Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
LUA98-153
c$ .' CIT 1. OF RENTON tairgf%., Hearing Examiner Jesse Tanner,Mayor" Fred J.Kaufman January 4, 1999 Mr.'James L. Colt Mt. Olivet Cemetery Co., Inc. P.O. Box 547 Renton, WA 98057 Re: Request for Reconsideration re Appeal of Short Plat Restrictions on La Colina Short Plat Appeal File No.: LUA98-153,AAD Dear Mr. Colt: This office has reviewed your Request for Reconsideration. This office sees no reason to alter or modify the decision. : Any applicable State law that governs this site is not a matter for this office to interpret. You may seek legal relief for any violations of State law in a court with appropriate jurisdiction. No other issues raised require any change in the decision. You may file appropriate appeal remedies within applicable time limits. Sincerely, Fred J. Kau an Hearing Examiner FJK:mm cc: Mayor Jesse Tanner Jay Covington, Chief Adminisrative Officer . Larry Warren, City Attorney Peter Rosen, Project Manager Parties of record 1055 South Grady Way- Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6515 CITY OF RENTON y- DEC 291998 rY ^F`MT. RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE OLIVET CEMETERY ANEWLAWIRAL HOMES City of Renton Fred J.Kaufman,Hearing Examiner p e 0 HAND DELIVERED Re: file No.:LUA98-153,AAD Dear Mr.Kaufman: Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 15 of the City's Code,this is our request for reconsideration of your decision of December 10, 1998. In your Findings of Fact,Finding#19 you state that, "a number of provisions of state law governing cemeteries and historic graves may[emphasis added]be applicable to this case." You continue to cite portions of the RCW without making a definitive determination that they are applicable or in the alternative that they are not applicable. We request that you reconsider your statement and make a decision as to whether the RCW applies to the property in question or whether in your opinion it does not. Exhibit#3 contains more sections of the RCW than those referenced in your Finding#19. Your Conclusion#10 states that a survey essentially overturns RCW 68.32010, this conclusion is in error and we request that you consider it as it relates as to whether the RCW is relevant in this section to the cemetery property covered in our appeal. Your Conclusion#13 states that bodies may[emphasis added]be laid to rest in what is termed the encroachment area,and irrespective of the RCWs cited herein state that the appellant(Mt.Olivet Cemetery)does not have property rights therein although you state in Conclusion#5 that the City did not notify those who are heirs or possible relatives of those buried on the subject site. You state that notice to Mt.Olivet Corporation should be notice to them in Conclusion 5 while in 13 you state that Mt:Olivet has no property rights therein on their behalf. These conclusions and findings conflict with one another and we would request you provide clarification and reconsideration of the same. Th're are many other areas of ambiguity in your decision that we cannot address at this time because the use of the terms"may apply"do not tell us your actual decision based upon those findings and conclusions. Clearly you have incated that the property in question contains human remains which just as clearly indicates that the City's error in ding that the property was"vacant"was an improper conclusion and decision,which could have easily have been prevented or rectified by a simple visit to the site. This is our request for clarification and reconsideration of your decision. Sincerely, A/ t. O . . 7 Ai'I TERY CO.,INC. ir -NoorWAID,—...1 Jam 4 C, - ' -sident cc: K- Hanchett,Esq. Funeral Home, Mausoleum, Crematory and Gardens Box 547 • 100 Blaine Ave. N.E., Renton, WA 98057 • 206-255-0323 CITY OF RSNTON DEC 2 a 1998 A t RECEIVEDMT. CITY CLERK'S OFFICE OLIVET CEMETERY AWslanWilltiVERAL HOMES City of Renton 2ACFredJ.Kaufman,Hearing Examiner 2 HAND DELIVERED Re: file No.:LUA98-153,AAD Dear Mr.Kaufman: Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 15 of the City's Code,this is our request for reconsideration of your decision of December 10, 1998. In your Findings of Fact,Finding#19 you state that, "a number of provisions of state law governing cemeteries and historic graves may[emphasis added]be applicable to this case." You continue to cite portions of the RCW without making a definitive determination that they are applicable or in the alternative that they are not applicable. .. We request that you reconsider your statement and make a decision as to whether the RCW applies to the property in question or whether in your opinion it does not. Exhibit#3 contains more sections of the RCW than those referenced in your Finding#19. Your Conclusion#10 states that a survey essentially overturns RCW 68.32010, this conclusion is in error and we request that you consider it as it relates as to whether the RCW is relevant in this section to the cemetery property covered in our appeal. Your Conclusion#13 states that bodies may[emphasis added]be laid to rest in what is termed the encroachment area,and irrespective of the RCWs cited herein state that the appellant(Mt.Olivet Cemetery)does not have property rights therein although you state in Conclusion#5 that the City did not notify those who are heirs or possible relatives of those buried on the subject site. You state that notice to Mt. Olivet Corporation should be notice to them in Conclusion 5 while in 13 you state that Mt. Olivet has no property rights therein on their behalf. These conclusions and findings conflict with one another and we would request you provide clarification and reconsideration of the same. There are many other areas of ambiguity in your decision that we cannot address at this time because the use of the terms"may apply"do not tell us your actual decision based upon those findings and conclusions. Clearly you have indicated that the property in question contains human remains which just as clearly indicates that the City's error in finding that the property was"vacant"was an improper conclusion and decision,which could have easily have been prevented or rectified by a simple visit to the site. This is our request for clarification and reconsideration of your decision. Sincerely, A/ ffy i 47,1hTERYCO. INC. Jam "C: ; 'resident cc: Ke •n Hanchett,Esq. Funeral Home, Mausoleum, Crematory and Gardens Box 547 • 100 Blaine Ave. N.E., Renton, WA 98057 • 206-255-0323 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. County of King MARILYN MOSES being first duly sworn, upon oath, deposes and states: That on the 10th day of December ,1998, affiant deposited in the mail of the United States a sealed envelope(s) containing a decision or recommendation with postage prepaid, addressed to the parties of record in the below entitled application or petition. Signature: oE. K6- SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this /0W'7 day of 4Cvinia-L; 1998. ILUk-d-e. Notary Publi91in and for the State of Washington, residing at iri- therein. Application, Petition, or Case No.: Appeal of La Colina Short Plat LUA98-152,AAD The Decision or Recommendation contains a complete list of the Parties of Record. HEARING EXAMINER'S REPORT I December 10, 1998 OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND DECISION APPELLANT: James L. Colt Appeal of Short Plat and Restrictions re La Colina Short Plat File No.: LUA98-153,AAD LOCATION: South and Southwest of Mt. Olivet Cemetery SUMMARY OF APPEAL: Appeal decision of City regarding restrictions on short plat,the short plat, and notice thereof. PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Appellant's written request for a hearing and examining the available information on file,the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: MINUTES The following minutes are a summary of the November 10, 1998 hearing. The official record is recorded on tape. The hearing opened on Tuesday,November 10, 1998, at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit No. 1: Yellow file containing the appeal,Exhibit No.2: Land Use File No. LUA97-136, ShPI proof of posting and publication, and other by reference) documentation pertinent to the appeal. Exhibit No.3: Copy of portions of RCW statutes Exhibit No.4: Assessor's map of Mt. Olivet 68.04, 68.60, 68.24'and 68.32 Cemetery Exhibit No.5: Plot map Exhibit No.6: Short plat map Exhibit No.7: Triad Associates map of site, sheet 2 Exhibit No. 8: Copy of short plat,page 3 of 3 of 2,Job 94-130 Exhibit No. 9: Survey map dated 10/9/81 by Exhibit No. 10: Agreement between Copley/GMC Goldsmith Exhibit No. 11: Agreement between GMC/Wallis Exhibit No. 12: Collections of RCW cemetery statutes Exhibit No. 13: Restrictive Covenants Exhibit No. 14: Photographs of grave sites(3) James L. Colt Appeal of Short Plat Restrictions re La Colina Short Plat File No.: LUA98-153,AAD December 10, 1998 Page 2 Parties present: James L. Colt,Appellant Representing City of Renton P.O. Box 547 Larry Warren Renton,WA 98057 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Representing Applicant Gary Merlino Construction Co. David Halinen 10500 NE 8th,#1900 Bellevue,WA 98004 The Examiner explained that the appeal was an administrative appeal held pursuant to Ordinance 3071 and was the only administrative review to occur on the matter. The matter may be submitted back to the Examiner for reconsideration if the parties are not satisfied with the decision. He stated that the appellant had the burden of demonstrating that the City's action was erroneous, and would have to show clear and convincing evidence that the City's determination was incorrect. At that point the City could respond, if they chose to do so. As a preliminary matter,Mr. Warren raised a standing argument as to any