APPEAL ADMIN DECISION RE STOP WORK ORDER1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
BEFORE THE CITY OF BAINBRIDGE ISLAND
OFFICE OF HEARING EXAMINER
PAUL and JENNIFER CLARK,
Appellants,
V.
CITY OF BAINBRIDGE ISLAND, acting
through its Department of Planning and
Community Development,
-�,U urq ey�ortiiV eA
jam V&kk)t l
(;&V -" 01�4&-W l`
LWZ A- L+ w
No. PLN50467 VEG (COD 16 -0055)
APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE
DECISION UPHOLDING WARNING OF
VIOLATION AND ORDER TO
CORRECT AND STOP WORK ORDER
Paul and Jennifer Clark, Appellants herein, pursuant to City of Bainbridge Island
Municipal Code ( "BIMC ") § 1.26.070(D) and § 2.16.020(P)(1)(a), hereby appeal to the
Bainbridge Island Office of Hearing Examiner that certain administrative decision dated
December 12, 2016 (the "Decision "), issued by the Director of the City of Bainbridge Island
Department of Planning and Community Development ( "the City "), Mr. Gary R. Christensen.
The Decision is regarding Vegetation Management Permit PLN50467 VEG and
addresses a Warning of Violation and Order to Correct and Stop Work issued October 13,
2016, COD 16 -0055. Appellants' work pursuant to a clearing permit issued by the City and
the Vegetation Management Plan is complete. Appellants honored the Warning of Violation
and Order to Correct and associated Stop Work Order. Appellants concede no violation of
any applicable law and are willing to consider voluntary restoration. Thus, they file this
APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION - 1 of 14 200 Winslow sl w Wayr vs LAW OFFICE
200 Winslow Way West, Suite 380
[90364 -1] Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
(206) 780 -6777
(206) 780 -6865 (Facsimile)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
KI
protective appeal to preserve their arguments and contentions that they have violated no law
or permit condition as to the clearing of their land while they discuss possible remediation
and /or mitigation with City Staff.
I. NAME AND IDENTITY OF APPELLANTS
AND BASIS FOR STANDING
1.0 Paul and Jennifer Clark. Their current address is: 9809 NE Lafayette Avenue,
Bainbridge Island, Washington, 98110, telephone: (206) 962 -0555. Mr. and Mrs. Clark own
the property subject to the clearing and the City's Administrative Decision.
1.1 Appellants' legal representative in this matter is the Dennis D. Reynolds Law
Office, 200 Winslow Way West, Suite 380, Bainbridge Island, Washington 98110; telephone:
(206) 780 -6777; fax: (206) 780 -6865.
1.2 Appellants are aggrieved parties with standing to seek review and contest the
Decision because their property is the subject of the City's Warning of Violation and Order to
Correct and accompanying Stop Work Order. Appellants are prejudiced or likely to be
prejudiced by the City's actions specified below if no relief is granted. A ruling in favor of
Appellants will substantially eliminate or redress the prejudice that the Decision has caused,
or will likely cause them, for which review and relief is requested.
II. NAME AND IDENTITY OF RESPONDENT
2.0 The City of Bainbridge Island, Department ol' Planliitig ,md Comintinity
Development, 280 Madison Avenue North, Bainbridge Island, Washington, 98110, telephone:
(206) 842 -2545, acting through Director Gary Christensen.
APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION - 2 of 14
[90364 -1]
DENNIs D. REYNOLDS LAW OFFICE
200 Winslow Way West, Suite 380
Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
(206) 780 -6777
(206) 780 -6865 (Facsimile)
23
24
25
26
III. DECISION APPEALED
3.0 Appellants appeal the Administrative Decision dated December 12, 2016. A
true and accurate copy of the Decision is annexed hereto as Exhibit 1, by reference made part
of this Appeal. The Decision states in relevant part as follows:
After considering all of the information and materials submitted
by the applicant and the record as part of the Request for
Director's Review, I am herby sustaining the Warning of
Violation & Order to Correct and associated Stop Work Order
issued October 13, 2016.
Decision, December 12, 2016, p.2.
3.1 A true and accurate copy of the Warning of Violation and Order to Correct and
Stop Work Order dated October 13, 2016 is annexed hereto as Exhibit 2, by reference made
part of this Appeal.
3.2 A true and accurate copy of the Request for Director's Review dated
October 19, 2016 is annexed hereto as Exhibit 3, by reference made part of this Appeal.
3.3 The Decision is in error for the reasons set out below.
IV. STATEMENT OF RELEVANT FACTS IN SUPPORT OF
GROUNDS FOR APPEAL
4.0 Mr. and Mrs. Clark own 2.33 acres of property located on Bainbridge Island.
They intend to develop their property with a single - family home, drainfield, well, access road,
and appurtenant structures. The work includes removing trees and stumps to create a build
site for the proposed home, and grading and filling for the home's basement and foundation.
4.1 The project site and tax parcel information is: Johnsonville Lane, Tax ID
No. 28250220352008. The assigned zoning is R -0.4. The site appears to contain a short
section of a non -fish bearing seasonal stream on the southwest corner of the Clarks' property.
APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION - 3 of 14
[90364 -1]
DENNIs D. REYNOLDs LAW OFFICE
200 Winslow Way West, Suite 380
Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
(206) 780 -6777
(206) 780 -6865 (Facsimile)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
4.2 The Appellants are not commercial developers. They are developing the site to
build a home, live on and raise their children. It is in their best interest to protect their land
and keep it as natural as possible. The Clarks sought technical assistance from the City —
which pursuant to State law (RCW 36.70B.220) the City was required to provide — and in
good faith followed all directives from City employees as they understood them.
4.3 The Clarks purchased their land in January of 2016 and began development by
first obtaining a clearing permit from the City of Bainbridge Island in February. Mr. Clark
was told by City employee Nate Schildmeyer that the Clearing Permit would limit him to
5,000 board feet of timber, and that he would have to designate the trees to be taken down.
This turned out to be about ten (10) trees contained in an area of about 11,000 square feet.
Mr. Clark went ahead and marked the trees to be cut and went back to Mr. Schildmeyer for
his approval. It took a few days, but Mr. Schildmeyer came back later that week and
approved the trees that Mr. Clark had designated to fall. After Mr. Clark cut down the trees,
Mr. Schildmeyer and another City employee, Janelle Hitch, came out to inspect the property
due to a complaint by a neighbor that Mr. Clark was building on a "salmon stream." These
employees verified there was no stream and also noted the trees that were removed. Clearing
in the work area did not exceed 5,000 square feet.
4.4 The neighbor began complaining as soon as Mr. Clark began the work by
calling him on his cell phone and demanding that he come over to her property to see how the
view from her deck of the forest was "changing." Two weeks later she came out and told
Mr. Clark he was getting "very close" to her property, and so, as a courtesy to her, Mr. Clark
told her he would not remove any of the trees that she thought were hers. Upon information
and belief, the City has overreacted to neighbor complaints.
APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION - 4 of 14 200 Winslow sl REYNOLDSLAwoFFt80
200 Winslow Way West, Suite 380
[90364 -1) Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
(206) 780 -6777
(206) 780 -6865 (Facsimile)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
4.5 After the first site inspection, City Staff urged Mr. Clark to secure a vegetation
management approval for additional work. It was not until April 2016 that Mr. Clark was
issued approval for a Vegetation Management Permit, which he then used to obtain his forest
practices permit in person from the Department of Natural Resources office in Greenwater,
Washington. A true and accurate copy of the Vegetation Management Plan Permit ( "VMP ")
is annexed hereto as Exhibit 4, by reference made part of this Appeal.
4.6 As part of the Vegetation Management Plan Permit, Mr. Clark noted the trees
that needed to be removed for his home and backyard on the site plan. For this permit, he was
told there was a 20,000 square foot limit of additional cutting and clearing. Mr. Clark was
told by Mr. Schildmeyer (who was told by City Employee Josh Machen) that Mr. Clark
needed to actually physically mark the trees on the property that he wanted to remove. So,
Mr. Clark purchased some pink duct tape and flagged all the trees that he wanted to remove,
making sure he stayed within the allotted 20,000 square foot limit. Mr. Schildmeyer then came
out and approved the trees to be logged and the area to be cleared; Mr. Clark then proceeded
to log and clear. A substantial portion of the work area was disturbed but not cleared.
4.7 After the work was completed, this neighbor went down to City Hall to again
complain that Mr. Clark had removed "too many trees." Mr. Clark received a call from
Heather at the Department of Community Development the next day and told her he would
take time off work to come down and meet with her. She brought Director Christensen along
to the meeting. Director Christensen came with a 300 -foot tape measure. They proceeded to
measure the cleared area and concluded that it was under what had originally been proposed
to clear. Apparently this decision was not good enough for the neighbor, who then went to
the City Manager to complain. City employee Josh Machen then came out and took rough
APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION - 5 of 14 200 Winslow sl w Way W LAW OFFICE
200 Winslow Way West, Suite 380
[90364 -1] Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
(206) 780 -6777
(206) 780 -6865 (Facsimile)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
measurements of the entire property, including what was cleared with the clearing permit. He
determined that Mr. Clark had cleared "more than" 20,000 square feet, apparently thinking
that the 20,000 square feet allowed in the clearing permit included the 11,000 square feet
allowed in the VMP, even though the two approvals were separate and distinct, and the
cutting and clearing pursuant to each permit was separately approved by the City.
4.8 On October 7, 2016, Mr. Clark was told by Director Christensen (who
originally told him that the clearing he had done was under the 20,000 limit) that the
Vegetation Management Plan Permit was being revoked and that he would be facing a
moratorium along with fines and costs to replant. This came as a huge shock to Mr. Clark
since for the prior six months he had done everything the City asked of him. Indeed, City
employees had come out multiple times and assured him that he had not cleared "too much."
So, on October 12, 2016, Mr. Clark went in to meet with Mr. Machen to see if there had been
some sort of misunderstanding. Mr. Machen told Mr. Clark that the area to be cleared on the
site plan did not "look like" the area that had actually been cleared, and thus, Mr. Clark had
"violated" the VMP. Mr. Clark then asked Mr. Machen if the area to be cleared by the
Vegetation Management Plan Permit somehow included that allowed in the Clearing Permit.
His only answer was that this issue was out of his hands.
Permit.
4.9 On October 8, 2016, the City revoked the Clarks' Vegetation Management
4.10 On October 16, 2016, Mr. and Mrs. Clark timely appealed the City's permit
revocation decision, alleging that pursuant to their Vegetation Management Plan Permit, they
had not exceeded the 20,000 square foot clearing limit. It was further stated that the site plan
was an approximation only, which was substantially complied with in all material respects.
APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION - 6 of 14 200 Wi REYNOLDS LAW OFFICE
200 Wnssll ow Way West, Suite 380
[90364 -1] Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
(206) 780 -6777
(206) 780 -6865 (Facsimile)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Mr. Clark alleged that the facts at hearing would show he cleared or disturbed approximately
less than 20,000 square feet; the remaining area was disturbed but not cleared. The only area
actually graded is where the home is located; the remainder of the lot was cleared or
disturbed, but not graded. The City Code provides total site tree unit requirements (BIMC
§ 18.15.010.2) which have not been exceeded. Maximum lot coverage requirements were not
exceeded by Mr. and Mrs. Clark.
4.11 The Warning of Violation and Order to Correct is premised upon "revocation"
of Permit No. PLN50467 VEG. No apparent consideration was given to the Clarks' appeal of
the permit revocation. The enforcement action did not consider the prior directives and
guidance provided by City employees, or the City's affirmative obligations to provide
technical assistance.
4.12 The Warning and Order states: "... you must bring your property into
compliance. Once the property is brought into compliance, you must maintain the property to
be in compliance with City Codes." Absolutely no direction is provided as to what is
expected of the Clarks in order to bring their property "into compliance."
4.13 On October 19, 2016, the Clarks filed a timely request for Director's review
pursuant to BIMC § 1.26.070 and § 1.26.050. The Director decided to handle the Clarks'
request for review even though he had participated in the events leading to the City's
enforcement actions.
4.14 The Clark property is approximately 101,930 square feet. During the
Director's Review process, Mr. Clark went out and physically took measurements of the areas
that were disturbed but not cleared, and determined that area to be 13,580 square feet. He
then subtracted that figure from the City's figure of 33,278 square feet "cleared," which
APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION - 7 of 14 200 Winslow sl w Way Ds LAw Suite OFFICE
380
200 Winslow Way West, Suite 380
[90364 -1] Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
(206) 780 -6777
(206) 780 -6865 (Facsimile)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
leaves a total cleared area of 19,698 square feet, which is under 20 percent of the property.
These calculations were provided to the Director. A true and accurate copy of the
calculations placed upon an "overlay map" that COBI provided to the Clarks is annexed
hereto as Exhibit 5, by reference made part of this Appeal.
4.15 There is a distinction between "cleared" and "disturbed." See, e.g., BIMC
§ 16.18.020, Definitions. "Clearing" means the destruction and removal of vegetation by
mechanical or other means. "Disturbing" means moving dirt or effectuating a change in the
soil cover and /or the existing soil topography. In this matter, what occurred on a substantial
portion of the site is placing clean dirt from the basement excavation for the proposed home in
varying depths over existing vegetation. It is expected the vegetation will grow through or
new vegetation take hold in the disturbed areas. That is "disturbance," not "clearing."
4.16 Approval was sought to remove trees and stumps to develop the Clark property
for a single family residential use. The Vegetation Management Permit Application speaks in
terms of tree removal and harvest. The City Code, § 16.22.060A.1, uses the term "cut," that
is, trees which are cut or harvested. In the R -.04 Zone, the allowable percent of area is 20
percent. Disturbance is not regulated by the VMP.
