After discovering an encroachment on Clarke Beach, the Mercer Island City Council authorized staff to sell the property to the homeowner encroaching on the park for $28,000.

The park was purchased with state grant money, so the proceeds of the sale must be used to buy more park land per Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO) requirements, said Parks and Recreation Director Bruce Fletcher.

The sale isn’t final. At the Oct. 20 City Council meeting, there was a debate about who is financially responsible for resolving encroachments:  the homeowner or the city.

The councilmembers were split on this, and voted 4-3 to pay 50 percent of the city’s $9,000 costs, which include a survey, appraisal and title report.

Some councilmembers wanted the homeowner to pay the city’s costs in full.

“The law may be difficult, but that’s the law,” said Deputy Mayor Dan Grausz. “All we can do is protect public property on behalf of the citizens of this Island … and if there are costs incurred to resolve the encroachment, the city gets reimbursed for those costs.”

Many homeowners do not do a property line survey before building a fence or deck, and may unknowingly build on property they do not own.

In this case, the current owners were not aware of the encroachment, which measures 2,584 square feet and includes a patio, retaining walls and landscaping. They are the third owners of the property since it was redeveloped in 2006.

“There was nothing on public record that the property was encroaching,” said the homeowner, Brian Graham, when he addressed the Council. “There is a responsibility of the city to take care of the parks. That’s why, when you issue a permit for a construction site that is next to city property, you should do due diligence to make sure that property doesn’t encroach on the park.”

Graham said that 98 percent of Mercer Island buyers don’t do a lot line survey, and it’s not recommended by local realtors.

The Council went into executive session to discuss the $28,000 price.

“Some may argue that the appraisal didn’t come up with a high enough value,” Grausz said, but he thought it was reasonable.

Usually, encroachments are removed by the homeowner or sometimes by Eagle Scout volunteers, said City Attorney Katie Knight at a Council meeting in July.

An encroachment agreement wasn’t possible in this case, as removing the landscaping would be expensive and would destabilize the slope, Fletcher said.

Councilmember Debbie Bertlin said she encourages all homeowners to get surveys done on their properties before purchasing. Though there was no ill intent on the part of the city or the homeowner, this decision sets a precedent for how the city will deal with encroachments in the future, she said.

“This is an unfortunate situation … but there has to be a degree of impartiality,” Bertlin said.

The city has been steadily working through encroachments, and discovered this one in 2009.

This was a unique situation for the city and the RCO, but Fletcher said that “if anyone were to walk the property line, this makes sense.”

At their meeting on July 7, the Council declared that the portion of property being encroached on was a “surplus” to the city’s parks and recreation needs, meaning it could be sold.

The city sent letters to neighbors and had a public hearing, and received no objections to the sale, Fletcher said.