||| FROM SUSAN MUSTARD |||
Before the celebration of completed sidewalks, curbs, gutters, and storm water drainage on Prune Alley a bit of history is in order. I do not want to rain on parades, but it is long past time to address the sad and upsetting tale of my experience with San Juan County government here in Eastsound, two blocks away from the soon to be completed project.
As part of my single-family residential building project, the home in which I now live, I was forced by the County to build out storm water drainage, curbs, gutters and sidewalks. These were to be built in the public right of way on two sides of my home at the corner of Madrona St. and Rose St. This all came about mid-project as I was trying to finish my home and terminate the interim construction loan. Each day was costly. After a myriad of emails and letters attempting to communicate with County officials, I was finally able to meet with the Director of Public Works, as well as my engineer, on site. The Director of Public Works stated that if I did not undertake the cost and construction, he would “shut down my project.” To be clear, there was no ordinance or law that required that I build in public right of way – outside the boundaries of my lot. However, facing the fear of more delays in permitting, and thus more cost, I felt forced to comply with the demand.
This experience came at a huge financial and emotional cost to me. Financially it amounts to approximately $70,000. In stark contrast, property owners on Prune Alley (including a former County Councilor) will face no cost for the Prune Alley “beautification.” Now, six years later, the stark contrast between my experience and that of the Prune Alley landowners is clear.
Two blocks away, I wonder if this costly wrong will ever be righted?
5 minutes of googling led me to San Juan County code 18.30.700E which is part of the Eastsound Subarea plan:
“Property owners shall install, or agree to install at a future date under specific conditions, curbs, gutters, sidewalks and street trees when their property adjoining public streets is developed, when an existing use is substantially expanded, when a change of use occurs, or when improvements of a fair market value of at least $50,000 are made to the property.”
So because you and your engineer did not do your due diligence, somehow the County taxpayers are supposed to reimburse you for costs you incurred 6 years ago because public works is doing a street improvement project elsewhere in Eastsound? What? There’s no shortage of things people will blame the County for. Sheesh
Henry,
I find your reply to Susan Mustard as insensitive and tone deaf to the emotional and financial angst the County dealt her. The way she was treated by the County was ugly, unfair, and likely illegal. Mind you, just because you read SJCC 18.30.700E is in the Subarea Plan does not mean it is legal, nor should it be.
To make Miss Mustard pay for street improvements is in direct violation of RCW 82.02.020. Under this statute, the State has preempted the County from imposing any tax, fee, or charge, either direct or indirect, on the construction or reconstruction of residential buildings. The Courts interpreting this statute have specifically held that the conditions, such as the County imposed on Mustard, are an invalid tax. Therefore, it violates both the statute and is an unconstitutional taking under both the State and Federal Constitutions. The County simply cannot impose conditions on Miss Mustard to improve what apparently the County had already considered as a deficient road. The burden is on the County to establish, by substantial evidence, that the required improvements are a direct result of traffic that would be increased based on Mustard’s single-family home. See generally, Detray v. City of Lacy, 132 Wash.App. 1008, 2006 WL 701939 (2006). It is not the responsibility of Mustard to correct pre-existing deficiencies.
Miss Mustard was extorted by the County by withholding her final building permit approval for an expensive streetscape undertaking or otherwise challenge the County in a long and expensive lawsuit — this is an adversarial approach for the County to take. The County is often wrong in their legal opinions as we saw last week when they were rebuked from removing the Charter Review amendments from the November election … thus we have to sue the County to advocate our side, but that cost money and takes time.
Mr. Stamper just because you read something in the Eastsound Subarea Plan does not necessarily mean it is legal, nor just, and may be in conflict with the State laws of Washington. We live in an unincorporated island, why should one land owner have the burden of building curbs, gutters, storm drains at great expense that another land owner doesn’t? Why should they be taxed $70,000 to build and live in town? Did you build out sidewalks on your property and should you have been required to spend an extra $70,000 doing so? I believe everyone on Orcas Island should be treated the same permit-wise wherever they live on the island — even if it is in town. How can we incentivize 80% of all future building to occur in the UGA, have affordable housing in town, and then shoulder the burden of these infrastructure costs on these people for the benefit of all Orcas islanders so they can drive into town and walk through the village with the nice street trees at an owners expense?