4.17 The City has not alleged that the Clearing Permit 5,000 square foot limit on
clearing was exceeded. Thus, only the Vegetation Management Plan Permit limit (20,000
square feet) is in play, which was not exceeded.
4.18 The COBI issued the Clarks a building permit (BLD21401 SFP). That permit
allows the basement excavation and related grade and fill work, so is outside any prescribed
permit or Code clearing limit.
APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION - 8 of 14
[90364 -11
DENNIS D. REYNOLDS LAW OFFICE
200 Winslow Way West, Suite 380
Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
(206) 780 -6777
(206) 780 -6865 (Facsimile)
1
2
3
:d
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
4.19 City employee Ms. Janelle Hitch worked with Mr. and Mrs. Clark to establish
silt fences and stormwater controls for the approved excavation and related grade and fill
work. In addition to silt fencing, proper Best Management Practices control methods were
employed, including spreading grass seed on the affected areas with slope and spreading a
straw covering on any affected areas that required stabilization or protection from the
elements.
V. SUMMARY OF GROUNDS FOR APPEAL
5.0 Appellants reallege their allegations set out in Sections I — IV of the appeal.
5.1 For the reasons set out herein, the City's Decision is clearly erroneous.
Statement of Factual Errors
5.2 The Decision is in error in finding that Appellants are in violation of any
material term or condition of Permit No. PLN50467 VEG as interpreted and applied by City
Staff or any related City Code provisions found in Findings of Fact Nos. 1 -7 or the Decision.
5.3 The Decision is in error to the extent it "finds" that any limitation on the
extent of allowed clearing set out in Permit No. PLN50467 VEG, including a 20,000 square
foot limit, or other City approval, directive or requirement was violated.
5.4 The Decision is in error to the extent it "finds" that all City directives to
Appellants set out in Permit No. PLN50467 VEG or during site visits /inspections were not
followed.
Statement of Legal Errors
5.5 The Decision is based upon the premise that the City's approval as to the
allowed extent of clearing set out in the Vegetation Management Plan Permit iiiclucles what
was separately allowed by the Clearing Permit. This premise is legal error.
APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION - 9 of 14 200 Winslow sl w Way W st, S ite OFFICE
380
200 Winslow Way West, Suite 380
[90364 -1] Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
(206) 780 -6777
(206) 780 -6865 (Facsimile)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
5.6 The City does not contest any work under the Clearing Permit. Under the
doctrine of finality, the City cannot impliedly "add" such activity in assessing a possible
violation of the VMP.
5.7 It is legal error for the City to determine that the 20,000 square foot maximum
clearing set out in Permit No. PLN50467 VEG has been exceeded. The operative regulatory
standard is "cleared" but the City impermissibly imposes a "disturbance" standard.
5.8 The City's approach in this matter impermissibly conflicts with (a) its
affirmative obligations to provide technical assistance, and (b) its enforcement policy which is
remedial, not punitive.
5.9 The City has illegally allowed a complaining neighbor to interfere with the
Clarks' development.
5.10 The Decision is in error because it conflicts with City Code provisions as to
tree retention and allowed clearing set out above in Paragraph 4. 10, infra.
5.11 The Decision is in error under the doctrines of substantial compliance,
estoppel, or permission, among others.
5.12 There is a fundamental right to own and reasonably develop real property free
of arbitrary governmental actions, including enforcement of the law without basis in law or
fact. See, e.g., Carpinteria Valley Farms v. County of Santa Barbara, 334 F.3d 796 (Ninth
Circuit, 2003).
5.13 The right to build on one's property is a fundamental attribute of property
ownership and exists without regard to zoning laws, which operate as restrictions on the use
of property. Nollan v. California Coastal Commission, 483 U.S. 825, 833 n.2,107 S. Ct.
3141, 97 L. Ed.2d 677 (1987) (the "right to build on one's own property — even though its
APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION - 10 of 14 200 Wi REYNOLDS LAW OFFICE
20Q Wnssll ow Way West, Suite 380
[90364 -1] Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
(206) 780 -6777
(206) 780 -6865 (Facsimile)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
exercise can be subjected to legitimate permitting requirements — cannot remotely be
described as a `governmental benefit. "'); River Park v. City of Highland Park, 23 F.3d 164,
166 (7th Cir. 1994) ( "An owner may build on its land; that is an ordinary element of a
property interest. Zoning classifications are not the measure of the property interest but are
legal restrictions on the use of property. "); see also Palazzolo v. Rhode Island, 533 U.S. 606,
627 (2001) (explaining that government cannot extinguish a person's rights in his or her
property by regulation).
5.14 Although government may restrict an owner's property rights through
regulation (in this case, reasonably regulating clearing and tree removal), the regulatory
process does not negate the very existence of those rights — a person's property rights exist
regardless of the regulatory restrictions that burden those rights. See Nectow v. Cambridge,
277 U.S. 183, 187, 48 S. Ct. 447, 72 L Ed. 842 (1928); Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co., 272 U.S.
365, 384, 47 S. Ct. 114, 71 L. Ed. 303 (1926). A property owner who submits a land use
application is not requesting a government- created benefit; he or she is following the procedures
required to exercise the right to make use of private property. Nollan, 483 U.S. at 833 n.2. The
City's unreasonable partial denial violates Appellants' protected rights to maintain and
protect their property and persons who use it.
5.15 In Washington, the Growth Management Act (GMA) requires that
governments plan their growth, while also protecting the private property rights of
individuals: "Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation
having been made. The property rights of landowners shall be protected from arbitrary and
discriminatory actions." RCW 36.70A.020(6). The City's partial denial is arbitrary as set
out herein.
APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION - 11 of 14 200 Wi nssll 3cE
REYNOLDS LASoF
200 Wow Way West, Suite 380
[90364 -1] Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
(206) 780 -6777
(206) 780 -6865 (Facsimile)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
5.16 The GMA, RCW 36.70A.020(7), provides that: "... applications for ... local
government permits should be processed in a ... fair manner to preserve predictability." The
Application in question was not processed in a fair manner.
5.17 The Decision violates Appellants' constitutional rights, including their right to
substantive and/or procedural due process, equal protection, and the right to be free from
arbitrary or discriminatory application and enforcement of promulgated laws.
VI. APPEAL FEE
6.0 The $530 appeal fee is tendered with this appeal.
VII. CONSOLIDATION WITH PERMIT REVOCATION APPEAL
7.0 This appeal should be consolidated with the appeal filed on October 16, 2016
relating to revocation of the VMP.
VIII. RELIEF REQUESTED
Appellants request that the Office of Hearing Examiner, upon review:
8.0 Consolidate the two appeals.
8.1 Reverse and vacate the two Decisions challenged with a ruling that Appellants
have not violated any permit conditions or applicable law.
8.2 Enter an order vacating the City's revocation, Notice and Order to Correct and
Stop Work Order.
