Kudos to Noah Haglund for shining light on Highbridge Estates developers’ $3 million damage claim against the county for their own delays finding a legal water source for its rural project. (Tuesday article, “Builder files damage claim against county over well-water issues”).
Uncovered environmental controversies surrounding Highbridge beg asking, why should county taxpayers bail it out? The project received a Determination of Significance and remand by the second Hearing Examiner to review it. Located along a pristine portion of the Snoqualmie River, the project redirects untreated stormwater from High Bridge Road into a Chinook salmon spawning and rearing section most prime along its reach. The third Hearing Examiner overlooked this fact to support preliminary approval, one of several bases for appeal.
Another controversy is whether valid septic approvals occurred to ensure that in addition to stormwater waste, the salmon are not subject to untreated septic effluent. In order to get preliminary health district approval, the developer allegedly trenched the site without permits to lower the water table, hiding its inability to provide safe septic treatment.
Damage claims are paid out of the same strained county coffers that support the health district, our justice system, law enforcement and roads. Hopefully county decision makers will not prioritize developers’ claims above necessities for the public health, safety and welfare.
The outrage is that the county track record on damage claims scandalously favors developers over defending well-founded decisions in court. This is how the county’s weakness creates a cash cow for developers at county taxpayer expense.
Laura Hartman
For High Bridge Community Association
Snohomish
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
