FOLLOWUP: Hearing date set for tree-vs.-house appeal

(June WSB photo of Ponderosa Pine at 3038 39th SW)

Two weeks after two appeals were filed against the granting of a permit to build a house at 3038 39th SW that would take out a Ponderosa pine deemed an “exceptional tree,” the hearing date is set. January 12th is when the city Hearing Examiner will hear arguments in the consolidated case, according to a notice in today’s Land Use Information Bulletin. The tree is in what was considered to be the side yard of the house next door, neighbors say, until that house was sold and the buyer got a city opinion that the “side yard” was a separate lot on which a house could be built. We first wrote about the tree tussle back in June. The appeal hearing is scheduled for 9 am January 12th at the Hearing Examiner’s chambers on the 40th floor of the Municipal Tower downtown (700 5th Ave.), and is open to the public for observation. You can see the case documents here.

8 Replies to "FOLLOWUP: Hearing date set for tree-vs.-house appeal"

  • Elle Nell November 3, 2016 (5:08 pm)

    I sure hope the Tree wins… 

  • PonderosaPine November 3, 2016 (6:42 pm)

    What I hope people realize is that this is more than just about a tree.

    Home owners who sell 2 or more contiguous  lots are way undervaluing their property if they have individual lots that are legal building sites.  Developers are picking them up for little to no money because home owners and real estate agents are unaware.

    Developers are paying a mere $1,000 to gain the City’s “preliminary” approval to build on these sites (you could do the same) which becomes final at the end of the permit’s appeal period. They bypass all subdivision practices and fees.  Homeowners should look into this before they price their property.  Ask the City for a “legal building site letter of opinion.”

    If you don’t agree with the City’s determination that a lot is a legal building site, (which in our case is smaller than required by the current zoning) one can hire an attorney and pay ~$15,000  to the City to redo the work already done for $1,000.  The hearing examiner will give deference to the City’s decision.  Thus, this is why it is almost exclusively developers who take this path.

    If you are like me, I think $15,000 is financial barrier and limits people’s access to court.  The first amendment gives us all the right to grieve government’s decisions.  Heck, access to the Supreme Court is only $300.  

    Another related issue is why do we still have historic lot exceptions grandfathering in tiny little lots established more than 59 years ago which do not meet current zoning?

    There is much more than this as well…

  • John November 4, 2016 (9:30 am)

    PondersosaPine needs fact checking.

    1  The building site letter is available for all.  Realty agents and home sellers are responsible for  assessing the value of their property.

    2  There is no $15,000 fee for the “City to redo the work already done”.  

    If they wanted just the work already done, that would be the contents of the letter, which they are challenging.  They are asking the city to do additional work in opposition to someone else’s property and have the city (all of us)  pay for it when someone else doesn’t like a decision.  

    Everyone else dealing with the DCI must pay their $250 per hour fees, why shouldn’t these people be excepted.?

    If this service were free,  it would totally tie up all construction as anyone  peeved could needlessly file appeals without consequences.

    3 Why should lots that were platted as legal building sites, have been taxed as such, and with thousands of them already built with homes suddenly become unusable?  

    I personally own one such “2,500 sq ft lot” that 2014’s City Council voted to make unbuildable.  This is in an era with dozens of lots of the same time happily providing homes built before 2014.  The lot assessed by King County Assessor has had a 565% increase by the county this year even though it is now nearly worthless.

    PonderosaPines comments about small lots that do not meet current zoning not being build-able ignores the thousands of substandard lots that are built upon, some being neighbors of the challenged lot.

  • PonderosaPine November 4, 2016 (4:41 pm)

    John,

    I expected a response from you.  Just curious…  Do you even live in West Seattle?  If I ventured a guess, I suspect you are a hired gun representing developers and are not even a neighbor.

  • John November 4, 2016 (8:04 pm)

    ponderosapine,

    I did not expect that sort of response from you. 

    I presented factual challenges to what you wrote.  I would expect you follow the rules of WSB and keep this site a friendly one for people who agree to disagree.

    Since you challenge me, I will respond in saying factually that I was born and raised in West Seattle, and I do live in West Seattle in my present house for 20 years.  As such I appreciate the old West Seattle ways of people respecting people and responsibility for their own property rights, not those of others.

    I am in no manner  a ‘hired gun’ representing developers.