8.3 Order return of the appeal feed paid for the instant appeal.
8.4 Grant any other further relief that is just and fair under the circumstances.
APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION - 12 of 14
[90364 -1]
DENNIs D. REYNOLDS LAW OFFICE
200 Winslow Way West, Suite 380
Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
(206) 780 -6777
(206) 780 -6865 (Facsimile)
1
K,
3
4
5
6
7
8
�0]
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
DATED this ' day of December, 2016.
DENNIS D. REYNOL W OFFICE
By
L)eiin' Reynolds, WSI#A #04762
Attorneys for Appellants Paul and Jennifer Clark
APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION - 13 of 14
[90364 -1]
DENNIS D. REYNOLDS LAW OFFICE
200 Winslow Way West, Suite 380
Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
(206) 780 -6777
(206) 780 -6865 (Facsimile)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, the undersigned, hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State
of Washington, that I am now, and have at all times material hereto been, a resident of the
State of Washington, over the age of 18 years, not a party to, nor interested in, the above -
entitled action, and competent to be a witness herein.
I caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing pleading to be served this date, in the
manner indicated, to the parties listed below:
James E. Haney, WSBA #11058 ❑ Legal Messenger
Ogden Murphy Wallace, PLLC ❑ Hand Delivered
901 Fifth Avenue, #3500 ❑ Facsimile
Seattle, WA 98164 -2008 ❑ First Class Mail
(206) 447 -7000, tel / (206) 447 -0215, fax ❑ Express Mail, Next Day
'hare omw1mv.com; cmace@omwlaw.com
Attorneys for Respondent City of Bainbridge Island
DATED at Bainbridge Island, Washington, this 2,3 day of December, 2016.
JoI Brenner
Paralegal
APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION - 14 of 14
[90364 -1]
DENNIS D. REYNOLDS LAW OFFICE
200 Winslow Way West, Suite 380
Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
(206) 780 -6777
(206) 780 -6865 (Facsimile)
CLARK: Appeal of Administrative Decision ( #2)
EXHIBIT 1
CITY OF
BAINBRIDGE
ISLAND
December 12, 2016
Paul and Jennifer Clark
9809 NE Lafayette Ave
Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
vas
ID
s
pgn� p.
RE: Director's Review and Decision on Appeal of Warning of Violation & Order to Correct and
Accompanying Stop Work Order Regarding Vegetation Management Permit PLN50467 VEG
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Clark,
This correspondence is regarding your appeal and a request of a Director's Review of the City's (COBI)
Warning of Violation & Order to Correct and accompanying Stop Work Order that was issued pertaining
to the revocation of the above referenced permit. By transmittal of this correspondence and based on
the attached findings of fad and decision, I'm hereby issuing an Order Sustaining the Warning of
Violation & Order to Correct and associated Stop Work Order issued October 13, 2016.
The Director Review's decision may be appealed in accordance with the procedures set forth in
Bainbridge Island Municipal Code, Section 2.16.020(P). An appeal must be filed no later than 4:00 p.m.,
Tuesday, December 27, 2016 (note that December 26 is a City Holiday and City Hall Is closed).
If you have questions, you may contact me at the below address.
Sincerely,
-For C,�.�- y ��,`g��.�.•�ti
. Christensen, AICP
Tractor, Planning and Community Development
Attachment: Paul and Jennifer Clark Director's Review Decision on Appeal of Warning of Violation &
Order to Correct and Accompanying Stop Work Order Regarding Vegetation Management
Permit PLN50467 VEG
CC: Dennis Reynolds
Ann Wilson (Note: Ann Wilson, as the complainant, is being provided a copy of this letter in
accordance with BIMC 1.26.070.C.)
Page 1 of 3
City of Bainbridge Island Planning and Development Services
Director's Review Decision
Paul and Jennifer Clark, Appeal of Warning of Violation & Order to Correct and Accompanying
Stop Work Order Regarding Vegetation Management Permit PLN50467 VEG
Findini!s of Fact:
1. On October 6, 2016, the City revoked the Vegetation Management Permit PLN50467 based on
Gty staff site visits and violations of conditions listed on the Notice of Administrative Decision
for permit PLN50467 VEG, specifically conditions 2 and 4.
2. On October 13, 2016, the City issued a Warning of Violation & Order to Correct and
accompanying Stop Work Order.
3. On October 19, 2016, the City received a letter from Dennis Reynolds, Paul and Jennifer Clark's
(the "Clarks ") legal counsel, seeking a Request for Director's Review of the City's action to Issue
the Warning of Violation & Order to Correct and accompanying Stop Work Order.
4. On November 8, 2016, the Director's Review meeting was held pursuant to BIMC 1.26.070.
Those in attendance were Paul Clark (applicant), Dennis Reynolds, Josh Machen (the City's
Planning Manager), Joe Levan (City Attorney), and Gary Christensen (the City's Planning and
Development Services Director). At the meeting, the applicant and his legal counsel provided
additional information and materials, and indicated that further information would be provided
In response to City actions.
S. Based on that meeting, in accordance with BIMC 1.26.070, as Director I continued review of the
matter to allow the applicants to provide additional Information and materials to support what
was discussed at the Director's Review meeting.
6. On November 17, 2016, the applicant's legal counsel submitted additional information and
materials, more specifically calculations regarding the portions of the Clark's property that the
applicant described as "cleared" and the areas "disturbed" and an "overlay map" Illustrating
such, and correspondence from Janelle Witch (the City's Development Engineer) regarding sift
fences and stormwater controls.
7: On November 28, 2016, the applicant-was notified that the Director's review was complete and
that the Director's Order on the matter would be issued within 10 working days of the
correspondence (no later than December 12, 2016).
Decision:
After considering all of the information and materials submitted by the applicant and the record as part
of the Request for Director's Review, I am hereby sustaining the Warning of Violation & Order to
Correct and associated Stop Work Order issued October 13, 2016.
In making this decision, I considered the information, arguments, and materials offered by the
applicants and their legal counsel, Including the letter (October 19, 2016) seeking review of the Warning
Page 2 of 3
City of Bainbridge Island Planning and Development services
Director's Review Decision
Paul and Jennifer Cook, Warning of Violation & Order to Correct and Accompanying Stop Work Order Regarding
Vegetation Management Permit PLN50467 VEG
of Violation & Order to Correct and accompanying Stop Work Order, information discussed and material
provided at the Director's Review meeting (November 8, 2016), and additional information and
materials provided by correspondence (November 17, 2016) related to "calculations" and "slit fences
and stormwater controls." In addition, I relied upon information In the Vegetation Management Permit
PLN50467 VEG project file and associated City Planning and Development Services land use records and
related information.
I am sustaining the initial orders at issue based on the relevant findings of facts upon which the City
made those decisions, as well as based on the new information and materials provided by the applicants
as part of the Director's Review.
