I have been watching the proposed Falls Crossing and quarry

expansion issues unfold. It seems odd that our elected representatives, their

appointees and ourselves cannot prohibit the development of a property that

would be wrong for the community. It seems odd that the law places the rights of

a single property owner over the rights of all the citizens who would be

affected by the development of a property.

I believe that the residents of a town should have more say about

how that town changes. It follows that the property owners’ rights should be

tempered to more closely align with the good of the community and the

wisdom of its citizens. I think it is wrong that a property owner is allowed

to develop a property when it degrades the environment of the

surrounding property owners, and when the developer is the only person to profit

from it.

The increase in traffic, runoff, sewer use, etc., are factors that are

routinely mitigated in the planning of a development as the responsibility

of the developer. I propose that those factors that contribute to our quality

of life be quantified and mitigated also, so that we may be compensated by

the developer for the negative changes in our surroundings caused by the

development. I am speaking of noise, congestion, ambient light, loss of

revenue for established businesses, deterioration of the view and similar

changes, the importance of which are more subjective than, say, the increase in

cars per day on Railroad Avenue.

If this were done, the developers and the affected municipalities

and citizens would all equally enjoy the financial benefits of the

development and share the costs of the changes to their surroundings. When the area

is developed sufficiently to make it unlivable, we will have all

profited enough to get out and go somewhere else.

Dave Eiffert

Snoqualmie