of the third parties referenced in the appeal and their rights in this appeal. He also asserted a standing challenge concerning the cemetery itself or Mr. Colt's ability to assert the rights of the cemetery in the manner of this appeal. James L. Colt, appellant herein, stated that Mt. Olivet Cemetery is a dedicated cemetery since 1990 and has had burials in it since 1960. He stated that the City has chosen to take property which belongs to individual property owners and their successors,has replatted it, granting applicant permission to build single family residential homes. In order for that to be done,they would have to remove the dedication, and in order to remove the dedication they would have to exhume and remove all the bodies. In the La Colina plat which was originally approved, it was conditioned with respect to the resolution of the historic graves and possible Indian graves lying on that property. It has been some time later and that it is still not resolved. Applicant has applied for and received a short plat for the property excluding, or attempting to exclude,portions of the encroachment area. The property owners and their successors in interest and those who have been buried there have been excluded from this project which both would modify their original approval substantially,requiring a new hearing on it, and patently cannot be done because someone else's land is being short platted. Mr. Colt then referred to several Revised Code of Washington statutes pertaining to cemetery definitions, including RCW 68.040.040(2)which states for the purposes of this chapter a cemetery is any burial site,burial ground or place where five or more human remains are buried. It further goes on to say that the cemetery definition not only includes burials within there,but that a cemetery's boundaries shall be a minimum of 10 feet in any direction from those burials.RCW 68.60.010(3)defines a historical grave as a grave that was placed outside a cemetery, dedicated pursuant to this chapter prior to June 7, 1990. It further goes on to say at 68.60.020 that any cemetery which would include the 10 feet previously defined and any historic grave which would include the 10 feet previously defined that has not been dedicated pursuant to 68.24.030 shall be considered permanently dedicated as of that date. In this instance there were burials made outside Mt. Olivet Cemetery on what is the Merlino.property lying south of the L-shaped parcel since 1960. At a trial in 1978 it was indicated that there were in excess of 20 bodies lying on the Merlino property south of the L-shaped parcel, that those graves were determined to be historic graves and defined under the definition of a cemetery including James L. Colt Appeal of Short Plat Restrictions re La Colina Short Plat File No.: LUA98-153,AAD December 10, 1998 Page 3 the 10 feet in 1979. To make things a cemetery without having to rely on property owners to dedicate the land, the Legislature in 1990 dedicated all such historic graves and graves and cemeteries lying outside of existing dedicated cemeteries. Mr. Colt stated that that is the land the City of Renton has approved to build single family homes on,that is the land that the short plat has been issued on. Mr. Colt further asserted that those people that a court would determine are entitled to notice have not been notified and were not notified. Property owners include not only deceased ones buried there but also includes their descendants. It is defined in RCW 68.32 as to their rights,presumption as to title,vested rights of spouses, descent of the title, family plots. Mr. Warren asserted his continuing standing argument regarding third parties. He further stated that this is not a development proposal as there are no houses being built on top of these graves and there is State law which prohibits building on top of or too close to a grave. The Examiner stated he had no jurisdiction over resolving the issue of notification of the parties at this time. A discussion ensued regarding the boundaries of Mt. Olivet and who owned the land where these bodies are buried. Mr. Colt responded that because there were bodies buried there prior to 1960,the boundaries of the cemetery were expanded to include these bodies. Mt. Olivet has been in possession and control of that property since 1960,has maintained it,has buried bodies there and continues to bury bodies there. He further questioned who does the encroachment area belong to other than the property owners of Mt. Olivet Cemetery which has certification to operate the cemetery. Mr.Halinen stated that the record title has vested in Gary Merlino Construction Co. and there has been no showing made to the contrary;that there is an existing fence that encroaches onto the Merlino property. Mr. Colt responded that lying within the encroachment area were those whose names were listed in his letter of appeal,that there were clearly defined markers. Bradley Freeman, 11814 115th Avenue NE,Kirkland, Washington 98034, stated that he is a licensed professional surveyor employed with Triad Associates. He explained the half-foot offset that was depicted on the short plat drawing in relation to the proposed Tract C boundary to the fence. He stated it is an existing fence that may designate an area of possible encroachment. The property lying south of the fence is a vacant piece of property,but he did not remember the condition of the property lying north of the fence. On cross- examination he further explained the notations and symbols on the short plat map regarding the common boundary and the differences between the 1981 survey map and the 1994 survey map. Mr. Halinen at this point explained the history of the restrictions upon Tracts A,B and C. He stated that Tract B has been withdrawn from the short plat proposal as agreements have been entered into among the parties. City staff is now willing to stipulate that the restriction will not apply to proposed Tract C since boundary line agreements have been entered into. Mr. Colt questioned the modification of the short plat without notification to parties of record. Discussion ensued among the parties regarding the proposed modification and notification process. Excerpts from RCW 68 cemetery statutes were read by Mr. Halinen to assert applicant's position, including definitions and notification. Mr. Colt questioned Mr. Halinen regarding the documents in the bankruptcy proceedings,but the Examiner interrupted that it was not relevant to this proceeding. Photographs were shown to Mr.Halinen in an effort to identify the location of headstones on gravesites,but there was no indication on the photographs where the gravesites were located. James L. Colt Appeal of Short Plat Restrictions re La Colina Short Plat File No.: LUA98-153,AAD December 10, 1998 Page 4 Closing arguments were given by the parties and their comments reiterated their previous statements. The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this appeal. There was no one else wishing to speak. The hearing closed at 2:50 p.m. FINDINGS,CONCLUSIONS &DECISION Having reviewed the record in this matter,the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1.The appellant,James L. Colt,president of Mt. Olivet Cemetery Company,Inc.,hereinafter appellant, filed an appeal of an administrative determination approving a short plat(File No.LUA-097-136;La Colina Short Plat). 2.The appellant is president of a cemetery located north of the proposed short plat. The short plat is located south of Mt. Olivet Cemetery and north of SR-169,the Maple Valley Highway. 3.The appeal was filed on September 10, 1998. The record shows that the appeal was filed in a timely fashion. 4.The proposed short plat is for an approximately 41.05 acre parcel. The short plat was approved by administrative review. The appellant incorrectly asserts that the underlying decision was by the Hearing Examiner. The decision was an administrative decision which did not involve the Hearing Examiner's office until the appeal herein was filed. 5.The appellant's allegations can be summarized as: a.The special restrictions being applied are inappropriate. b.The Section 68.32.010 presumption of title to cemetery plots. c.No notice was given to those parties who are either buried or have family members buried at the site or who may have a future interest in a plot which may be part of short plat. d.The site, contrary to staff report, is not vacant. e.The City is short platting Mt. Olivet cemetery or where historic graves are located. f.The distance between the edge of grave and any other property is not the required 10 feet as required by law. g.The matter is before US Bankruptcy Court and unresolved. h.Old covenants govern the site. 6.The applicant,Bruce Knowlton/Triad Associates proposes dividing the subject property into one(1)lot and three(3)tracts. The one lot would be 40.79 acres and will be subdivided using normal full platting James L. Colt Appeal of Short Plat Restrictions re La Colina Short Plat File No.: LUA98-153,AAD December 10, 1998 Page 5 techniques. Actually, an approved Preliminary Plat(File No LUA-095-167,PP)would divide this parcel into 139 single family lots. 7.Proposed Tract A, a very tiny parcel, is approximately 4.69 square feet. Proposed Tract B is approximately 184.50 square feet. Tract C,the tract adjacent to the cemetery, is approximately 11,226.11 square feet. 8.It appears from the record and testimony that the boundary between the north end of the applicant's property and the south end of appellant's property,Mt. Olivet Cemetery,was unclear. In fact,the property line between the applicant's property and additional properties west of the cemetery was similarly ambiguous according to the record. The parties refer to this area as the encroachment area. 9.The record shows that the encroachment area belongs to the applicant. Two different surveys show that a cemetery fence strays on to the applicant's property. Any such waver would encroach on the applicant's property. Any use of this area by the appellant would have been improper. This is the area of Proposed Tract C. 10. The other areas noted above occur in the vicinity of the Monterey Terrace single family subdivision. In that case, some of the single family property owners abutting the applicant's north property constructed improvements including fences, sheds or both south of the actual property line,thereby also encroaching on the applicant's property. These are Tracts A and B, respectively. 