The Director Review's decision may be appealed by filing a written appeal and paying a $530.00 filing
fee to the City Clerk at 280 Madison Avenue North, Bainbridge Island, WA 98110, in accordance with the
procedures set forth in Bainbridge Island Municipal Code, Section 2.16.020(P). An appeal must be flied
no later than 4:00 p.m., Tuesday, December 27, 2016.
This Decision is dated December 12, 2016.
CITY OF
BAINBRIDGE
ISLAND
Gary R. Christensen, AICP
Director, Planning and Community Development
Page 3 of 3
CLARK: Appeal of Administrative Decision ( #2)
EXHIBIT 2
Department of Planning & Community Development
280 Madison Avenue North
Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
206 - 780.3769
www. ci. bainbridge -ist. we. us
R
CITY OF
BAINBRIDGE ISLAND
WARNING OF VIOLATION & ORDER TO CORRECT
The undersigned City of Bainbridge Island Code Compliance Officer hereby certifies and states that:
Violation Location
Parcel 28250220352008
COD16 -0055
Property Owner's Name
Paul & Jennifer Clark
Parcel Number
Same as above
Address
9809 NE Lafayette Ave
City, State, Zip Code
Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
DESCRIPTION OF VIOLATION
BIMC X22.030 Vegetation Management Permit
A Permit Required. Unless exempted In BIMC 16-22-04 a vegetation management permit Is required for harvesting of trees
and /or removal of vegetation.
81MC 16.1 &030 Cleating Permit
No person, corporation, or other legal entity shall engage in or cause clearing in the city without having obtained a land
clearing permit from the planning director or designee. No person, corporation, or other legal entity shall cut, trim, remove,
clear or damage any vegetation or trees within the following areas without obtaining a clearing permit from the planning
director or designee; any critical areas, shoreline areas or their buffers as defined in and regulated by Chapter 16:_12 or 16.20
BIMC. This standard also applies to landscape buffers, open space areas, or trees retained through a land use permit under
BIMC Titles 17 or 117, Including a4lacent properties.
Specifically: On 10 -7 -16 the City notified you that it had revoked permit # PLN50467 VEG. Effective
immediately the City is issuing a stop work order on all land clearing and/or the removal of any tree(s).
ACTION REQUERED
Within (10) days from the date of this letter, you must bring your property into compliance. Once
the property is brought into compliance, you must maintain the property to be in compliance with
City codes.
A CIVIL INFRACTION CITATION MAY BE ISSUED FOR EACH AND EVERY DAY WHICH THE
VIOLATION CONTINUES BEYOND THE DATE AND TIME ESTABLISHED FOR CORRECTION.
A CRIMINAL CITATION MAY BE ISSUED FOR ANY SUBSEQUENT VIOLATION(s) PER BIMC
1.26.100.
You must call for an inspection to vero compliance and to prevent additional legal actions from being
taken to gain compliance.
Department of Planning & Community Development
280 Madison Avenue North
Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
206. 780 -3769
www.d.baInbHdge-IsI.w;a.us
Anv Ouestlon or for Clarification Please Contact the- Officer Below
Signed:
Today's Date: 10 -13 -16
Name: (keg Vause
Phone: 206 -780 -3794
Title: Code Compliance Officer
Email: gvause @bainbridgewa.gov
CITY OF BAINBRIDGE ISLAND
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
206- 842 -2552
ALL PERSONS ARE HEREBY ORDERED TO AT ONCE
STOP WORK
PERTAINING TO: All Land Clearing and the removal of any tree(s)
On these Premises at:
Parcel 28250220352008
The order Is Issued due to violations of BIMC 16.22.030 816.18.030
Issued 10 -13 -16 Time 1100 hrs. Signature [..•' e
Code Enforcement Officer
- WARNING-
The failure to stop work, the resuming of work without permission from the
Department of Planning & Community Development, or the removal,
mutilation, or concealment of this notice is PUNISHABLE BY FINE AND
IMPRISONMENT. BIMC 1.26.050 "A failure to comply with to stop work order
shall constitute a violation of the applicable titles and chapter of this code."
Over
BIMC 1.26.070 Review by the director.
A. Any person affected by a notice of violation issued under BIMC I or 1 26.060 may request a
review of the notice by requesting such review within seven days after service of the notice. When the last
day of the period so computed is a Saturday, Sunday or federal or city holiday, the period shall run until
4:00 p.m. on the next business day. The request shall be in writing, clearly and concisely identifying the
errors of the director, or the basis for any claimed mitigation, and upon receipt of the request, the director
shall review the materials and:
1. Determine, in the sole discretion of the director, whether a review meeting should be held; or
2. Respond in writing denying the request for review citing the reasons for the denial. A director's
review may be denied if:
a. The review is being requested for an obvious or flagrant violation for which fines or
penalties, but no mitigation, are required;
b. The review is being requested solely to seek a reduction or elimination of fines and
penalties;
c. The review is being requested to seek a waiver or reduction of the enforcement fee;
d. The review is being requested for any matter relating to burning violations.
If the director determines a review meeting should be held, the director shall notify any persons
served the notice of violation and the complainant, if any, of the date, time and place set for the
review, which shall be not less than 10 nor more than 20 days after the request is received. Before
the date set for the review, any person affected by the notice of violation may submit any additional
written material to the director for consideration at the review. During the administrative review, the
order shall be in full force and effect until the order is corrected or the decision is overturned.
B. The review will consist of an informal review meeting held at the department of planning and
community development. A representative of the director who is familiar with the case and the applicable
ordinances will attend. The director or representative of the director will explain the reasons for the
issuance of the notice and will listen to any additional information presented by the persons attending. At
or after the review, the director may:
1. Sustain the notice of violation;
2. Withdraw the notice of violation; -
3. Continue the review to a date certain for receipt of additional information; or
4. Modify the notice of violation, which may include an extension of the compliance date.
C. The director shall issue an order containing the decision within 10 working days of the date of the
completion of the review and shall cause the same to be mailed by regular first class mail to the person or
persons named in the notice of violation, mailed to the complainant, if possible, and filed with the
Bainbridge Island municipal court and Kitsap County auditor if necessary for recording on the title to the
property.
D. The decision of the director may be appealed pursuant to the procedures set forth in BIMC 2.16.130.
(Ord. 2001 -02 § 9, 2001: Ord. 95 -02 § 1, 1995)
CLARK: Appeal of Administrative Decision ( #2)
EximiT 3
'R Dennis D. Reynolds Law Office
200 Winslow Way W. Suite 380 Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
Lind Use - Fisheries Law • Environmental law - Business Law - Indian Law - Real Estate
206.780.6777 206.780.686S fax ww.ddrlaw.cons
October 19, 2016
Hand Delivered
Gary R. Christensen, Director
Department of Planning and Community Development
City of Bainbridge Island
280 North Madison Avenue
Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
Re: Clark — Tax Parcel No. 28250220352008 / COD 16 -0055
Dear Director Cook:
Pursuant to the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code, Sections 1.26.070 and 1.26.050,
please treat this letter as a Request for Director's Review. This Request for Director's Review is
made on behalf of Paul and Jennifer Clark, 6809 NE Lafayette Avenue, Bainbridge Island,
Washington 98110. Please email my office directly to set a mutually convenient date for the
Director's Review meeting.
