|
State high court rules house at Columbia Gorge can stay Paul Queary; The Associated Press Olympia, WA - June 29, 2001 - In a victory for landowners over scenic preservation advocates, the Washington Supreme Court on Thursday overturned a congressionally empowered agency's bid to remove a dream house from a bluff overlooking the spectacular Columbia River Gorge. The case stretches back to 1996, when Brian and Jody Bea applied to Skamania County to build on property his family had owned for generations. The county approved the land-use permit with conditions designed to protect the scenic value of the area, and the Beas began to build. But in 1999, with the Beas' $300,000 house 70 percent finished, the Columbia Gorge Commission invalidated the permit and ordered the county to force the Beas to move the house to a different part of their 40-acre parcel. The panel said the house violated the terms of the permit and was too visible from some of the region's most popular viewpoints on the Oregon side of the Columbia River, a violation of the Scenic Area Act. Since then, the house has sat exposed to the elements, uninsulated and unheated, while lawyers argued its fate. "We had a dream and we began the dream, and then it became a nightmare," said Brian Bea, a physician's assistant who said he has worked 300 hours a month in recent years to pay rent and the mortgage on the unfinished house. "Hopefully this nightmare is now ended." The county and the Beas challenged the commission's authority to countermand a building permit that already had been finalized. A lower court ruled against them, but the state Supreme Court reversed that decision. "We agree with Skamania County and the Beas that the Gorge Commission's action was without authority of law," Chief Justice Gerry Alexander wrote for the eight-justice majority. However, the court left open the possibility that the commission could use other methods to try to force changes in the Beas' house. In essence, the court agreed with the Beas that the commission missed its chance by failing to challenge the permit before it was finalized. "Agencies can't come in well after the fact," said Russ Brooks of Pacific Legal Foundation. "That's a position that's way out there in left field." But the Gorge Commission and the Friends of the Columbia Gorge contend the Beas' application was misleading and the county was lax. "This case involved a landowner who did not accurately portray his proposed development on his application, and Skamania County issuing a decision that did not accurately describe the impacts of the development and failing to enforce the conditions of that decision," the Gorge Commission said in a statement. The commission, responding to complaints about the house, got involved in July 1998, a year after the deadline to appeal the permit. © Associated Press 06/29/~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |