Where will West Seattle’s marijuana businesses be? More license applications

The state’s weekly update on recreational-marijuana business-license applications is out, and more West Seattle locations are on the list.

New retailer applications: Stuart Thomas Holding, 9831 16th SW; Owens on the Green, 4220 SW Spokane; two applications at 2218 Fairmount SW, for Advanced Green and Bud’s.

New producer applications: Raspberry LLC, 7938 7th SW, seeking a Tier 3 license; Stone Age Gardens at 5044 Fauntleroy Way SW, seeking a Tier 2 license. (The tiers are explained here.)

The state’s FAQs about licenses are here. Our reports from previous weeks’ lists are here and here.

19 Replies to "Where will West Seattle's marijuana businesses be? More license applications"

  • Yay December 17, 2013 (8:47 pm)

    I’m looking forward to the day, but why must they all have such cheesy names? Maybe something without the words green, stone , herb, etc.

  • Lowell December 17, 2013 (9:00 pm)

    Wait a second. Isn’t the Fairmount address and 42/Spokane residential areas? Is this really going to be the retail location?

    • WSB December 17, 2013 (9:14 pm)

      It was suggested in comments on a previous story that some might be applying under placeholder addresses; I’m still looking through the rules to see if that’s possible.

  • NeighborMom December 17, 2013 (9:14 pm)

    Um, 4220 SW Spokane is 2 blocks from Madison Middle and about 5 blocks in either direction from WSHS and SP Elementary. Really?!?

  • Sue December 17, 2013 (9:20 pm)

    The address on Fauntleroy is across the street from where I used to live – it’s definitely a residential address (one of those newish townhomes). I would imagine it has to be a placeholder address as it’s unlikely they’d have enough room to produce stuff there.

  • Mike December 17, 2013 (9:42 pm)

    That one on 42nd will be a quick fed hot point now that the resident put this application in. Legal in state but not by federal law. Still illegal. I voted to allow it as I think there is a medical need and telling cancer patients that they can’t legally have it is really really bad.

  • dsa December 17, 2013 (10:48 pm)

    I have a bad feeling about this. Not that it would have made a difference, but now I wish I had voted no.

  • cj December 17, 2013 (11:31 pm)

    As these people will be paying a pretty hefty price for their licenses I would assume they would not want to put them at risk by breaking the rules that go with them. Also I would think an application does not necessarily mean any location that applies will get approved. I just wonder if its going to take another year to get approvals finalized as progress for this sure is dragging along. My main concern would be security for those that are approved. As for kids getting their hands on it , the illegal trade that has been in place for generations will still likely target teens.

  • DarkHawke December 18, 2013 (6:49 am)

    @Mike: Medical use is different from recreational use, the latter of which is what the initiative put in place. In fact, seems like the initiative is actually putting the pre-existing medical marijuana outlets out of business.

    @dsa: I wish you had as well. “They” say that marijuana isn’t a gateway drug and isn’t as deleterious as alcohol. There are also echoes of lessons learned from Prohibition and good libertarian arguments for letting people do what they will so long as it hurts no-one else. That said, I share your bad feeling.

  • WestofJunction December 18, 2013 (7:23 am)

    I was for decriminalization of casual use amounts – but I never was for legalization, licensing of stores, and the state making money off of it. Mike, we already had legal medical use – cancer patients would obviously qualify. Its a stupid shame we have this. Really good idea, Washington!

  • David December 18, 2013 (7:44 am)

    This was a great idea. I’m so glad we did this. And I’m not being sarcastic. I hope folks use marijuana on the weekends instead of alcohol now. Marijuana isn’t magical. It’s not a mystically evil substance that turns you into a demon. Just substitute marijuana when you read a story with “beer” and see how it doesn’t seem like a big deal anymore. Same rules and concerns…you don’t want kids buying it, or folks driving while using it. But TRUST me, we’d ALL BE MUCH BETTER if everyone stopped drinking alcohol and started using marijuana. The cops would LOVE it. They hate rolling up to a domestic dispute call where both parties are drunk. If stoned, much easier to deal with. Bar fights in Pioneer Square at 2am every weekend? If everyone was stoned and not drunk, would be a fraction (if any) of what it is now. Alcohol causes too many drunk driving deaths, too much fuel for violence, too much liver and overdoes damage…but yeah, lets WORRY about marijuana. Sigh. Folks are “ok” with decriminalizing “small amounts”? Seriously? So you ok with what we HAD? Where I can legally buy 4 crates of wine. 16 bottles of vodka. 2 kegs of beer. 12 cartoons of unfiltered cigarettes, all legally, in the same day. But MAYBE we can CONSIDER allowing folks to buy a LITTLE bit of pot? Come on. Going by science, not superstition, marijuana should have been our legal drug and alcohol (10s of thousands of deaths a year) and tobacco (causes cancer) should be illegal. But we did it the other way by accident of history. This will be a GREAT experiment. Just like “gay marriage” hasn’t destroying marriage in Massachusetts after a decade (all that was lies)…what happens if a decade goes by and there are no problems from legalizing marijuana? Will the opponents apologize and admit they were wrong? You know, just like the far right has with gay marriage…LOL. I won’t hold my breath (quasi-pun)

  • Sertinsa December 18, 2013 (9:00 am)

    Very eloquent David, thanks. The social and health costs of alcohol are so much greater than for recreation MJ use. And it’s so unfair that (before the de-policing policy) black, over-21, responsible casual MJ users are jailed with impunity, but the white attorneys in Magnolia with 1/2 lb of the best Okanogan County Paralyzer are not given a second glance by the police.

  • East Coast Cynic December 18, 2013 (9:31 am)

    @David +1

    @dsa, I’m sure they won’t feel much different than the state liquor store on California

  • K2 December 18, 2013 (11:03 am)

    @WSB: The LCB was pretty clear that you don’t need a deed of sale or a lease in place to put your ‘an’ address on your application.
    In fact in their powerpoint presentation on their site they say if your proposed location doesn’t work you can put your application on hold until you find an appropriate location (for Retail the only stipulation is you cannot change the county you applied in due to their population allocation of stores).

    The application fees are VERY minimal considering the upside of this industry. Cannabis is safer than alcohol, and there is no difference between ‘medical’ and ‘recreational’…that would be the same as saying alcohol should be medicinal or recreational.

    The fact that cannabis has beneficial Cannabinoids is what makes marijuana safer, even safer than tobacco considering the analysis of smoke is EXACTLY the same with the exception of nicotine vs. cannabinoids.

    For those of you that care cannabinoids are anti-inflammatory, pain reducing, antibiotic, antifungal and MANY others. Nicotine and alcohol are not.

    I’m going to say over 1/2 of these applications are going to fail.

  • sgs December 18, 2013 (11:11 am)

    It makes me sad that our society is busying itself with these kinds of issues, rather than pursuing something on a “higher” level (pun intended).

  • Joe Szilagyi December 18, 2013 (11:33 am)

    For better or worse this is a done issue in Washington. We voted for it; the legislature can’t undo it for at least two years after it’s initiation, which means we’ll have retail stores for at least two years. I can’t imagine them undoing it in Olympia afterward, and the Federal government is unwilling to do so as the tides are beginning to turn nationwide. New York State was the outlier to lead to the overturn of Prohibition of alcohol; this time it’s WA & CO for marijuana. In fact, Time just reported that we likely grossly underestimated on the state level the local demand for marijuana by a factor of 100x, so expect more shops later:
    By the time I’m approaching grandparent age we will have as many shops for marijuana as some states have for alcohol. Whether or not some of us may like it, it’s coming, and will be the norm. To be honest, I’d rather people smoked too much by far than drank too much. How often do you hear of violent crime and fist fights from people who overindulged in marijuana, compared to alcohol?
    Too much to drink: a whole boatload of problems, including violence and aggression.
    Too much to smoke: a whole boatload of problems, including Doritos and melting into the couch.
    I’ll take the latter by far personally for a societal problem, if we had to have one.

  • Wes C. Addle December 18, 2013 (12:50 pm)

    There is definitely a difference between medical and recreational cannabis.
    I doubt the retail stores would be selling high CBD strains that don’t get you the “high” at all. Also the stores aren’t allowed to tell you anything that would be good for any medical condition. This is also one of the concerns I have about the 5 nanogram limit. If you use a strain with high CBD and low THC you’re not going to feel high at all, but I bet the blood will show a different story.
    This is why the medical system needs to be left alone. Sell the high THC stuff at the recreational stores.

  • Jeffrey December 18, 2013 (1:32 pm)

    Marijuana is harmless. All it causes according to the current scientific literature is memory loss and impairment of brain function. But then alcohol consumption presents a similar profile.

    I say inform people of the consequences and hold them accountable if they cause damages, injury etc.

    On accountability, penalties for actions taken while impaired should be more severe. Stop treating adults like children.

  • zark00 December 18, 2013 (2:29 pm)

    1st address looks to be within 1000 feet of a school, a park and an arcade.
    2nd is within 1000 feet of Madison.
    3rd on Fairmount is actually outside of the 1000 foot boundary from Belvedere Park so is probably OK
    The one on 7th SW is possibly within 1000 feet of Westcrest, it’s hard to say it’s right on the edge.
    Fauntleroy Address is within 1000 feet of a school and a park.

    WLCB is being very diligent about making sure to put all applications that used a home address on hold immediately. You can use a placeholder address, and it does not appear to derail the application process if it is not in an accepted location. However, the guidelines are very clear, no license will be granted with an address that doesn’t meet the boundary criteria – period.

    Agree, a lot will fail – well they wont “fail” as much as be put on perpetual hold. WLCB doesn’t mess around here – they know how to deal with liquor licenses and they’re following the same model – which is a good thing – it’s hard to get a liquor license for good reason. Not expensive, but it takes a long time and you have a LOT of i’s to dot and t’s to cross to get there.

Sorry, comment time is over.

WP-Backgrounds by InoPlugs Web Design and Juwelier Schönmann