Review is sought of the Warning of Violation & Order to Correct and accompanying
Stop Work Order dated October 13, 2016, received by Paul and Jennifer Clark via U.S. Mail on
October 18, 2016 ( "the Notice ") issued under BIMC § 1.26.050 and /or BIMC § 1.26.060 by City
Code Compliance Officer Greg Vause. A true and accurate copy of the Notice is attached hereto
as Exhibit A, by reference made part of this request. The Notice alleges violation of the
Bainbridge Island City Code. Mr. and Mrs. Clark will honor the Warning and Stop Work Order,
but contest that they have violated any regulation, permit approval or directive from any City
official.
SPECIFICATION OF ERRORS
The Notice does not specify the grounds for its issuance. Thus, Mr. and Mrs. Clark set
out their story, reserving the right to amend this request if more specification is provided by the
City. Here goes.
Mr. and Mrs. Clark own 2.23 acres of property located on Bainbridge Island. They
intend to develop their property with a single- family home, drainfield, well, access road, and
appurtenant structures. The work includes removing trees and stumps to create a building site
for a proposed home. The project site and tax parcel information is: Johnsonville Lane, Tax ID
No. 28250220352008.
They purchased 2.33 acres of land in January of 2016 and began development by first
getting a clearing permit from the City of Bainbridge Island in February. Mr. Clark was told by
City employee Nate Schildmeyer that the clearing permit would limit him to 5,000 board feet of
L.Lrte'r ari 6cd,&L_ '- u
[90128-11 Pc p D',¢IEe70X cFeu- bAMt -Se �
CITY OF DAI'NBRIDGE ISLAND
Gary R. Christensen, Director
Dept. of Planning & Community Dev.
October 19, 2016
Page 2
timber and that he would have to designate the trees to be taken down. This turned out to be
about ten trees covering an area of about 11,000 square feet. Mr. Clark went ahead and marked
the trees to be cleared and went back to Mr. Schildmeyer for his approval. It took a few days,
but Mr. Schildmeyer came back later that week and approved the trees that Mr. Clark had
designated. After Mr. Clark had cleared the designated area, Mr. Schildmeyer and Janelle Hitch
came out to inspect the property due to a complaint by a neighbor that Mr. Clark was building on
a salmon stream. They verified there was no stream and also noted the trees that were removed.
It was not until April that Mr. Clark got approval for a vegetation management permit, which he
then used to get his forest practices permit in person from the Department of Natural Resources
office in Greenwater. A true and accurate copy of the vegetation management plan permit is
annexed hereto as Exhibit B, by reference made part of this request.
As part of the vegetation management permit, Mr. Clark noted the trees that needed to be
removed for his home and backyard for his family on the site plan. For this permit he was told
that this new permit would limit him to 20,000 square feet of additional cutting. Mr. Clark was
told by Mr. Schildmeyer (who was told by Josh Machen) that Mr. Clark needed to actually
physically mark the trees on the property that he wanted to remove. So Mr. Clark went out and
bought some pink duct tape and flagged all the trees that he wanted to remove, making sure he
stayed under the allotted 20,000 square foot limit for the vegetation management permit.
Mr. Schildmeyer then came out and approved the area to be cleared and Mr. Clark proceeded to
clear.
The neighbor began complaining as soon as Mr. Clark began clearing, by calling him on
his cell phone and demanding that he come over to her property to see how the view from her
deck of the forest was changing. Two weeks later she came out and told Mr. Clark he was
getting very close to her property and so, as a courtesy to her, Mr. Clark told her he would not
remove any of the trees that she thought were hers. When the clearing wad finalized, said
neighbor went down to City Hall to complain that Mr. Clark had removed too many trees. He
received a call from Heather at Planning the next day and told her he would take time off work to
come down and meet with her. She brought you with her to the meeting, and you carne with a
300' tape measure. The two of you proceeded to measure the cleared area and concluded that it
was under what had originally been proposed to clear. Apparently this decision was not good
enough for the neighbor who then went to the City Manager to complain. Josh Machen then
came out and took rough measurements of the entire property, including what was cleared with
the clearing permit, and deemed that Mr. Clark had cleared more than 20,000 square feet.
On October 7, 2016, Mr. Clark was told by you (who originally told him that the clearing
he had done was under the 20,000 limit) that his vegetation management permit was being
revoked and that he would be facing a moratorium along with fines and costs to replant. This
came as a huge shock to Mr. Clark since for the prior six months he had done everything the City
asked of him. Indeed, City employees had even come out multiple times to tell him that he had
not cleared too much. So on October 12, 2016, Mr. Clark went in to meet with Josh Machen to
[901 xx -I ]
Gary R. Christensen, Director
Dept. of Planning & Community Dev.
October 19, 2016
Page 3
see if there had been some sort of misunderstanding. Mr. Machen told Mr. Clark that the area to
be cleared on the site plan did not look like the area that had actually been cleared, and thus
Mr. Clark had violated the vegetation management permit. Mr. Clark then asked Mr. Machen if
the area to be cleared by the vegetation management permit and the clearing permit was
cumulative or not. His only answer was that this issue was out of his hands.
Mr. Clark does not believe that he has over - cleared, nor does he believe that he attempted
to take advantage of the trust that the City had placed in him to develop his property. Mr. Clark
honestly feels that he has followed every request made to him by the City and that he has been
compliant with everything City Staff has asked him to do, or, at a minimum, has substantially
complied in all material respects.
SUGGESTED RELIEF
Upon review, the Director should vacate the Notice and direct that the City's enforcement
file on this matter be closed and that no criminal or civil penalties be imposed.
Very truly yours,
DENNIS D. REYNOLDS LAW OFFICE
1�-- 0 4�
Dennis D. Reynolds
Enclosure
cc: Paul & Jennifer Clark
Greg Vause, Code Compliance Officer (w /encl.) (hand delivered)
Joseph B. Levan, City Attorney (w /encl.) (hand delivered)
DDR/cr
[901xx-I]
CLARK -- Request for Director's Review
EXWBIT A
Department of Planning & Community Development
280 Madison Avenue North
Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
206 - 780 -3769
www. cl.bainbridge-lst we. us
CITY OF
BAINBUDGB ISLAND
'DARNING OF VIOLATION & ORDER TO CORRECT
The undersigned City of Bainbridge Island Code Compliance Officer hereby certifies and states that:
Violation Location
Parcel 28250220352008
COD16 -0055
Property Owner's Name
Paul & Jennifer Clark
Parcel Number
Same as above
Address
19809 NE Lafayette Ave
City, State, Zip Code
I Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
DESCRIPTION OF VIOLATION
BIMC 16.22.030 Vegetation Management Permit
A. Permit Required. Unless exempted In BIMC 16.22. Otto , a vegetation management permit is required for harvesting of trees
and /or removal of vegetation.
