8208 FLORIDA DR 2024-02-26 - Laserfiche WebLink

• 1 i 11. The Respondent testified at the hearing that she has hired a consultant to complete the required documents. (Testimony of Ivy Nguyen) 12. John Laufenberg, Wetland Resources Geologist,testified at the hearing that his firm was retained to identify and resolve any critical area intrusions on the subject property. He is in communication with City staff and his firm is in the process of preparing the required reports; however, due to virtual practices and other delays related to the pandemic,the process is moving slowly. Because the Respondent cannot control necessary City response times in the permitting process,Mr. Laufenberg testified that he thinks it is likely that completion of all potentially required wetland and/or buffer restoration, including plantings, may not be achievable by the date requested in the proposed order. In order to facilitate successful compliance with the Order,he requested that the final abatement deadline be moved to spring 2023. He testified that he believes that the work required would be able to be completed within 120 days from the issuance of permit, stating that he expects the required restoration work not to be complicated,involving soil restoration and planting of native species. However, due to the likelihood that permit issuance could occur during the summer when planting is not feasible or in the fall,pushing required plantings too close to possible freezing weather,he requested an extension in the deadline. (Testimony of John Laufenberg) 13. Officer Cunningham acknowledged at the hearing that the images depicting the location of the subject property in its surroundings in Exhibits#8 and#11 do not represent a professional survey of the property and appear not to show the actual boundaries of the subject property because they include the majority of Florida Drive within the boundaries depicted;however,they do accurately depict the relative size of the parcel, its approximate boundaries, and its very near proximity to the wetland. Officer Cunningham recommended that a professional survey be conducted on the subject property as the best way to be certain of the property's boundaries. He recommended extending the final abatement deadline to November 13,2022. Officer Cunningham confirmed that as long as the Respondent is acting in good faith to meet the requirements of the Order,if unforeseen circumstances arise that delay full completion of abatement,he would not refer the matter for reassessment of the suspended fine amount, if any is suspended. (Testimony of Code Enforcement Officer. Cunningham) Based on the above findings of fact,the Violations Hearing Examiner enters the following conclusions: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW • Jurisdiction: Pursuant to EMC Chapter 1.20 or any Everett Municipal Code provisions that identify EMC Chapter 1.20 for enforcement,the Violations Hearing Examiner of the City of Everett has jurisdictional authority to hold this hearing and to issue the decision. EMC 1.20.020. 4f1