11. Additional encroachments including a concrete pad(Monterey Terrace Lot 2)and fence(Monterey Terrace Lot 1)were also found to be encroaching on the applicant's property. The owners of those adjacent, abutting parcels have agreed to the demarcation of the property line and will have the encroachments removed. Therefore they were not included in the short plat as additional tracts. 12. The appellant claims to have knowledge of bodies buried in the encroachment area that would be Tract C,but nothing demonstrative was submitted. None of the exhibits defines where bodies are located in juxtaposition with the property line or property lines defined in either the older surveys or the proposed Tract boundaries. 13. Since these various discrepancies exist and possibly cloud the title and development rights of the applicant,the applicant proposed the short plat reviewed herein. The applicant desires to redevelop his property south of the common property line with a single family plat. In order to plat the greater portion of the applicant's property unencumbered by these clouds on title,the applicant submitted a request to short plat the larger acreage into 1 lot and 3 tracts which would segregate the disputed or encroachment area from the remainder. 14. The applicant stated the case in its September 12, 1997 letter to City: "This preliminary short plat application is unique in that approval of the short plat will create no new lots(italics in original). Instead,we are using the short plat process to create tracts around several existing encroachments and occupations which exist along the perimeter property lines of the parcel." 15. They clarified the intent and defined the lots and properties affected in a March 14, 1998 letter to Jana Huerter in which they state: "Specifically,these include a fence south of Lot 5 adjacent to Monterey Terrace(Tract A), a shed and fence south of Lot 17 within the same plat(Tract B)and a fence encroachment where the property abuts the Mt. Olivet Cemetery(Tract C). These three tracts plus the parent lot make a total of four lots created within the short plat." James L. Colt Appeal of Short Plat Restrictions re La Colina Short Plat File No.: LUA98-153,AAD December 10, 1998 Page 6 16. The applicant proposes the following conditions or limitations on the proposed tracts: Special Restriction Upon Tracts A,B, and C: Tracts A,B and C encompass areas of encroachment across previously-established boundary lines of record. These three tracts are not intended to be independent buildable lots. None of these tracts can be converted to independent buildable lots by a mere increase in tract size(such as by boundary line adjustment with one or more abutting parcel of land.) In order to convert any of these three tracts to independent buildable lots, City of Renton approval of a subdivision or short subdivision application involving one or more of these tracts as well as abutting parcel(s)would have to be secured." 17. In addition to this short plat there are apparently some matters filed with the US Bankruptcy Court. The applicant has filed quiet title and damages actions against the appellant in that court. 18. Notice of the action was provided to all real property owners within 300 feet of the subject site as found in the records of the assessor's office. This notice included the appellant as the operator of Mt. Olivet Cemetery. In addition,notice was posted on and near the site and published in the newspaper of record. The City did not specifically notify those who are buried,who might be buried or possible heirs or relatives. Notice to the cemetery corporation,Mt. Olivet, should be sufficient and reasonable notification. 19. A number of provisions of state law governing cemeteries and historic graves may be applicable to this case. Some of those sections cited in part are: Section 68.60.010 (3): `Historic grave' means a grave or graves that were placed outside a cemetery dedicated pursuant to this chapter and to chapter 68.24 RCW, prior to June 7, 1990, except Indian graves and burial cairns protected under chapter 27.44 RCW." 68.60.020: Dedication.Any cemetery,historical cemetery, or historic grave that has not been dedicated pursuant to RCW 68.24.030 and 68.24.040 shall be considered permanently dedicated and subject to RCW 68.24.070. Removal of dedication may only be made pursuant to RCW 68.24.090 and 68.24.100." RCW 68.24.070: Permanency of dedication. After property is dedicated to cemetery purposes pursuant to RCW 68.24.010 through 68.24.060,neither the dedication,nor the title of a plot owner, shall be affected by the dissolution of the cemetery authority,by nonuser on its part, by alienation of the property,by any encumbrances,by sale under execution, or otherwise except as provide in this act." CONCLUSIONS: 1.The appellant has the burden of demonstrating that the Administrator's decision was either in error, or was otherwise contrary to law or constitutional provisions, or was arbitrary and capricious (Section 4- 3011(B)(1)(b). The appellant has failed to demonstrate that the action of the Administrator should be modified or reversed. The decision of the Administrator is affirmed. 2.Arbitrary and capricious action has been defined as willful and unreasoning action in disregard of the facts and circumstances. A decision,when exercised honestly and upon due consideration of the facts James L. Colt Appeal of Short Plat Restrictions re La Colina Short Plat File No.: LUA98-153,AAD December 10, 1998 Page 7 and circumstances, is not arbitrary or capricious(Northern Pacific Transport Co. v Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission, 69 Wn. 2d 472, 478 (1966). 3.An action is likewise clearly erroneous when,although there is evidence to support it,the reviewing body, on the entire evidence, is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed. (Ancheta v Dally, 77 Wn. 2d 255,259(1969). 4.The appellant has failed to demonstrate that the decision was founded upon anything but a fair review of the short plat provisions as it pertains to the proposed use. The appellant has failed to demonstrate with cogent evidence that a mistake was made. 5.The first issue that needs to be addressed is the one of notice. The City did not specifically notify those who are buried,who might be buried or possible heirs or relatives of those buried on or adjacent to the subject site. Notice was provided to Mt. Olivet Cemetery. Notice to the cemetery corporation,Mt. Olivet, should be sufficient and reasonable notification since it is the cemetery that is responsible for the management of the property. In addition,the appellant argues that notice is required before dissolution of a cemetery. No plans for dissolution were presented to the City. The City was acting upon a short plat application. Whether there is a de facto cemetery or not was not the issue. The applicant was attempting to segregate portions of the subject site,not dissolve a cemetery. 6.Notice was given to those who own normal title to land. The assessor's records are used to compile a list of adjacent property owners within 300 feet of a proposed project. Mt. Olivet's name was among those in the assessor's files. Mt. Olivet did receive notice. Whether or not Mt. Olivet violated its legal boundaries, according to the appellant it was apparently the party responsible for the purported burials, and therefore seems that it remains the logical party to be notified of the proposed short plat. The applicant did not sustain the burden of demonstrating that the action was clearly erroneous. 7.While the appellant alleged that old covenants are applicable to the subject site,no proof of that claim was presented. 8.There was a compelling lack of proof about the location of any bodies, in fact. No documentation shows the precise location of bodies. The surveys presented merely showed fence locations. Photographs showed nothing definitive vis-a-vis property lines and gravesites. The appellant did not show any evidence that title to the property which is subject to this short plat belongs to the appellant. 9.Even if there are gravesites,the applicant's purpose was to separate that property from the remaining property. There is certainly no justification in the allegation that the City is short platting Mt. Olivet cemetery. Even if graves are located on portions of the subject site,that does not make the subject site part of the appellant's Mt. Olivet cemetery. 10. Section 68.32.010 merely creates a presumption of title to cemetery plots. The applicant has demonstrated through surveys that the applicant is the title holder of the land. This rebuts any presumption. 