BIMC 1618030 Dearing Permit
No person, corporation, or other legal entity shall engage In or cause clearing In the city without having obtained a land
clearing permit from the planning director or designee. No person, corporation, or other legal entity shall cut, trim, remove,
clear or damage any vegetation or trees within the following areas without obtaining a clearing perntitJr•wn the planning
director or designee: any critical areas, shoreline areas or their buffers as defined in and ragultated by Chapter M,1 'or lt)..?Q
BIMC. This standard also applies to landscape bi(fers, open space areas, or trees retained through a land use permit under
BIMC Titles I ' or I v, including a4lacent properties.
Specifically: On 10 -7 -16 the City notified you that it had revoked permit # PLN50467 VEG. Effective
immediately the City is issuing a stop work order on all land clearing and /or the removal of any tree(s).
ACTION REQUMED
Within (10) days from the date of this letter, you must bring your property into compliance. Once
the property is brought into compliance, you must maintain the property to be in compliance with
City codes.
A CIVIL INFRACTION CITATION MAY BE ISSUED FOR EACH AND EVERY DAY WHICH THE
VIOLATION CONTINUES BEYOND THE DATE AND TIME ESTABLISHED FOR CORRECTION.
A CRIMINAL CITATION MAY BE ISSUED FOR ANY SUBSEQUENT VIOLATION(s) PER BIMC
1.26.100.
You must call for an Inspection to verify compliance and to prevent additional legal actions from being
taken to gain compliance
Department of Planning & Community Development
280 Madison Avenue North
Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
206 -780 -3769
www. cl. halOddge -lsl. we. us
Anv Quevion or for Clarification Plawe Contact ike Ofileer Below
Signed: �s'" "" "�"
Today's Date: 10 -13 -16
Name: Greg Vause
Phone: 206 - 780 -3794
Title: Code Compliance Officer
Email: gvause @bainbridgewa.gov
CITY OF BAINBRIDGE ISLAND
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
206 -842 -2552
ALL PERSONS ARE HEREBY ORDERED TO AT ONCE
STOP WORK
PERTAINING TO: All Land Clearing and the removal of any tree(s)
On these Premises at:
Parcel 282S02203S2008
The order is Issued due to violations of BIMC 16.22.030 & 16.18.030
Issued 10 -13 -16 Time 1100 hrs. Slgnature w `"
Code Enforcement Officer
=WARNING=
The failure to stop work, the resuming of work without permission from the
Department of Planning & Community Development, or the removal,
mutilation, or concealment of this notice is PUNISHABLE BY FINE AND
IMPRISONMENT. BIMC 1.26.050 "A failure to comply with to stop work order
shall constitute a violation of the applicable titles and chapter of this code."
Over
BIMC 1.26.070 Review by the director.
A. Any person affected by a notice of violation Issued under BIMC 1.26.050 or 1.26.060 may request a
review of the notice by requesting such review within seven days after service of the notice. When the last
day of the period so computed Is a Saturday, Sunday or federal or city holiday, the period shall run until
4:00 p.m. on the next business day. The request shall be In writing, clearly and concisely Identifying the
errors of the director, or the basis for any claimed mitigation, and upon receipt of the request, the director
shall review the materials and:
1. Determine, In the sole discretion of the director, whether a review meeting should be held; or
2. Respond in writing denying the request for review citing the reasons for the denial. A director's
review may be denied It
a. The review Is being requested for an obvious or flagrant violation for which fines or
penalties, but no mitigatlon, are required;
b. The review Is being requested solely to seek a reduction or elimination of fines and
penalties;
c. The review is being requested to seek a waiver or reduction of the enforcement fee;
d. The review is being requested for any matter relating to burning violations.
If the director determines a review meeting should be held, the director shall notify any persons
served the notice of violation and the complainant, if any, of the date, time and place set for the
review, which shall be not less than 10 nor more than 20 days after the request is received. Before
the date set for the review, any person affected by the notice of violation may submit any additional
written material to the director for consideration at the review. During the administrative review, the
order shall be In full force and effect until the order is corrected or the decision is overturned.
B. The review will consist of an informal review meeting held at the department of planning and
community development. A representative of the director who Is familiar with the case and the applicable
ordinances will attend. The director or representative of the director will explain the reasons for the
Issuance of the notice and will listen to any additional Information presented by the persons attending. At
or after the review, the director may:
1. Sustain the notice of violation;
2. Withdraw the notice of violation;
3. Continue the review to a date certain for receipt of additional Information; or
4. Modify the notice of violation, which may include an extension of the compliance date.
C. The director shall issue an order containing the decision within 10 working days of the date of the
completion of the review and shall cause the some to be mailed by regular first class mail to the person or
persons named In the notice of violation, mailed to the complainant, If possible, and filed with the
Bainbridge Island municipal court and Kltsap County auditor if necessary for recording on the title to the
property.
D. The decision of the director may be appealed pursuant to the procedures set forth In BIMC 1v 6.130.
(Ord. 2001 -02 § 9, 2001: Ord. 95 -02 § 1, 1995)
CLARK: Request for Director's Review
I 4I o� ;1
NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION and
MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (MDNS)
The City of Bainbridge blood has wade a deahlas concerning the following land use nppllcation:
Date of Issuance: July 13, 2016
Project Name & Number: CLARK, PAUL VEG PLN50467 VEG
Project Type: Vegetation Management Plan
Owner: JENNIFER and PAUL CLARK
Project Site & Tax Parcel: Johnsonville Lane, TA1i 28250220352008
Project Description: Remove trees and stumps to create a building site for the house, well and
yard.
Permit Decision: The application is approved. The staff report, containing the statement of
facts upon which the decision, including conditions, Is based and the
conclusions of law derived from those facts, is available. to the public upon
request The decision becomes eflbctive after 14 days from the date of
Issuance, or after Wednesday, July 27, 2016
SEPA Determination: The City of Bainbridge Island (lead agency) has determined that the proposal
does not have a probable significant impact on the environment if mitigation
measures are properly implemented. An environmental impact statement
(Big) Is not required under RCW 43.21 C.030(2xc). This detetminadon was
made after revfow of a completed environmental checklist and other
information on file with the lead agency. This Information is available to the
public upon request.
Responsible Official: Clary Christensen, AICP, Planting Director
City of Bainbridge Island
Address: Department of Planning and Community Development
280 Madison Avenue North
Bainbridge Island, WA 981 % (06) 842 - -25►5+2
Signatures te: t1131
Appeal Procedure: This adm isdative decisfsaa sruilor 9f:PA dotcrrnfnatinn may be appealed by
tiling a written appeal and paying a 8530.00 filing fee to the City Clerk at
260 Madison Avenue North, Bainbridge Island, WA 98110, in accordance
with the procedures set forth In the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code,
Section 2.16,020P anchor 16.04.170. An appeal trust be filed no later than
4.00 p.m., Wednesday, July 27, 2016. You should be prepared to maize
specific factual objections.
