Outdated Study in the Lake Wenatchee Avalanche?
That’s what the Wenatchee World says in yesterday’s article on the avalanche stricken house near Lake Wenatchee. But, I wasn’t convinced by the article. It doesn’t say when the house was built, but Kahler Glen has been around since the late 1980’s according to the history section on their web site and the geo-tech report was from 1993.
Of course, a bunch of insurance companies and attorneys will probably eventually litigate to some sort of conclusion of blame or financial responsibility for the destruction of this home. I don’t know how things worked in Chelan County in the 1980s, but today the decision of which lots could be built upon would be part of the plat process. That would not be a decision made when a landowner is looking for an individual building permit for a home. So, 1993 does not sound “out of date” for when the plat process may have been done.
Of course, the situation begs the question of how much regulation do we really want from our local governments on building? How many hoops do we want to have to go through to get a building permit? Is county planning supposed to be our nanny when it comes to using common sense on where we build? Fortunately, only property was damaged in this incident. But is it the county’s responsibility to protect us from incidents like this?
Much of growth management is about protecting the environment from people and their infrastructure. Supposedly growth management protects habitat areas, streams, open spaces and water quality among other things. In my dealings with Growth Management, it doesn’t protect the builder or homeowner from the environment. A development already has to do SEPA studies, traffic studies, storm water studies, engineering and design studies and many more can be required if the project is in a sensitive area. As the list shows, Growth Management doesn’t protect the property owner from high costs.
In the future, this will now be a sensitive area if it wasn’t already. Clearly, it has now been proven that the slope above this home, and possibly others in the area is not stable. If there are other endangered structures and the danger is high enough, what should be done with those homes?
I remember a group of three homes that was built on Capital Hill in Seattle. In a particularly wet storm season, one slid down towards Lakeview Drive and the others shifted and were condemned. I checked with some friends who remembered the details about what eventually happened with that issue. The homeowners sued the City of Seattle saying that they should have never issued building permits and should have controlled the storm water. The city actually lost, but the award was miniscule, on the order of tens of thousands of dollars. The homeowners said they would have been better off to not have even bothered.
Another Seattle analogy is the Perkins Lane area in Magnolia. The area has continual landslides and several homes have been damaged and destroyed over the years. But, people keep building there because it is has spectacular views overlooking Puget Sound. I’m sure the news on this particular act of nature is not over yet!
Discussion Area - Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.