11. Section 68.04.040 (2)defines a cemetery for specific purposes-historic graves. But nothing in that definition prevents the applicant from subdividing property. Particularly,when that subdivision is intended to prevent disturbance to the graves or putative graves and to segregate parcels that may contain graves from the remainder of the applicant's property. The purpose is not to create cemetery plots,to sell plots or interests in plots. Nor is it intended to convey development rights on these lots outside of the main portion of the subject site. James L. Colt Appeal of Short Plat Restrictions re La Colina Short Plat File No.: LUA98-153,AAD December 10, 1998 Page 8 12. If anything, it appears to this observer that the applicant is intending to clarify a confusing situation by dividing off those portions of his privately owned property where persons may be buried to protect the eternal rest of those who may have been inappropriately or unknowingly laid to rest on the applicant's property. 13. The fact that bodies may be laid to rest in what is termed the "encroachment" area does not convey any property right to the appellant which he is not otherwise in possession of None of the statutes gives the appellant a right of adverse possession nor do those statutes dislodge the ownership rights of the underlying owner. 14. The appellant presented no competent evidence that the City violated any of its short plat requirements in approving the proposed short plat. No evidence was presented that showed that any state laws would be violated. There was no information that showed any action would disturb or disrupt any existing gravesite. Establishing lot or tract boundaries does not necessarily mean that the ten foot distance found in Sections 68.60 and 68.04.040(2)has been violated. Nothing in that definition prevents a cemetery from being located within another legally defined parcel. Nothing prevents a cemetery from being coincident with a legal lot or overlapping it. It merely defines what is called a cemetery. Actually,the definition states: "Unless a cemetery is designated within the records of the county assessor, a cemetery's boundaries shall be a minimum of ten feet in any direction from any burials therein." So all we have may be a cemetery that still extends beyond the tract proposed by the applicant. 15. In any event,this office cannot find that staff made any error regarding the City's regulations regarding the processing or decision that approved the short subdivision. Since the burden of demonstrating error is on the appellant,this office can reach no other conclusion but that staff made the correct determination. The proposed short plat received the appropriate review under City law. The decision below must be affirmed. 16. Finally,this office is generally required to accept the fact that parties will comply with all appropriate laws and regulations. This would include laws applicable to cemeteries as well as the general health, safety and welfare. It is unnecessary to cite all possible federal, state or health regulations that apply to a proposal. The presumption is that the applicant will abide by any laws applicable to any graves that might be located on the subject property. DECISION: The appeal is denied. ORDERED THIS 10th day of December, 1998. FRED J.KAUF IVINLY HEARING EXA ER James L. Colt Appeal of Short Plat Restrictions re La Colina Short Plat File No.: LUA98-153,AAD December 10, 1998 Page 9 TRANSMITTED THIS 10th day of December, 1998 to the parties of record: James L. Colt David Halinen Larry Warren P.O. Box 547 10500 NE 8th,#1900 1055 S. Grady Way Renton,WA 98057 Bellevue,WA 98004 Renton,WA 98055 Peter Rosen Bradley Freeman Bruce Knowlton,Triad Associates 1055 S Grady Way 11814 115th Ave NE 11814 115th Ave NE Renton,WA 98055 Kirkland,WA 98034 Kirkland,WA 98034 Gary Merlino Construction Co.Paul&Lila Houser Jean Singer 1915 Maple Valley Highway 57 Monterey Drive NE 51 Monterey Drive NE Renton, WA 98055 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Dennis&Mary Jo Guettler William&Madeline Cokeley Kevin Hanchett 63 Monterey Drive NE 64 Monterey Place NE 601 Union Street, #2600 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Seattle,WA 98101-4000 TRANSMITTED THIS 10th day of December, 1998 to the following: Mayor Jesse Tanner Gregg Zimmerman,PlanBldg/PW Admin. Members,Renton Planning Commission Jim Hanson,Development Services Director Chuck Duffy,Fire Marshal Mike Kattermann,Technical Services Director Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Larry Meckling,Building Official Transportation Systems Division Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer Utilities System Division Councilperson Kathy Keolker-Wheeler Sue Carlson,Econ.Dev.Administrator South County Journal Pursuant to Title IV,Chapter 8, Section 15 of the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m.,December 28, 1998. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is ambiguous or based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for a review by the Examiner within fourteen(14)days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the specific ambiguities or errors discovered by such appellant, and the Examiner may, after review of the record,take further action as he deems proper. An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV,Chapter 8, Section 16,which requires that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk,accompanying a filing fee of$75.00 and meeting other specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance Department, first floor of City Hall. If the Examiner's Recommendation or Decision contains the requirement for Restrictive Covenants,the executed Covenants will be required prior to approval by City Council or final processing of the file. You may contact this office for information on formatting covenants. James L. Colt Appeal of Short Plat Restrictions re La Colina Short Plat File No.: LUA98-153,AAD December 10, 1998 Page 10 The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex parte(private one-on-one)communications may occur concerning pending land use decisions. This means that parties to a land use decision may not communicate in private with any decision-maker concerning the proposal. Decision-makers in the land use process include both the Hearing Examiner and members of the City Council. All communications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This public communication permits all interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the evidence. Any violation of this doctrine would result in the invalidation of the request by the Court. The Doctrine applies not only to the initial public hearing but to all Requests for Reconsideration as well as Appeals to the City Council. CIT1 3F RENTON Hearing Examiner Jesse Tanner,Mayor- Fred J.Kaufman September 29, 1998 Mr. James L. Colt Mt: Olivet Cemetery.Co., Inc. P:O. Box547 _ Renton,WA 98057 Re: Appeal of Short Plat Restrictions re La Colina Short Plat Appeal File No.: LUA98-153,AAD Dear Mr. Colt Your letter of appeal in the above matter has been received and a date and time for said hearing have now been established. The appeal hearing has been set for Tuesday,November:10,1998, at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of Renton-CityHall,-1055 S. Grady Way. Should you be unable to attend,would you please appoint a representative to act on your behalf. We appreciate your cooperation, and if you have any questions,please•contact this office. Sincerely, Fred J. Ka an Hearing Examiner FJK:mm cc: Mayor Jesse Tanner Jay Covington, Chief Adminisrative Officer Larry Warren, City Attorney Peter Rosen,Project Manager 1055 South Grady Way- Renton,Washington 98055 - (425)430-6515 nn.,--- - __ CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER MEM (QRANDUM Date: September 14, 1998 To:Peter Rosen From: Marilyn Moses Re:La Colina Short Plat, LUA97-136 The attached appeal of an administrative short plat came in on September 11: Fred is on vacation until September 28. After he returns we will set a date for hearing, but I thought you would like to see the appeal at this time. mm cc: Larry Warren NOTICE OF APPEAL HEARING RENTON HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON An Appeal Hearing will be held by the Renton Hearing Examiner at his regular meeting in the Council Chambers on the 7th floor of City Hall, Renton, Washington, on November 10, 1998 at 9:00 AM to consider the following petition: LACOLINA SHORT PLAT AAp=98-153'(LUA-97-136,S H PL-A) Appeal of the 'administrative short plat. Site Location: The property is located south of Mt. Olivet Cemetery and north of SR-169. Legal descriptions of the files noted above are on file in the Development Services Division, Sixth Floor City Hall, Renton. All interested persons to said petitions are invited to be present at the Public Hearing. Publication Date: October 30, 1998 Account No. 51067 Ii HEXPUB.DOC CITY OF RENTON SEP 1 01998 RECEIVED MT. CITY CLERK'S OFFICE OLIVET CEMETERY AND FUNERAL HOMES September 10, 1998 Hearing Examiner City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 File#: LUA-97-136, SHPL Dear Sirs: This is our formal request to the Hearing Examinerrre-open the Short Plat with respect to the Special Restrictions Upon Tracts A, B and C" and to reconsider the decision to impose special restrictions on cemetery property owned and/or occupied by in excess of 30 families whose names include Aguilar; Leathley; Barrington; Sardua; Viena; Osborne; Pierce; Jason;Kinney; Howard;Frazier; Cashaw; Suspancic; Slack; Benson; Titus; Som; Anderson; Albert; Johnson; Linear;Horton;Long; Imran, and others. RCW 68.32.010 Presumption as to Title states, "All plots conveyed to individuals are presumed to be the sole and separate property of the owner named in the instrument of conveyance." It is clear that the families whose names appear above are presumed tohold sole and separate title to the cemetery-lots reserved for themselves and their loved ones including those individuals already occupying their sole and separate property. No notice was given to any of these families or individuals who hold sole and separate property rights as defined in the RCW quoted above. This request is based upon the fact that the City of Renton's report containing your decision on Page 5 states on Page 2 under B. GENERAL INFORMATION, Line 4. Existing site uses; vacant. It is very obvious to anyone who goes to the Proposed Tract C which on Page 3 is indicated as being in excess of 11,226 square feet, is not only fully developed as a Cemetery but is anything but "vacant". No notice was given to any of the families who hold property rites and interest in the property as defined in the RCW. The mere fact that the City of Renton Is Short Platting a portion of Mt. Olivet Cemetery and the historical graves located therein within the Proposed Tract C as defined by the RCW without notice to the effected property owners and by stating that the site is vacant violates the Cities Code and RCW and misleads the public and the public record. Funeral Home, Mausoleum, Crematory and Gardens Box 547 • 100 Blaine Ave. N.E., Renton, WA 98057 • 206-255-0323 James Hanson, Gregg Zimmerman Page 2 September 10, 1998 Additionally, the plans that were provided by Douglas W. Harris, Attorneys for Gary Merlino Construction as prepared by Bruce Nolton indicate that Proposed Tract C as indicated on Page 3 at Detail 5 allows only one-half of a foot of distance from the existing graves and the "remaining proposed lot" per Page 3, G under "DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS". This is in violation of the RCW which requires a minimum distance of 10 feet from the cemetery lots to any adjacent property(see attached). The last sentence on Page 3 states, "The creation of Tracts A, B and C will leave the proposed lot (40.79 acres) free of unresolved encroachments." THIS IS AN INCORRECT STATEMENT insofar as the area in question before the US Bankruptcy Court for the District of Western Washington encompasses not only Tract C as defined in your Administrative Land Use Action but includes the requirement of an additional 10 feet beyond the existing fence line in accordance with the RCW and Renton Land Use Decisions. The actual required size of this parcel will not be determined until the US Bankruptcy Court makes that decision. At the present time, the RCW requires the 10 foot buffer which precludes your granting Merlino's request to separate the actual cemetery property without including the 10 foot buffer from the existing La Colina Preliminary Plat, City File#LUA-0950167. The decision is also inconsistent with the Hearing Examiner's hearing and decision with respect to the La Colina Preliminary Plat Approval in which the Examiner required that the issue over human remains (cemetery lots and spaces)located on the Merlino property be resolved prior to any further action. The fact that the City is attempting to permit Merlino to realign property boundaries prior to the Federal Court's resolution of Merlino's request for relief requesting the Court to Quiet Title (Complaint Quiet Title-5, Paragraph 5.3, Line 13, 14 and 15)wherein the attorneys for Merlino are requesting the Federal Court for an Order to establish the boundary between the Merlino property and Cemetery property is inappropriate prior to the Court's establishing the boundary. This was pointed out to Mr. Pywell in Mr. Hanchett's letter of April 21, 1998 wherein Mt. Olivet through its attorney provided and enclosed information and our formal objection to Merlino's application to Short Plat cemetery property, until the Court has ruled. The City has failed to consider on Page 2 of its Department Report at Paragraph C HISTORICAL BACKGROUND to take into consideration all of the covenants, restrictions and City Ordinances which relate to the property now owned by Merlino which was previously referred to and the subject of restrictive covenants while being considered by the City as the "Monterey Terrace Project," the "Kent Highlands Project," "The ERADCO and Monterey Terrace PUD." It appears that the City neglected to look at its own use files beyond Ordinance 4404, dated June 7, 1993. The City failed to examine the Stoneway Concrete (Merlino as successor in interest) Application R-891-76 Re-zone of the Merlino Property. During this application, references were made to the fact that in 1972 when the Comprehensive Plan for this area was amended that restrictive covenants were attached to the now Merlino property restricting development within 100 feet of the adjoining cemetery and Stoneway/Merlino/Monterey Terrace property. Additionally, the property was subject to Ordinances in the City of Renton pertaining to the property which the James Hanson, Gregg Zimmerman Page 3 September 10, 1998 City has in the present instance declined to provide to Mt. Olivet saying these records were not available because of the move to the new City Hall. Until the City has responded with the requested files, no decision should be reached as the City has made the information necessary to review the present request unavailable. Insofar as the City appears to have made its administrative decision without having ordered a Title Report or examined its files for the restrictions, covenants and ordinances filed against the property and that since no notification was made to the effected property owners referenced in Paragraph 1 of this letter prior to the City's granting_the Proposed Short Plat reconsidered until all effected property owners have-been contacted with respect to this proposal. The fact that the City failed to comply with-the RCW with respect to the historical graves and sole ownership by the familiesthere and with-respect to the 10 foot setback required-adjacent to-the existing cemetery lots on the undedicated Merlino property, that the-decision approving the Short Plat should-be-reconsidered, withdrawn and any decision set over until the Courts determine at Merlin's request the actual boundaries of the properties in question, which determination is scheduled for trial in late October. We request that if the City does not withdraw its Short Plat referenced herein, that that decision be granted an appeal based upon the information contained herein and that we be permitted to add that information that the City has made unavilable prior to its decision. Respectfully, MT. OL ' ' C ETERY CO.,INC. NO, 1pr Jo 4.11 t Preside t tld CITY OF RENTON CITY TREASURER REG/RCF'T : 02-35142 C:09-11-1998CASHIER-ID --11:50 an A:09-11-1998 8000 HISCELLANEOUS-REV===-=__===$;5.00APPEALOFADNINDECISION000.000.00.345.81.00.000003 TOTAL DUE ----------------- RECEIVED FROM: 75.80 MT. OLIVET CEMETERY CO INC CHECK 75.00 TOTAL TENDERED 75.00 CHANGE DEE ---------------- S0.00 0 0ORIGINAL 1 IN 'THE =SUPERIOR COURT tIL `SHE 0! -.W IHINGTON IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KING 51.11)ER_G:',_R_,Li_ .. , AMERICAN MEMORIAL .SERVICES INC . v VA. 414ashington.'8ori5oration, Y:•"y:: f , Vat ... Plaintiff , ) 1,:,n. . vs No . 832 ,576 . , THOMAS J . 'PRITCHARD and RUBY V. IC:;›-PF ITCHARD; his wife ; and GEORGE :. VOLUME. I R. PRITCHARD and DOROTHY PRITCHARD, q jh .s wife ,. 0 Defendants . ) 10 VERBATIM `REPORT 0' PROCEEDINGS 11 c' L r 1ii r 16 BE:-'.IT-:REMEMBERED, that on the 4th day of 14 Octbbdr',' ''978, at the hour of 9 :3.0 o 'clock a.m. , the above- it entitled'?arid''riumbered cause came' on regularly fortrial be- ca c") 16 fore the '$onorable HORTON SMITH,-; 'One of th'e J-udgc.s of 4)iici r ab`bie-:4 1 dnt1.tel,court , at the Kin County Co ithouse', it A City of Seattle , County of King, State of Wiihing on. ;ter` lam+' 9 t-3 ern JAMES YOUNG and THEODORE H.-' ATHE , Atiays w k0 at- Law,' appearing on behalf of the Plaintiff; • •zc' c. g 41 DONALD .G . HOLM, Attorney at Law, appearing on behalf of the. Defendants . r. 11 is w`AUPoN, the following proceedings were I ,` .J,.4,,,J.- ,-,.-i4 had and done ,c„to-wit 1' i c. 5 Reported by:A Thomas G . Ka ris,-, Pfficial o 'YL eporter. c p eSi/iif RiiiofifkiiSti.v I 47 f ifTLk. 11{1A1CIIf1bTON 1\,\ is, a 1 omAS IKARIs COURT REPORTER 1 A That is also the other piece that was added. 2 Q Was that part of the books and records of the company at 3 the time that you sold it? 4 A True . 5 Q And it was in your possession? L: 6 A True. 7 Q Did you turn it over to Mr . Colt? 8 8 A He had access to everything in the office . 9 Q The question is : Did you turn it over? 10 A He had seen it , yes . 11 MR. YOUNG : Would you hold this up for the 1 12 Court so the Court can see it . 13 Move for the admission of Exhibit 2 . 14 MR. HOLM: No objection . 15 THE COURT: Exhibit 2 is admitted. 16 Plaintiff ' s Exhibit 2 for iden- tification admitted in evidence . ) rl 17 S. 18 Q By Mr. Young) Mr. Pritchard, if I may just direct your 19 attention, inside is the original five acres , Exhibit 1 , 20 am I correct? 21 A That 's correct . 22 Q All right . Then comes the L-shape? 23 A True . 24 Q Is that the L you were talking about when you said the 25 engineer hadplatted it out for you? COURT REPORTER SEATTLE. WASHINGTON Pritchard - Direct 20 1 A Right . 2 Q These are designated grave sites also? 3 A To the best of my knowledge . 4 Q Do you know when that was done? 5 A In the early forties , I believe . 6 Q It was done before you actually took over the management 7 of this then, is that correct? 8 A Correct . Y 9 MR. YOUNG : Maybe I can put this up on the 10 board , your Honor, if I may. tt 11 THE COURT : You certainly may . 12 Q By Mr. Young) Now, Mr. Pritchard, after you took over 13 the management of the cemetery from 1950 forward, were 14 bodies buried out in this area? 15 A In approximately this area. 16 Q Outside of the L-shape , am I correct? 7, 17 A Correct . 18 Q About how many over the course of the time that you were 19 there and up until July of 1974? 20 A I am going to have to give you a guess . • 21 Q Oh, sure . 22 A Twenty . 23 Q How about other areas around the L, outside of the L , 24 were other bodies buried? 