After years of legal battles and community debate, the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners has issued a statement in support of the Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort (MPR) in Brinnon, again …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
We have recently launched a new and improved website. To continue reading, you will need to either log into your subscriber account, or purchase a new subscription.
If you had an active account on our previous website, then you have an account here. Simply reset your password to regain access to your account.
If you did not have an account on our previous website, but are a current print subscriber, click here to set up your website account.
Otherwise, click here to view your options for subscribing.
* Having trouble? Call our circulation department at 360-385-2900, or email our support.
Please log in to continue |
|
After years of legal battles and community debate, the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners has issued a statement in support of the Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort (MPR) in Brinnon, again citing its potential to boost economic growth.
The letter, signed by Commissioners Heather Dudley-Nollette, Heidi Eisenhour and Greg Brotherton, outlined the county’s long-standing involvement with the resort’s development and provided an update on the permitting process.
The 252-acre MPR has been in the works since 2002 with the adoption of the Brinnon Subarea Plan. It is proposed by Statesman Group of Companies, a real estate development company based in Alberta, Canada.
The board, in the letter, emphasized its “unequivocal and enthusiastic” support of the project, stating that the MPR will increase tourism, hotel, and motel sales tax revenue, property values, housing supply, jobs and recreational opportunities.
“Jefferson County is a distressed rural community as recognized by the state government,” the letter reads, emphasizing Brinnon is one of the most economically distressed. “This resort has the potential to put south county on the map.”
With its position established, the commission then updated readers on the project’s status, sharing that two permit applications are pending — a preliminary plat permit and a building permit.
A public hearing on the preliminary plat application was scheduled for May 16. The meeting was postponed, with Statesman informing the county it would be making changes to its application, including moving the wastewater treatment plant, moving roads over 40 feet, moving the hotel and spa 45 feet, moving the wildlife corridor, moving a stormwater pond, eliminating lots and moving lot lines, and locating a new point of access for the MPR. The hearing will be rescheduled once Statesman submits its revised permit application.
As for the building permit application for a 41,000-square-foot multipurpose building, the consultant must provide more information — including proposed use to establish building occupancy — before it can move forward. Statesman agreed to provide the information on May 9 but has not done so yet.
“As required by county code and state law, DCD’s role in the process is to serve as a neutral reviewer of development and building applications,” the letter reads. “Put simply and despite what you may have heard, the ball is in the applicant’s court for both the preliminary plat approval and the building permit approval.”
Statesman’s development plans include a 290 slip marina, a “maritime village” with approximately 180 commercial units and 10,000 square-foot commercial space to replace current facilities, a golf course with food service and meeting capability and approximately 1,100 individual residential units that will be privately owned but managed as a resort, according to the county website.
Quilcene resident Jean Ball, in a Leader column, expressed frustration with the delays in the process, saying the community is missing out on the benefits she believes it will bring the community.
“The question Jefferson County should be asking is: How can we help the developer move more quickly,” she wrote.
In response, and in a letter to the editor, Barbara Moore-Lewis, who lives in Snohomish, cautioned against MPRs, saying, “There is no proof that the MPR will make money for the county. Washington state published an analysis of MPRs that stated that only 1 out of 10 is profitable.”