Grandfather TreesApril of 1989, the King County Superior Court gave Innis Arden residents an opportunity to seek assistance in enforcing the view preservation covenant. 'Special Masters' were appointed by the Court and provided binding arbitration over tree height disputes. Judge Anne Ellington wrote the 'Procedures for Special Master Process', with grounds for variance from the covenant. Grounds for variance included the 'grandfather' clause:
Where a tree is demonstrated to have been view blocking prior to subdivision (1941, 1945, and 1949 for Innis Arden I, Innis Arden II, and Innis Arden III respectively) and trimming or topping would significantly damage the tree, then it would be 'grandfathered'.
By order of March 8, 1990 the Court clarified as follows: Additional exclusion "Grandfather Trees" Trees which were view blocking before the subdivisions. Respondents alleging this ground must establish that the tree was view blocking at the time of subdivision.
The following ten properties in Innis Arden have been identified in Court records as having grandfather trees:
Case Number 84-2-09622-5
Filing Date
Address
Description of Tree
8-5-1991
18229 13th NW
Fir (removed Nov 2005)
8-5-1991
1048 NW Innis Arden Drive
Maple (fell, April 2004)
11-26-1991
Cedar, 3 feet south of garage
1-2-1992
18124 14th NW
Maple at NW corner of property
1-2-1992
2 Maples
1-10-1992
Cedar, rear of lot
3-17-1992
17207 12th NW
2 Cedars, behind house (removed July 2005)
3-18-1992
Fir at north of property
3-23-1992
Fir, east of lot
3-31-1992 17252 13th NW Cedar 5-5-1992
Maple at south of property
In one Special Master decision in which grandfather status was denied, the respondent appealed the Order. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision. At issue was a tree estimated by an arborist to be view blocking prior to subdivision and therefore 'grandfathered'. However, photographic evidence showed that the tree in question was not visible and thus the tree was not grandfathered.
In another Special Master decision grandfather status was denied because trees which were cut to restore views cannot be allowed to become view obstucting again despite their age or previous height.
The Special Master process concluded in 1992, with Judge Ellington recommending that the Innis Arden Board develop and plan for future petitions.
In June 2004, a Covenant Compliance request was made regarding a tree on the Tollett property. In October of 2004, the Tollett trust requested from the court that the Special Master process be reinstated. This request was denied.
In December of 2004, the Board made a decision with regard to a compliance complaint involving a tree on the Tollett property. "The Board lacks the authority to declare the Tollett tree a "grandfathered" tree as defined in the Special Master Guidelines promulgated by Judge Ann Ellington in the Innis Arden Club, Inc v Binns et al lawsuit. The tree was subsequently removed in 2005.