25 A Not to my knowledge . COURT RCIORT[R EATTL[. WASHINGTON Pritchard - Direct 21 1 Q. -- within Mt . Olivet? 2 A. True . 3 Q. Now, if you will turn to the page there on 4 your Answer and you will see Paragraph II up there on 5 Line 5 . Would you read that? 3 6 A. 'Defendants acknowledge certain burials were 7 made outside the platted 'portion of Mt . Olivet Cemetery 8 but alleges that full disclosure thereof was made to 0 9 plaintiff through James Colt , who indicated this was not 10 of _ concern due 'to enlargement plans of plaintiff. '" 11 Now , you have mentioned to the Court already in 12 your direct testimony today that Mr. Colt went over the 13 records and so forth with respect to thep question of 14 perpetual ' care .and endowments . I want you to tell the 15 Court what records you showed Mr. Colt concerning that " 16 question. r 17 A The same records that he has now plus many more that were 8i18 in the office . 19 Q Are you saying that you called to Mr. Colt ' s attention 20 the fact that there had been more than the Nelsen family? 21 A No . I am saying Mr. Colt didn 't care about that , because 22 he was going to set up an endowed care fund for the whole FS 23 cemetery, and any funds that had been paid, it was no 24 problem because he was going to set up the funds himself. re•25 Q Did you say any of that in your deposition, sir? COURT REPORTER SEATTLE. WA•HIROTOR Pritchard - Direct 47 Chapter 68.04 RCW DEFINITIONS Sections place where five or more human remains are buried. 68.04.020 "Human remains", "remains" defined.Unless a cemetery is designated as a parcel of land68.04.030 "Cremated remains". identifiable and unique as a cemetery within the records68.04.040 "Cemetery". 68.04.050 "Burial park". e county assessor, a tery's boundaries shall be 68.04.060 "Mausoleum".a minimum of ten feet in any di ction from any burials 68.04.070 "Crematory". therein. [1990 c 92 7. 19 1 § 1; 1943 c 247 § 4; 68.04.080 "Columbarium". em. 4.]68.04.090 "Crematory and columbarium". 68.04.100 "Interment". 68.04.110 "Cremation". RCW 68.04.050 "Burial park". "Burial park" 68.04.120 "Inurnment". means a tract of land for the burial of human remains in 68.04.130 "Entombment". the ground, used or intended to be used, and dedicated,68.04.140 "Burial". 68.04.150 "Grave". for cemetery purposes. [1943 c 247 § 5; Rem. Supp. 68.04.160 "Crypt". 1943 § 3778-5.] 68.04.165 "Vault", "lawn crypt", "liner". 68.04.170 "Niche".RCW 68.04.060 "Mausoleum". "Mausoleum" 68.04.180 "Temporary receiving vault". means a structure or buildingfor the entombment of68.04.190 "Cemetery authority". 68.04.200 "Cemetery corporation", "cemetery association". human remains in crypts in a place used, or intended to 68.04.210 "Cemetery business",etc. be used, and dedicated, for cemetery purposes. [1979 c 68.04.220 "Directors", "governing body". 21 § 2; 1943 c 247 § 6; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-6.] 68.04.230 "Lot", "plot",etc. 68.04.240 "Plot owner", "owner", "lot proprietor". RCW 68.04.070 "Crematory". "Crematory" means RCW 68.04.020 "Human remains", "remains" de- a building or structure containing one or more retorts for fined. "Human remains" or "remains" means the body the reduction of bodies of deceased persons to cremated of a deceased person, and includes the body in any stage remains. [1943 c 247 § 7; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-7.] of decomposition except cremated remains. [1977 c 47 § RCW 68.04.080 "Columbarium". "Columbarium"1; 1943 c 247 § 2; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-2.] means a structure, room, or other space in a building or Short title-1943 c 247: "This act shall be known as the 'General structure containing niches for permanent inurnment ofCemeteryAct.'" [1943 c 247 § l.] cremated remains in a place used, or intended to beSererability-1943 c 247: "If any section,subdivision,sentence or used, and dedicated, for cemetery purposes. [1943 c 247clauseofthisactshallbeheldinvalidorunconstitutional,such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this act." § 8; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-8.] 1943 c 247 § 147.] The foregoing annotations apply to 1943 c 247,the general cemetery RCW 68.04.090 "Crematory and columbarium". act, which act refers to sections codified as follows: RCW 68.04.020 "Crematory and columbarium" means a building orthrough68.04.240, 68.08.010 through 68.08.030, 68.08.120 through 68.08.220,68.08.240,68.20.010 through 68.20.100,68.24.010 through structure containing both a crematory and columbarium. 68.24.180,68.28.010 through 68.28.070,68.32.010 through 68.32.170, [1943 c 247 § 9; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-9.] 68.36.010 through 68.36.100, 68.40.010 through 68.40.090, 68.44.010 through 68.44.170,and 68.48.040 through 68.48.090. RCW 68.04.100 "Interment". "Interment" means the disposition of human remains by cremation and in- RCW 68.04.030 "Cremated remains". "Cremated urnment, entombment, or burial in a place used, or in- remains" means a human body after cremation in a cre- tended to be used, and dedicated, for cemetery purposes. matory. [1977 c 47 § 2; 1943 c 247 § 3; Rem. Supp. [1943 c 247 § 10; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-10.] 1943 § 3778-3.] RCW 68.04.110 "Cremation". "Cremation" means RCW 68.04.040 "Cemetery". "Cemetery" means: the reduction of the body of a deceased person to cre- 1) Any one, or a combination of more than one, of the mated remains in a crematory in such a manner that the following, in a place used, or intended to be used, and largest dimension of any remaining particle does not ex- dedicated, for cemetery purposes: ceed five millimeters: Provided, That if a person entitled a) A burial park, for earth interments.to possession of such remains under the provisions of b) A mausoleum, for crypt interments.RCW 68.50.270 is going to place the cremated remains c) A columbarium, for permanent cinerary inter- in a cemetery, mausoleum, columbarium, or building ments; or devoted exclusively to religious purposes, the five milli- 2) For the purposes of chapter 68.60 RCW only, meter dimension requirement shall not apply. [1987 c cemetery" means any burial site, burial grounds, or 1991 Laws) Ch.68.04 RCW—p II L`‘<ti3 Chapter 68.60 RCW ABANDONED AND HISTORIC CEMETERIES AND HISTORIC GRAVES Sections 1)(a) The archaeological and historical division of the 68.60.010 Definitions. department of community, trade, and economic development 68.60.020 Dedication. may grant by nontransferable certificate authority to maintain 68.60.030 Preservation and maintenance corporations—Authorization and protect an abandoned cemetery upon application made of other corporations to restore,maintain,and protect by a preservation organization which has been incorporatedabandonedcemeteries. 68.60.040 Protection of cemeteries—Penalties. for the purpose of restoring, maintaining, and protecting an 68.60.050 Protection of historic graves—Penalty. abandoned cemetery. Such authority shall be limited to the 68.60.060 violations—Civil liability. care, maintenance, restoration, protection, and historical preservation of the abandoned cemetery, and shall not RCW 68.60.010 Definitions. Unless the context include authority to make burials, unless specifically granted clearly requires otherwise, the definitions in this section by the cemetery board. apply throughout this chapter. b) Those preservation and maintenance corporations I) "Abandoned cemetery" means a burial ground of the that are granted authority to maintain and protect an aban- human dead in [for] which the county assessor can find no doned cemetery shall be entitled to hold and possess burial record of an owner; or where the last known owner is records, maps, and other historical documents as may exist. deceased and lawful conveyance of the title has not been Maintenance and preservation corporations that are granted made; or in which a cemetery company, cemetery associa- authority to maintain and protect an abandoned cemetery tion, corporation, or other organization formed for the shall not be liable to those claiming burial rights, ancestral purposes of burying the human dead has either disbanded, ownership, or to any other person or organization alleging to been administratively dissolved by the secretary of state, or have control by any form of conveyance not previously otherwise ceased to exist, and for which title has not been recorded at the county auditor's office within the county in conveyed.which the abandoned cemetery exists. Such organizations 2) "Historical cemetery" means any burial site or shall not be liable for any reasonable alterations made during grounds which contain within them human remains buried restoration work on memorials, roadways, walkways, prior to November 11, 1889; except that (a) cemeteries features, plantings, or any other detail of the abandoned holding a valid certificate of authority to operate granted cemetery. under RCW 68.05.115 and 68.05.215, (b) cemeteries owned c) Should the maintenance and preservation corporation or operated by any recognized religious denomination that be dissolved, the archaeological and historical division of the qualifies for an exemption from real estate taxation under department of community, trade, and economic development RCW 84.36.020 on any of its churches or the ground upon shall revoke the certificate of authority. which any of its churches are or will be built, and (c) d) Maintenance and preservation corporations that are cemeteries controlled or operated by a coroner, county, city, granted authority to maintain and protect an abandoned town, or cemetery district shall not be considered historical cemetery may establish care funds pursuant to chapter 68.44 cemeteries. RCW, and shall report in accordance with chapter 68.44 3) "Historic grave" means