I believe the sidewalks and curbs and street trees are for everyone living on the island, it is everyone’s town, and these costs should be paid evenly and equally by everyone for those amenities out of our tax base. Miss Mustard should not have been required to shoulder these expenses alone so she can live in town, it’s unfair and not right, and realistically it is an illegal tax on individuals building in town.
If nothing else I believe the an apology is due to Miss Mustard from the County for its behavior.
Sean DeMeritt
Hello Mr. Stamper,
You omitted the fact that storm water drainage was not mentioned under code. No mention anywhere. And why weren’t Prune Alley owners treated the same way I was?
You still have to explain the terrible costs I faced with the construction of the storm water drainage system. Even if you do believe I should have to pay for what the Prune Alley owners have not.
Susan Mustard
Mr. Stamper,
I have been asking for relief and address of this situation for 6 years. The County Councilor who ignored and dodged my repeated requests to meet and discuss the issues has subsequently benefitted greatly by the Prune Alley improvement.
And by the way, this isn’t the only issue I had with the County.
For example, before I purchased the lot in 2013, I floated over and had meeting with the building dept. I wanted to be certain I could build a home. They said yes. After purchasing the lot, I was told by the County that no, I couldn’t build a home. Further, they said I had to build mixed use (commercial and residential). I attempted many times to speak with the Orcas County Councilor. He avoided me. For months, I bled money as the architect designed a dense 2 story design with catwalks, etc. Exactly what I didn’t want. Plus I hired an attorney to figure this out. I even tried to buy other property owners’ parking spaces to meet commercial requirements, etc, etc, etc,….until…
I spoke with neighboring lot owner. She told me she was designing a home. I told her she could not do so. She said she could. I asked her who she had spoken with at the County and she said Colin Maycock. I immediately phoned him. I asked why he told Paige she could build a residence. He said “different folks here at the County interpret that law differently”. I angrily told Maycock to place my name on the agenda for the next Council meeting. The next day, my architect phoned me to tell me that the County said I could build residential.
I assume that due to this initial costly craziness, County officials would be more than a bit embarrassed and that I would have no further problems. I was sorely wrong.
Susan M
Susan, you bring up
A very important issue.. when the Corner of A street was developed which encompassed Enzo’s, Random Howse and other buildings. I understand that the developers had to put in curbs, Gutters and Sidewalks as part of their buildout..
There are several instances where the burden fell upon the individuals doing the development.. Right?? Wrong?? It is unfortunate that we as a Community don’t appreciate and recognize the benefits to all patrons that will traverse those improvements. Our Governance just doesn’t seem to have the band with to facilitate long range planning or vision
I’m this revised.
I am very appreciative of the work on Prune Alley, but have a hard time with our punitive short sidedness..
it would be amazing if like OPALCO when one develops and for example has a transformer installed, when another down stream hooks up there is a sharing of costs for up to five years. It’s musters fairness..
One could ask, who’s responsibility is it for infrastructure?? Odd how it defaults to a singular private source than the norm of other options One of the largest challenges of our unincorporated town.
I will personally thank you for doing something so good for your Community.
You have a great example of Job well done!
Really? You guys. Really? Look. You want it that bad, I guess you might have to pay for it. You made the choice to proceed knowing the code and our peculiar land use regulations here in Eastsound, yet you remain disgruntled. Gee Sean, I don’t know the detailed circumstances of Susan’s property development in the downtown area but I am sure of yours. You are are a good guy to be certain, and an honest real estate developer, but please, less crying over decision you have made.
Years ago Sean recommended the City of Boise, Idaho’s planning and permitting department to me as a model of efficiency and clarity. I suggested that our county council take a look way back when we had 6 County Councilors. The answer was, “Oh no. We are different in San Juan County.”
The City of Boise Planning and Development website even has a search engine that works!
Imagine that.
Check it out here:
https://www.cityofboise.org/departments/planning-and-development-services/