.40 shall continue to be valid upon a change of ownership of the site,
business, service, use or structure that was the subject of the permit application. No other
use is allowed without approval of an additional conditional use permit.
ISSUED this 2nd Day of August, 2022
_____________________________
Gary N. McLean
Hearing Examiner
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
DECISION – APPROVING SHORELINE VARIANCE
AND OTHER PERMITS FOR RENOVATION OF THE
MARROWSTONE INN PROPERTY –
FILE NO. MLA21-00080
Page 26 of 26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
JEFFERSON COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
621 SHERIDAN STREET
PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368
Final Decision,
Request for Reconsideration or Clarification,
Appeal Rights
The Hearing Examiner is authorized to issue Final Decisions for matters listed in JCC 2.30.080(2).
Decisions of the Hearing Examiner may be subject to a request for reconsideration or clarification, by parties with standing
and in the time and manner specified in the Jefferson County Hearing Examiner Rules of Procedure, including without
limitation HEx Rules 6.5 and 6.6.
Final Decisions of the Hearing Examiner are subject to appeal as explained in HEx Rule 6.7, and JCC 18.40.340, which
reads as follows:
(1) Time to File Judicial Appeal. The applicant or any aggrieved party may appeal from the final decision of the
administrator or hearing examiner to a court of competent jurisdiction in a manner consistent with state law. All
appellants must timely exhaust all administrative remedies prior to filing a judicial appeal.
(2) Service of Appeal. Notice of appeal and any other pleadings required to be filed with the court shall be served
by delivery to the county auditor (see RCW 4.28.080), and all persons identified in RCW 36.70C.040, within the
applicable time period.
(3) Cost of Appeal. The appellant shall be responsible for the cost of transcribing and preparing all records ordered
certified by the court or desired by the appellant for the appeal. Prior to the preparation of any records, the appellant
shall post an advance fee deposit in an amount specified by the county auditor with the county auditor. Any
overage will be promptly returned to the appellant.
State law provides short deadlines and strict procedures for appeals and failure to timely comply with filing and service
requirements may result in dismissal of any appeal. Persons seeking to file an appeal are encouraged to promptly review
appeal deadlines and procedural requirements and confer with advisors of their choosing, possibly including a private
attorney.