a grave ves that were RCW to the state cemetery board. placed outside a cemetery dedic pursuant to tht apter 2) Except as provided in subsection (1) of this section, and to chapter 68.24 RCW rior to June 7, 1990, ex pt the department of community, trade, and economic develop- Indian graves and burial c ' n protected under chapter 2 .44 ment may, in its sole discretion, authorize any Washington RCW. nonprofit corporation that is not expressly incorporated for 4) "Cemetery" has he meaning provided in RCW the purpose of restoring, maintaining, and protecting an 68.04.040(2). [1990 c 92 § I.] abandoned cemetery, to restore, maintain, and protect one or more abandoned cemeteries. The authorization may include RCW 68.60.020 Dedication. Any cemetery, historical the right of access to any burial records, maps, and other cemetery, or historic grave that has not been dedicated historical documents, but shall not include the right to be the pursuant to RCW 68.24.030 and 68.24.040 shall be consid- permanent custodian of original records, maps, or docu- ered permanently dedicated and subject to RCW 68.24.070. ments. This authorization shall be granted by a nontransfer- Removal of dedication ma o ade pursuant to RCW able certificate of authority. Any nonprofit corporation 68.24.090 and 68.24.1 . [1990 c 92 § 2. authorized and acting under this subsection is immune from liability to the same extent as if it were a preservation RCW 68.60.030 Preservation and maintenance organization holding a certificate of authority under subsec- corporations—Authorization of other corporations to tion (1) of this section. restore, maintain, and protect abandoned cemeteries. 1996) ICh.68.60—p. 11 Chapter 68.24 RCW CEMETERY PROPERTY Sections County auditor: Chapter 36.22 RCW. 68.24.010 Right to acquire property.County auditor fees, generally: RCW 36.18.010. 68.24.02O Surveys and maps. 68.24.030 Declaration of dedication and maps—Filing. RCW 68.24.040 Dedication, when complete. Upon 68.24.040 Dedication,when complete. 68.24.050 Constructive notice. the filing of the map or plat and the filing of the declaration 68.24.060 Maps and plats—Amendment. for record, the dedication is complete for all purposes and 6824.07O Permanency of dedication. thereafter the property shall be held, occupied, and used 68.24.080 Rule against perpetuities,etc.,inapplicable. exclusively for a cemetery and for cemetery purposes. [1943 68.24.090 Removal of dedication—Procedure. 68.24.1C/0 Notice of hearing. c 247 § 64; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-64.] 68.24.110 Sale of plots. 68.24.115 Execution of conveyances. RCW 68.24.050 Constructive notice. The filed map 68.24.120 Plots indivisible. 68.24.130 Sale for resale prohibited—Penalty. or plat and the recorded declaration are constructive notice 68.24.140 Commission on sales prohibited—Penalty.to all persons of the dedication of the property to cemetery 68.24.150 Employment of"runners" prohibited—Penalty. purposes. [1943 c 247 § 66; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-66.] 68.24.160 Liens subordinate to dedication. 68.24.170 Record of ownership and transfers. 68.24.175 Inspection of records. RCW 68.24.060 Maps and plats—Amendment. 68.24.180 Opening of roads,railroads through cemetery—Consent Any part or subdivision of the property so mapped and required—Exception.plotted may, by order of the directors, be resurveyed and 68.24.190 Opening road through cemetery—Penalty.altered in shape and size and an amended map or plat filed, 68.24.220 Burying place exempt from execution. 68.24.240 Certain cemetery lands exempt from taxes,etc.—I901 c so long as such change does not disturb the interred remains 147.of any deceased person. [1943 c 247 § 65; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-65.] RCW 68.24.010 Right to acquire property. Ceme- tery authorities may take by purchase, donation or devise, RCW 68.24.070 Permanency of dedication. After property consisting of lands, mausoleums, crematories, and property is dedicated to cemetery purposes pursuant to RCW columbariums, or other property within which the interment 68.24.010 through 68.24.060, neither the dedication, nor the of the dead may be authorized by law. [1943 c 247 § 61; title of a plot owner, shall be affected by the dissolution of Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-611 the cemetery authority, by nonuser on its part, by alienation of the property, by any incumbrances, by sale under execu- RCW 68.24.020 Surveys and maps. Every cemetery tion, or otherwise except as provided in *this act. [1943 c authority, from time to time as its property may be required 247 § 67; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-67.] for cemetery purposes, shall:Reviser's note: For"this act,"see note following RCW 68.04.020. I) In case of land, survey and subdivide it into sec- tions, blocks, plots, avenues, walks, or other subdivisions; RCW 68.24.080 Rule against perpetuities, etc., make a good and substantial map or plat showing the inapplicable. Dedication to cemetery purposes pursuant to sections, plots, avenues, walks or other subdivisions, with *this act is not invalid as violating any laws against perpetu- descriptive names or numbers.ities or the suspension of the power of alienation of title to 2) In case of a mausoleum, or columbarium, it shall or use of property, but is expressly permitted and shall be make a good and substantial map or plat on which shall be deemed to be in respect for the dead, a provision for the delineated the sections, halls, rooms,corridors,elevation, and interment of human remains, and a duty to, and for the other divisions, with descriptive names or numbers. [1943 benefit of, the general public. [1943 c 247 § 68; Rem. Supp. c 247 § 62; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-621 1943 § 3778-681 Reviser's note: For"this act,"see note following RCW 68.04.020. RCW 68.24.030 Declaration of dedication and maps—Filing. The cemetery authority shall file the map or RCW 68.24.090 Removal of dedication—Procedure. plat in the office of the recorder of the county in which all Property dedicated to cemetery purposes shall be held and or a portion of the property is situated. The cemetery used exclusively for cemetery purposes, unless and until the authority shall also file for record in the county recorder's dedication is removed from all or any part of it by an order office a written declaration of dedication of the property and decree of the superior court of the county in which the delineated on the plat or map, dedicating the property property is situated, in a proceeding brought by the cemetery exclusively to cemetery purposes. [1943 c 247 § 63; Rem. authority for that purpose and upon notice of hearing and Supp. 1943 § 3778-63.]proof satisfactory to the court: 1996) Ch.68.24—p. 1] V/ p MO 68.24.090 Cemetery Property 410 1) That no interments were made in or that all inter- RCW 68.24.140 Commission on sales prohibited— ments have been removed from that portion of the property Penalty. It shall be unlawful for a cemetery authority to,pay from which dedication is sought to be removed. or offer to pay to any person, firm or corporation, 2)That the portion of the property from which dedica- indirectly, a commission or bonus or rebate or other thing l not PY of is sought to be removed is not being used for interment tolapforsr the sale of a plot or on regularly employed by services. the cemetery s authority for of human remains. 3) That notice of the proposed removal of dedication such purpose. Each person violating this section shall be has been given the cemetery board in writing at least sixty guilty of a misdemeanor and each violation shall constitute days before proceedingsfilingthe § 7 st in Supp. superior1943r §court. 37 [ 1 3778-74.] 987separate offense. [1943 c 247 § 74; Rem. Supp. 1943 § c 331 § 34; 1943 c 247 Effective date-1987 c 331: See RCW 68.05.900.RCW 68.24.150 Employment of"runners” prohib- RCW 68.24.100 Notice of hearing. The notice of ited—Penalty. offerso pa Everyo otherrsonperson, firm, s orcauses o corporation, paid hearing provided in RCW 68.24.090 shall be given by publication once a week for at least three consecutive weeks directly or indirectly,except as provided in RCW 68.24.140, in a newspaper of general circulation in the county where any commission or bonus or rebate, or other thing of value said cemetery is located, and the posting of copies of the in consideration of recommending or causing a dead human notice in three conspicuous places on that portion of the body to be disposed misdemeanor and each violationat ry rshall constitutee , s property from which the dedication is to be removed. Said ga separate offense. [1943 c 247 § 75; Rem. Supp. 1943 § notice shall: 1)Describe the portion of the cemetery property sought 3778-75.] to be removed from dedication. 