July 8 Planning Commission
--by Dixie A. Walter
    At the last regular meeting of The Eatonville Planning Commission, July 8, commissioners voted to cancel the July 15 meeting and convene Monday, Aug. 5 at 7 p.m.
    A drama played out as Robert and Meredith Sholin waited for the commission to decide how and where they spent the rest of their lives.
    This drama ended happily when the commissioners unanimously voted in the Sholin's favor after long and detailed discussion.
    A decade ago the Sholin property on Ohop Creek Drive North was annexed by the Town of Eatonville. They were promised sewer and water but have never received them. Two years ago they applied to the commission for a conditional use permit to live in a mobile on their property. At that time the commission denied their application. The Sholins did not appeal in the proper way because they were ill and had no knowledge of the appeal process.
    Last month Robert Sholin asked the Eatonville Town Council for permission to reapply to the planning commission, and their request was granted by a vote of three to two.
    Public Works Director Jamison Van Eaton explained, "The planning commission and the town are not responsible for informing Mr. and Mrs. Sholin as to how to go about the appeals process. It's implicit in our code that they have, by rights, ten days to appeal the process. They never did that. This is not an appeal, it's a reapplication for conditional use."
    Van Eaton said something "jumped at me" when he was reading Appendix B of the Finding of Facts, "Development standards are based on the best accepted contemporary practices, rather than on past practices. Contemporary practice recognizes the need for more flexible regulation than in the past, with more administrative discretion concerning land development decisions."
    Robert Sholin patiently stated his case once again, "During the '40s I played football against Eatonville. I've been in the area a long, long time and I've seen many, many changes.
    One of the changes was when Eatonville came in and annexed our property. They promised us sewer and water and all the necessities of living in the city [town]. And here we are 11 years later with one big nothing."
    Sholin told the commissioners, "You might wonder, 'You were turned down the first time, what the heck are you doing back here now?'"
    He explained how a neighbor "turned us down two years ago. He lived in Kent." The man has since sold his property and the couple have new neighbors who are "very gracious" to the couple.
    "My wife's roots go much deeper than mine, Eatonville is her life. She's a part of the land and wants to live here the rest of her life," Sholin explained.
    He pleaded his case, "We want to move into this trailer because the house is so big and we have so much land and yard. We are just getting too old to maintain it all. Maybe we will rent the house and let somebody else do all that work. I'm hoping you'll vote tonight in favor of us."
    From the audience Pat Van Eaton spoke in support of the Sholins, saying he was in favor of the conditional use application, and drew attention to the fact that Appendix B calls for more flexibility in development standards which is "smart growth."
    He went on to say, "Zoning has been a massive success, we have traffic jams because we are so rigid in zoning; everyone is forced to live somewhere else and drive to work. I think flexibility in zoning may be new, but it should be incorporated into our new plan."
    Also speaking in support of the Sholins, Betty Allison informed the commission that she had lived in the area for over 50 years and had known Meredith Sholin since she moved to Eatonville. "Her children went to school with mine. I know they are great people, good people, and I really feel these people deserve a break."  One of the many concerns about granting the Sholin's request is  hiding mobile homes from view by the public.  Allison stated, "I went down and saw that property and you can't even see that trailer until you get almost directly in front of it."
    Commission Chairman Steve Lind informed his fellow commissioners that a letter of support from Ed and Jeannette Smith had been received. The Smiths, "neighbors and friends" for 30 years, wrote, "Bob and Meredith Sholin deserve to be able to use their land." Adding, "Somewhere along the line someone snuck in a change of zoning on the Sholins and it is now zoned commercial."
    The Smiths also noted there are "at least four other mobile homes on the neighboring properties, so it [granting Sholin's request] will not set a precedent."
    No one spoke or wrote opposing the Sholin's application.
    An interesting exchange concerning discrimination took place. Commissioner Bobbi Allison said, "I want to caution everybody about the distinction between a manufactured home and a stick built home. There is case law that recludes anyone from discriminating between the two."
    David Babcock, one of nine commissioners, told the group, "A manufactured home and a mobile home are two different things. A manufactured home is carted in and put up. A mobile home is wheeled in. And we do have that on our books, to designate which is which." Allison again warned the commission "for the record" that case law says you "cannot discriminate..."
    Commissioner Grins Pierce said, "If that were the case then we are already discriminating all the time. I don't see how we can avoid the discrimination that exists now."
    There was much discussion among the planning commission members about mobile homes, RV parks, septic systems, conditional use and the future of the Sholin's land.
    Commissioner James King had this to say about conditional use: "If we were to issue the conditional use we could put a condition in stating it could only be for Mr. and Mrs. Sholin. Once it's [their property] is vacated, sold or given away then the conditional use would become null and void."
    Pierce added his thoughts, "I view these folks to be elderly. Someday they may face having to be moved out and may need an income stream. My feeling is that if we do this, as long as they are alive they should be able to live on the income stream of that property." He continued, "Since they were not allowed to have sewer, whatever the reason, we, as a town, have impacted them and in fairness they should be allowed to live on their land in a way they can afford to live on it. I think that weighs much heavier than a dispute between a manufactured home and a stick built home."
    More dialogue ensued concerning zoning, mobile home parks, annexation and septic systems. Pierce said, "Everything that's happened to these people is a result of annexation. If you really want to get technical, why not back them out of the annexation if we're not going to do anything to help them?"
    Allison asked, "Do we know right now how long it's going to take the town to get sewer and water services down the hill?" Her answer was "no."
    King made a motion to allow the Sholins to live in their mobile home under the conditions that there is one mobile home, one unit and the conditions will be in effect as long as the Sholins live in their mobile home. The conditional use being null and void once the property is " sold, vacated or given away." Pierce added an amendment to allow the couple to rent "both of their properties so they have an income stream."
    Both the amendment and the motion passed unanimously.
    In other business commissioner Barbara Samora inquired about "the grass height law." Public Works Director Van Eaton stated he had looked into it and "because we are a town and not a city we cannot enforce regulations, it's kind of like a freedom of private property to grow long grass if you're a town, not a city." Van Eaton said he could look farther into the issue "because there's a lot of long grass here, it's a problem."
    Pat Van Eaton told the commission, "I want to become a party of record concerning the growth management plan. One of the issues is 'smart growth' and I hope this planning commission will take that into consideration. The watershed, storm water management and urban growth boundaries are in the plan. I'm very interested in these issues and I will look at these very closely. So plan away."
    Discussion of the Comprehensive Plan update was put on hold until town consultant for growth management and the comprehensive plan Mart Kask could attend the commission meeting. Kask was absent July 8 and was not available for the July 15 meeting. The commission voted to cancel that meeting and assemble again Aug. 5. The planning commission meets at the Eatonville Town Hall in the courtroom.

"The tragedy of life is what sometimes dies inside a man while he lives."
~Schweitzer