    I welcome all newcomers to the city I love and don’t condone these NIMBY attitudes of entitlement so openly expressed.   

    Your neighbor John.

  • PonderosaPine November 5, 2016 (8:43 am)

    John,

    I will take you at your word John.


    We will have to agree to disagree about the tree.  However, I am guessing we both share the desire for anyone to be able to exercise our first amendment rights:


    The First Amendment to the US Constitution prohibits the making of any law… abridging the freedom of speech …or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.


    I served in the US Armed Services to protect those rights John, as did my family all the way back to the founding of this Country.


    Back to the facts – the average number of hours to do a code interpretation is 31.  Paying the City to defend their decision has been a wide range of hours historically.  At $280/hour (not $250 and soon to be over $300/hour), one quickly gets to $15,000 – just to petition for a governmental redress of grievance. I consider $15,000 as a barrier to exercise ones rights, which I find appalling as one who has served this Country and risked my life defending it.


    My position is the code interpretation  fee should be born by the permit applicant and be part of a required process.  This land owner stands to gain $400,000 in profit and alone should bear the costs of the City’s permitting processes, not the tax payers nor those who want to appeal a bad decision. 


    Now, as to your comment about:  “I would expect you follow the rules of WSB and keep this site a friendly one for people who agree to disagree.”  You may want to consider your own words you wrote addressing Cass’s and others comments.  I found those comments to be rather unfriendly.


    Until the next update John…


    With Warm Regards, Your Neighbor

  • Cass Turnbull November 6, 2016 (9:35 am)

    It is certainly more than just about this tree. Among other issues it is about a false dichotomy that decision makers and the public have embraced and are using to remake Seattle.  That is that Density and Green Space are mutually exclusive. But, you can meet both your density and housing goals by building ‘up, not out’ inside the City.

    Whether you have a city full of skyscrapers or low buildings sqeezed together shoulder to shoulder, people’s health, their pocket books, and their local environment will be in big trouble without ample green. We aren’t funding new parkland acquisition while we are pell mell eliminating ‘private open space’ and adding thousands of new residents. 

     What sort of a City will we be leaving our kids. Oh, that’s right. I forgot. There won’t be any kids here. They will be living in the suburbs because their parents wanted a pleasant place to live, safe and with a back yard. Such measures will cause Smart Growth to backfire. 

    Seattle is just for the rich, the young professionals and the very poor now. 

  • What it's all about November 6, 2016 (3:05 pm)

    West Seattle has been my home for 20+ years.   One of the things I immediately loved about Seattle is the strong, vibrant,  livable neighborhoods.  Each has it’s own character and personality.   

    However, one of my major concerns with this frantic infill by the City is that it destroys the little open and green spaces that we have left.  Ironically, it creates mono-culture neighborhoods.  When all the green space is gone, many people who can afford to, and many people with children, will flee to communities with more open space and trees –  Normandy Park, Lake Forest Park, Arbor Heights, and on and on.   When Ercolini Park opened, it was swarmed with families needing a safe park!  When this population boom ends, and it will end, we will be left with overdeveloped neighborhoods that no one wants to live in.  

    Cass’s statements resonate so well with me.  Driving around West Seattle (and all of Seattle) there are so many places where we can add more housing and still keep our side yards, trees, and open spaces.  Creating these small lots is just not necessary.  Projects like the one with the Ponderosa pine tree, are sneaking in through an unnecessary loophole. 

    Variances and short subdivisions are and have been land use options for oversized lots when owners want to divide them.  It takes longer and has a public comment process that developers don’t like because it reduces their profit margin.  These processes also don’t usually create lots below the minimum zoning size unless there is a good reason to do so.   We’ve had Single Family 5000 square feet lot size requirements since 1957 and they were established for a reason!  If we want to change the minimum lot size in a neighborhood, then let’s go through the public process to do so.  It’s just not fair to allow a few people to squeeze in these additional small lots without the neighborhood, and in most cases the previous owners, knowing this is possible.   It’s like a secret backroom deal the public doesn’t know about.

    If you think we are exaggerating, just take a look at the house on 3611-55th Ave SW (SW Manning and 55th Ave SW).  There are 3 houses squished into one former lot.  

    The Historic Lot Exception has to go.        

Sorry, comment time is over.