Thursday, June 18, 2009

Legal stuff; appeal of SnoCo PDS case #09-102455-ct

Snohomish county PDS issued me a notice of violation for a trailer that I use to raise birds, and for my greenhouse. Here's the appeal letter:
Appeal of notice of violation in the case #09-102455-ct

Basis for appeal:

The code enforcement officer in this case did not return repeated phone calls made to him and did not talk to me about either of this structures prior to entering this order.

The "mobile home" is a farm trailer used for the brooding and raising of chickens. It is not permanently affixed to the ground, it is licensed and towable. Farming on the flood plain does require evacuation of animals in the case of flood, and in the most recent flood event in early January, 2009 Snohomish county PDS videotaped me loading animals and equipment on these trailers to evacuate my property. Roxanne Pilkenton has viewed this video and is in possession of it to the best of my knowledge.

This farm trailer is in response to over 2 years of attempting to permit a permanent structure to raise and brood birds in. If the PDS will ever approve my structure I'd be happy to use permanent, anchored buildings to accomplish the same purpose. But since this process apparently takes years to complete, trailers are a legal and appropriate alternative.

This trailer has no water, power, kitchen or working bathroom. It's used exclusively to store feed, animals and tools. It currently contains 778 chickens and 150 turkeys and 3 geese.

With respect to the membrane structure, since temporary buildings do not typically require flood hazard permits I did not apply for one. Having been informed that one is required, I will file for such a permit, but my expectation is that the permit process to approve that building will span several years as has the last.

In the interest of resolving this issue, if Mr. Odegaard wishes to come an inspect the trailer in question, he's welcome to. He can reach me at 206 940 4980 to arrange a time to do that inspection.


Dave said...

Did they tell you which part of which RCW says you need a permit for the hoop house or is this just another case of some office dude applying his personal opinion to the law ?

Bruce King said...

Snohomish counties' position is that any building, of any size or construction, temporary or not, requires a flood hazard permit.

The $300 flood hazard permit isn't the problem; if it was just that I'd probably pay it and be done with it. It's the habitat management plan ($750 fee, + $3000 professional fees) and the survey ($2500) required to complete the application that's the problem.

So to build a chicken coop, for instance, you'd need to pony up $6500. Of that money, only $1,000 goes to the county -- the rest goes to various folks like the surveyor or the environmental consultant they're forcing you to hire.

Bruce King said...

oh yea; the best information that I've got about the environmental report they force you to file is that the filing is that there is "no take" of salomonid species. In other words, you're paying thousands of dollars for what amounts to "nevermind, there's no impact". Complete waste of money.

Dave said...

Thats just nuts, kinda reminds me about 15 yrs ago when we bought our place we had to pay like $75 to verify we were not in a flood plain, our elevation is 750'