Mitigation Measures for This Ilmhold determination Is for Pile number PLN50467 VBQ, A
Determination: threshold determination under the State Environmental Policy Act in no way
allows construction work to commence without appropriate construction
penm4 suds as a building or grading pormlt. Mitigation measures become
conditions of approval fbr the percent.
Cooditfons of Approval are listed on the following page(,):
Scanned by CamScanner
If you have any questions, contact:
Nathan Schlldmeyer
City of Bainbridge Island
Department of Planning 8t Community Development
280 Madison Avenue Nortlti
Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
206. 780.3760 or nschildmeyar@bainbddgewa.gov
Condidone of Approval:
I. A separate building permit will be required for the construction of any structures, buildings,
roadways, driveways or utilities on this site.
2. This approval extends to the clearing of vegetation within the "Revised Garden Area," "Haul
Route," and homesite area represented on the revised site plan submitted and date stamped July
12, 2016 (included as "Attachment B" of staff report).
3. All significant trees in the area of the on -site sewer (OSS) system drainfield shall be retained.
4. Total of clearing under this approval shall not exceed 20,000 square feet of area.
3. A class N forest practices permit fiom the Washington State Department of Natural Resources is
required to begin the work authorized by this permit. The applicant shall receive this approval
prior to commencing any clearing activities, and shall provide copies of this approval to the
Planning and Community Development (PCD) Department.
6. Clearing limits fencing must be installed, inspecte3d, and approved by the PCD Department as
shown on the site plan submitted July 12, 2016 as part of this application prior to any vegetation
disturbance on the site, in order to verify compliance with the conditions of approval and
conformity with the standards of BIMC 16.22. At the time of the clearing limits inspection, the
applicant shall have the property boundary lines on the north and west of the lot clearly and
accurately marked and identifiable.
Scanned by CamScanner
CLARK: Appeal of Administrative Decision ( #2)
ExxislT 4
NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION and
MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (MDNS)
The City of Bainbridge Inland has made a decision concerning the following land use application:
Date of Issuance: July 13, 2016
Project Name & Number: CLARK, PAUL VEG PLN50467 VEG
Project Type: Vegetation Management Plan
Owner: JENNIFER and PAUL CLARK
Project Site & Tax Parcel: Johnsonville Lane, TAN 28250220352008
Project Description: Remove trees and stumps to create a building site for the house, well and
yard.
Permit Decision: The application is approved. The staff report, containing the statement of
facts upon which the decision, including conditions, is based and the
conclusions of law derived from those facts, is available to the public upon
request. The decision becomes effective after 14 days from the date of
issuance, or after Wednesday, July 27, 2016
SEPA Determination: The City of Bainbridge Island (lead agency) has determined that the proposal
does not have a probable significant impact on the environment if mitigation
measures are properly implemented. An environmental impact statement
(EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21 C.030(2xc). This determination was
made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other
information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the
public upon request.
Responsible Official: Gary Christensen, AICP, Planning Director
City of Bainbridge Island
Address: Department of Planning and Community Development
280 Madison Avenue North
Bainbridge Island, WA 981 (x:06) 842 - 2552
Signature: to: tbPp
Appeal Procedure: This administrative decision and/or SEPA determination may be appealed by
filing a written appeal and paying a $530.00 $sing fee to the City Clerk at
280 Madison Avenue North, Bainbridge Island, WA 98110, in accordance
with the procedures set forth in the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code,
Section 2.16.020P and/or 16.04.170. An appeal must be filed no Inter than
4:00 p.m,, Wednesday, July 27, 2016. You should be prepared to make
specific factual objections.
Mitigation Measures for This threshold determination is for file number PLN50467 VEG. A
Determination; threshold determination under the State Environmental Policy Act in no way
allows construction work to commence without appropriate construction
permits, such as a building or grading permit. Mitigation measures become
conditions of approval for the permit.
Conditions of Approval are listed on the following page(s):
Scanned by CamScanner
If you have any questions, contact:
Nathan Schlldmeyer
City of Bainbridge Island
Department of Planning & Community Development
280 Madison Avenge North
Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
206. 780 -3760 or nschildmeyer@bainbridgewa.gov
Conditions of Approval:
1. A separate building permit will be required for the construction of any structures, buildings,
roadways, driveways or utilities on this site.
2. This approval extends to the clearing of vegetation within the "Revised Garden Area," "Haul
Route," and homesite area represented on the revised site plan submitted and date stamped July
12, 2016 (included as "Attachment 13" of staff report).
3. All significant trees in the area of the on -site sewer (OSS) system drainfield shall be retained.
4. Total of clearing under this approval shall not exceed 20,000 square feet of area.
5. A class IV forest practices permit from the Washington State Department of Natural Resources is
required to begin the work authorized by this permit. The applicant shall receive this approval
prior to commencing any clearing activities, and shall provide copies of this approval to the
Planning and Community Development (PCD) Department.
6. Clearing limits fencing must be installed, inspecte3d, and approved by the PCD Department as
shown on the site plan submitted July 12, 2016 as part of this application prior to any vegetation
disturbance on the site, in order to verify compliance with the conditions of approval and
conformity with the standards of BINIC 16.22. At the time of the clearing limits inspection, the
applicant shall have the property boundary lines on the north and west of the lot clearly and
accurately marked and identifiable.
Scanned by CamScanner
CLARK: Appeal of Administrative Decision ( #2)
EXHIBIT 5
T
Q
0
ID
3
cl
d
0
Q
n
r�
4
00 �.
n
I
up
m
rot
as
�o
ro
u 7
mm ~
!a a y
d
45" 1 EASEMENT
oo�umewar�nem�mamaw �`-ry
Dennis D. Lm���om �n
''- '-'-"---- omwommuc/nu�omwom/.0
uVovwmg vxSoim3mu m�un�co�
aamu� /��.mm�110
206'80-677' 1212212016 �
�
wToTHE of �� °�5K>.UU
RosROF -�" '
- - �
Five hundred thirty and 00V100~°°
'__--_-___-----'-_-_-_-
DOLLARS ^~
�
-', _. �
2mo Madison Avenue North "
Bminbhdge|s|and ' WA 98110
�
*mmr 09
�
�
110 0 0 6111 U: L 2 S LOf62?2o:O9O1SOI377O"a
Dennis D. Reynolds Law Office
12/22/2016 City of Bainbridge Island
Columbia Bank 'Checking
COBI appeal fNnQNee - Appe of Administrative Deci
CITY OF DAIN8klDSE ISLAN0 FIN
MISC[lLANEOUS CASK R[CEIPTS
Date / Time : 12/27/16 11:49
�ece pt # � 558567
Ch:ck/Credit Card N; 444�
C�erk � cmitchell
Paid 8y : DENNIS D. REYN01-115