City to appeal ruling on Yelm subdivisions

This forum will list the news articles relative to the topic of RSE, directly or indirectly.
tree
Posts: 974
Joined: Sun May 18, 2008 12:31 am

City to appeal ruling on Yelm subdivisions

Unread post by tree »

A Thurston County Superior Court judge reversed approval of five Yelm subdivisions in response to a Land Use Petition filed by channeler JZ Knight.
Posted Nov 21, 2008. E-mail this article to a friend.

By Megan Hansen
Nisqually Valley News

A Thurston County Superior Court judge reversed approval of five Yelm subdivisions in response to a Land Use Petition filed by channeler JZ Knight.

The City of Yelm must go back and reapprove the subdivisions with different conditions.

?The five subdivisions were approved with improper conditions,? said Keith Moxon, Knight?s attorney. ?They were approved on the condition that the city didn?t have to prove potable water until building permit stage.?

The appeal was on a hearing examiner?s approval of five subdivisions, which would have brought 568 new homes to Yelm.

Yelm Mayor Ron Harding said the city will not reapprove the subdivisions before the city has appealed the judge?s decision.

?We need to appeal on principle,? Harding said. ?We really need to have clarification.?

?I feel bad because it?s a waste of the city?s resources, when really this is on the hearing examiner?s decision.?

Harding estimates this appeal could take several years, but maintains the city will continue to do business as usual.

In the initial appeal, Knight argued that potable water should be proven at preliminary plat approval.

She later changed her argument to say water must be proven at final plat approval.

RSE officials declined to comment, referring instead to a full-page ad purchased in this week?s Nisqually Valley News.

Harding said the city has always proved water at final plat.

Moxon disagrees, however, and said the judge noted that the city hasn?t proved water availability until building permit.

?The city has been taking the position that they can prove water at building permit stage,? Moxon said.

Last week, city officials said they were unhappy with how the final order was handled, saying they felt it was full of unnecessary opinion that clouded the issue.

?That?s what they told the judge, and he disagreed,? Moxon said.

?I disagree.?

?It was drafted to provide clarity.?

City officials argued that their submission for the final order wasn?t given the same consideration as the one drafted by Moxon.

?The prevailing party is entitled to submit their final order,? Moxon said. ?We did what prevailing parties always do.?

?The city submitted theirs earlier, but did not present it at the hearing.?

The city challenged Moxon?s order, but those challenges were dismissed.

?We did address their concerns,? Moxon said.

The judge?s order not only reverses approval of the subdivisions, but sets a precedent that water must be proven at final plat approval.

The city must also send Knight prior notice on any staff reports, hearings and decisions being made on the five subdivisions.

?Knight has the opportunity to be involved in the process,? Moxon said.

The city has 30 days to appeal the judge?s decision.
Post Reply

Return to “News Articles”