Laserfiche WebLink
JUL-11-02 12: 25 FROM�EVEREiT PLANNING DEPT ID:4252578742 PAGE 1B/21 <br /> � I 1 `.. <br /> The buffer betwesn thae two sinpis-family subdiviaions is quite unuaual. 8as�d on the <br /> material praa�nted et the h�aring, the buf'fer vves oatabli�hed in ths�xly 80'e by the City. <br /> At that time it wes projeaed by the City th�t the �ar►d ai which ths Powd�� Mill subbivision <br /> was eventually built would bs daveloped with multiple-femily dwellin�t. The City wanted a <br /> buffer area betwesn the propctsd multiple-family dwellinga and ths ainqle-family <br /> devQlcpmsnt of Ksnilw�oRh. Hovwvar, as time psaaed, ths developmern of multiple-Iamily <br /> did not occur, and the single-temily subdivi:ion oi Powder Mi11 w�a apprcved. Tha <br /> approval of the Powde� Mill subdivision, however, did nat change the rmquired buffer <br /> between theae two subdiviaions. Thua, whd has �esulted, ia � �ipn'�ficant spoce <br /> saparating these two aubdivisiona. Had tha davelopmenta occurrsd undsr ths GraMh <br /> Management Act provisions of th� 90's, this bu(fpr spac�would probably�t exist. <br /> Howevsr, it doea, end now ths partiss mwt work artwr� Memselwa to try and use this <br /> epece for their bena�fit. <br /> The buffer area in question ia the area that is included in the Powder Mill lot;. Ths k�y IOt6 <br /> in the disputa ere lats�MBO throuyh �F3T, with the north 80' of tha� lots beinp psrt o�th� <br /> buffer area. Althouph this buRar cannot be dsvslop�d with sutx;tuns, th�y an owr�sd by <br /> tha varioua property own�s. Buildit�p reab�ictiona oxiri and ths arw mwt bs maintair.ad <br /> for a "visual end sural" buMer. Ha�wwer, nothinp in th� rostrictions indicatet tf►�t a hma <br /> cannot be buiit within th� buf°fer xo�ne. <br /> TM Kenifworth propsrty owr»rs (Appellant�) cAnt�nd thit a f�w ie a �truavro. I� <br /> pnaentinfl this arQum�nt, it vva �teted that the hr�a ii1 s b4rrier mad�of po`b. wirs, and <br /> bairda and, thus, i�lls undK fh� �� Law D�N dstinitian ot"�rudun"b�cauae it <br /> i� a combination of mat6riM�to brm conafruetion for oocup�ngl, uw, a'omort�nution, <br /> eilher inatalled abovs or bNow tt» eurface of the parcal M I��d. This srqument fails. In <br /> ths state af washinpton, th� sppsllent oourts haw nevsr besn alled upon to dNlna for <br /> xoning purpoees wheth�r or not a Mncs i�a ��re. The oourt� hww bNn aeked �t <br /> tim�s to deflns whetllet a wp�tation is a f� ot whsthK trees ar�f�s. (� <br /> P3�3�l�1 Ya. Waotriek. 61 Wn.App. 177) <br /> The one tima, hawever, th�t tM couM have �pok�n as to whNhK a h�a ia a stnx�un is <br /> in the csae d�ytah vs. Roadhs. 71 WnZd 705. In thnt c�s, tF�o caurta sald <br /> �yy�q�� o ��f g, or on��.ted for <br /> ths soN pwpoa d�sthetic IoNutiflcsdon, it would nd <br /> conWhlta a"�nu�x�" as that t�rm w�s i►n�nded to b� <br /> intwrpr�ted by th� Ipislaaxs." (tM Ipislation beinp <br /> interpr�tvd wq s criminsl law rps:dinq buf�plary) <br /> Althouph the Ro�s cass involv�d aiminal law int�tatiarn tlwt s bounQuy hnc� is <br /> not a sirucrixe, it is rs#sonsbN to ases�me th�t a civil oouR would �clopt tM� �p�• A <br /> boundary Sance is aimply not a sbucturo. <br /> 11 <br /> �7�L& <br />