Say WA? Evergreen State ping
FReepmail sionnsar if you want on or off this ping list.
Ping sionnsar if you see a Washington state related thread.
Posted on 07/08/2008 7:52:12 AM PDT by Libertarianize the GOP
In a case that could determine how far local governments can go in limiting forest-clearing across entire watersheds, a state appeals court ruled Monday that a King County law went too far.
Rural property-rights advocates hailed the decision as repudiating excessive regulation, while environmentalists said it could degrade some of the county's most pristine streams and further jeopardize Puget Sound's threatened chinook salmon.
A three-judge Court of Appeals panel ruled that the 2004 clearing and grading ordinance — part of a package of laws collectively but imprecisely called the critical-areas ordinance — is an indirect but illegal "tax, fee, or charge" on development.
Before the county restricts how much land a property owner can clear for lawn or pasture, the unanimous court said, it must show that the clearing of that property would cause some kind of harm.
(Excerpt) Read more at seattletimes.nwsource.com ...
Seems to me if I own the property and pay the taxes, I should be able to do what I want on it (barring illegal activities, of course).
while environmentalists said it could degrade some of the county’s most pristine streams and further jeopardize Puget Sound’s old hippie population....
“One of the most far-reaching laws of its kind, the ordinance prohibits landowners from removing vegetation from more than half of a property larger than 1-¼ acres or more than 35 percent of a property of five acres or more.”
“Seems to me if I own the property and pay the taxes, I should be able to do what I want on it (barring illegal activities, of course).”
So True, but there are those on the King County Council that see clearing your own brush and cutting down unwanted trees on your own land as “illegal activity”.
A win like that in King County. Amazing.
Finally some news!
Good news, although the practical affect only prevents such a broad restriction on land use. The King County planning department can still force land owners, on a case by case basis, to follow the old restrictions. They just have to assert an environmental benefit from each individual land use restriction.
Which they did not want to do in the first place because it was to expensive, better to paint with a broad brush and make the peasants conform, I hate those bastards.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.