2) State that all remains have been removed or that no RCW 68.24.160 Liens subordinate to dedication. interments have been made in the portion of the cemetery All mortgages, deeds of trust and other liens of any nature, property sought to be removed from dedication. hereafter contracted, placed or incurred upon property which 3) Specify the time and place of the hearing. [1943 c has been and was at the time of the creation or placing of 247 § 77; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-77.] the lien, dedicated as a cemetery pursuant to this part, or upon property which is afterwards, with the consent of the RCW 68.24.110 Sale of plots. After filing the map owner of any mortgage, trust deed or lien, dedicated to or plat and recording the declaration of dedication, a ceme- cemetery purposes pursuant to this part, shall not affect or tery authority may sell and convey plots subject to such rules defeat the dedication, but the mortgage, deed of trust, or and regulations as may be then in effect or thereafter other lien is subject and subordinate to such dedication and adopted by the cemetery authority, and subject to such other anany nda all to the sales m dieauon ponfro cemetery purposes. freclosure are subject landd and further limitations, conditions and restrictions as may be c 247 § 60; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-60.] inserted in or made a part of the declaration of dedication by reference, or included in the instrument of conveyance of Effective date-1943 c 247: See note following RCW 68 20.040. such plot. [1943 c 247 § 70; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-70. FORMER PART OF SECTION: 1943 c 247 § 72 now RCW 68.24.170 Record of ownership and transfers. codified as RCW 68.24.115.] A record shall be kept of the ownership of all plots in the cemetery which have been conveyed by the cemetery RCW 68.24.115 Execution of conveyances. All authority and of all transfers of plots in the cemetery. No conveyances made by a cemetery authority shall be signed transfer of any plot, heretofore or hereafter made, or any by such officer or officers as are authorized by the cemetery right of interment, shall be complete or effective until authority. [1943 c 247 § 72; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-72. recordedOon the books of the§ce eye O authority.ry FORMER PART Formerly RCW 68.24.110, part.] OF SECTION: 1943 c 247 § 41 now codified as RCW RCW 68.24.120 Plots indivisible. All plots, the use 68.24.175.] of which has been conveyed by deed or certificate of ownership as a separate plot, are indivisible except with the RCW 68.24.175 Inspection of records. The records consent of the cemetery authority, or as provided by law. shall cemetery. pto inspection duringc n § the 4 customary Re officepp. hours 1943 c 247 § 71; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778 71.] 3778-41. Formerly RCW 68.24.170, part.] RCW 68.24.130 Sale for resale prohibited Penalty. It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to RCW 68.24.180 Opening of roads, railroads sell or offer to sell a cemetery plot upon the promise, through cemetery—Consent required—Exception. After representation or inducement of resale at a financial profit. dedication under this title, and as long as the property Each person violating this section shall be guilty of a remains dedicated to cemetery purposes, a railroad, street, misdemeanor and each violation shall constitute a separate road, alley, pipe line, pole line, or other public thoroughfare offense. 11943 c 247 § 73; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-73.]or utility shall not be laid out, through, over, or across any part of it without the consent of the cemetery authority 1996) 1Ch.68.24—p.21 s { 4 . Chapter 68.32 RCW TITLE AND RIGHTS TO CEMETERY PLOTS Sections RCW 68.32.050 Affidavit as authorization. An affi- 68.32.010 Presumption as to title. davit by a person having knowledge of the facts setting 68.32.020 Vested right of spouse. forth the fact of the death of the owner and the name of 68.32.030 Vested right Termination. 68.32.040 Descent of title to plot. the person or persons entitled to the use of the plot pur- 68.32.050 Affidavit as authorization. suant to RCW 68.32.010 through 68.32.040, is complete 68.32.060 Family plot Alienability. authorization to the cemetery authority to permit the 68.32.070 Joint tenants—Vested rights. use of the unoccupied portions of the plot by the person68.32.080 Joint tenants—Survivorship. 68.32.090 Joint tenants Identification. entitled to the use of it. [1943 c 247 § 93; Rem. Supp. 68.32.100 Co-owners may designate representative. 1943 § 3778-931 68.32.110 Order of interment—General. 68.32.120 Order of interment,when no parent or child survives. RCW 68.32.060 Family plot Alienability. 68.32.130 Waiver of right of interment. Whenever an interment of the remains of a member or 68.32.140 Termination of vested right by waiver. 68.32.150 Limitations on vested rights. of a relative of a member of the family of the record 68.32.160 Conveyance of plot to cemetery authority,effect. owner or of the remains of the record owner is made in a 68.32.170 Exemption from inheritance tax. plot transferred by deed or certificate of ownership to an individual owner and both the owner and the surviving RCW 68.32.010 Presumption as to title. All plots conveyed to individuals are presumed to be the sole and spouse, if any, die with children then living without making disposition of the plot either by a specific devise, separate property of the owner named in the instrument conveyance. [1943 c 247 § 88; Rem. Supp. 1943 § or by a written declaration filed and recorded in the of- ofof con 8 ] lice of the cemetery authority, the plot shall thereafter 3778- be held as a family plot and shall be subject to alien- RCW 68.32.020 Vested right of spouse. The spouse ation only upon agreement of the children of the owner of an owner of any plot containing more than one inter- living at the time of said alienation. [1979 c 21 § 16; ment space has a vested right of interment of his re— mains in the plot and any person thereafter becoming RCW 68.32.070 Joint tenants—Vested rights. In the spouse of the owner has a vested right of interment a conveyance to two or more persons as joint tenants of his remains in the plot if more than one interment each joint tenant has a vested right of interment in the space is unoccupied at the time the person becomes the plot conveyed. [1943 c 247 § 94; Rem. Supp. 1943 § spouse of the owner. [1943 c 247 § 89; Rem. Supp. 1943 3778-94.] 3778-89.] RCW 68.32.080 Joint tenants—Survivorship. RCW 68.32.030 Vested right Termination. No Upon the death of a joint tenant, the title to the plot conveyance or other action of the owner without the held in joint tenancy immediately vests in the survivors, written consent or joinder of the spouse of the owner di- subject to the vested right of interment of the remains of vests the spouse of a vested right of interment, except the deceased joint tenant. [1943 c 247 § 95; Rem. Supp. that a final decree of divorce between them terminates 1943 § 3778-95.] the vested right of interment unless otherwise provided in the decree. [1943 c 247 § 90; Rem. Supp. 1943 § Joint tenants,simultaneous death: RCW 11.05.030. 3778-90.] RCW 68.32.090 Joint tenants—Identification. An RCW 68.32.040 Descent of title to plot. If no inter-' affidavit by any person having knowledge of the facts ment is made in an interment plot which has been setting forth the fact of the death of one joint tenant and transferred by deed or certificate of ownership to an in- establishing the identity of the surviving joint tenants dividual owner, or if all remains previously interred are named in the deed to any plot, when filed with the cent:- lawfully removed, upon the death of the owner, unless etery authority operating the cemetery in which the plot the owner has disposed of the plot either by specific de- is located, is complete authorization to the cemetery au- vise or by a written declaration filed and recorded in the thority to permit the use of the unoccupied portion of office of the cemetery authority, the plot descends to the the plot in accordance with the directions of the surviv- surviving spouse or, if there is no surviving spouse, to the ing joint tenants or their successors in interest. [1943 c heirs at law of the owner subject to the rights of inter- 247 § 96; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-96.] ment of the decedent. [1979 c 21 § 15; 1943 c 247 § 91; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-91.] RCW 68.32.100 Co-owners may designate represen- tative. When there are several owners of a plot, or of rights of interment in it, they may designate one or more 1991 Laws) Ch.68.32 RCW—p 1] 1 ado- '"e ' r _ I r • d .'s.7r0 SG.si •atitii NYlwib a..) 0111 b.4, .i I S2£I r i i I VA e+ P' S i c •- v,. A,,,. IIr..,.' c.' i,.4. ib>ys--• , 0 i _ os 096 5Q....T I . I 'y 99s j 1s l4,.•Y7 2: / ....c 8 . 1' szr, 6 1 d r p tr qq rt "t r• A% I ti°+' eti oz Fo • I. O b v/ al` 14 tip 7 a. f siro . y i its0,N ° h . r z 4.9 i;r• „ .., .,, , ;I,I,14 I .', 1 ttizr1 • I:\.-(:). ... 1 > 7 1 r441I'• ll ik S- N Y i1V9b.t -----` 4,"7'.-'. -1"7, 73r;ieTF.e.... _tr;...A•Ar'. '719---k at-glit7;6—- CC Y fit i .. I/)0''. O1 y ) 1 4. 1 1 SOEO ter-7-t7.7-- I I 0/ 4 •• J 1 t ' i r, .,. Nw IFS ,A• V. C„ 0 4,..,' ri r•, reIdS1•. i 9- 1 Z ( Zo 1 I n6ror 6 . i t I Y.. .:[ T• 8 r Di 41.., p. ff • . ..,, ,,, - .,,, 4,-, I 41. t` 4, r 1 p r. r r Qi/ '4 I 1I .. 7011z o 4 .' . i Qa N4,, r 4 Y. 40 4. a r : . s ly 44 vw I~<gtrJ c,• 1 a I i. ' i !r i fir/ ,x ' ado 2I •On•i .a T- g 6 4 Z i ., C <c'O- 1.-__. Qo0 a\7-7e 19' f Y py y dicer — k!,.. :;,,, e- ' mit a: ,y' E 049 f - " o L b E o S Pt a' »,,,....,... ,. S r nW Florin:fps xh.5.; a• 1Ei 831s7 j S p ii z of€N N i @Nd3: t.i%• N g i WA r O. r } F 1 l El n 4.--. , . • KING C IS- 41978 NNe11 n SUPERIOR eoURT GLEnK EN W4• PI: tJl 1....: , Y M. HICKx DErUT fl1, - ' N ;if r--CI f"11 Iy, 1T C 1 r `}' i 1 '14 'CV. y'+} f y• 1 M 1- , ' <, Ir 1 i r 4 44:} V1 N1: __I tiS'` h, c.7' 6-C.:N.) i ^q" 1 Ct."4.) ' . ik4 c"--4 71 - 1 1 r rgz a 1 N t - en _ t" W. 9 tyic ' t R r+ rs f r o y 3Intl; V Q 1 e 4 fs:t4.4 4141 ,Ni IV gi 44 l!0-N N 11 4 O/cv `+t [: 1•`j! - rt .• Q " d.0 gii Q N 'n ui 9 N N;;% 11 0. N`'01" m w" 41 • h Q ."N :+!k # -S; 1. 1814101 G P e Ulf N p-+. '_col N 4a ..N. y1°°o Vola d' _ H ai:ni •i'f / ", E.}1•! N N dJl N .¢1 N N eq•s7! i al in -, R? V1.^ •, 4,..- 4. f . ....j.,- t •©© rc! a r.'v,:o ;r. .o • t t e`=f_ tv m +, i t `{ i l a .. tV 4' I .:SU RV E.Y n iGii _ r in a rf 17: ,1;a fl- riiv_.1a • NMI 041Nt` `- a '# — ' GIelq4 N 0 _ N N' 1Ati_ } l am r. aal1;y... ...,.. 1•.. , N - ; 1 R.J: T o,`;" 4],7" `'' i a i. T 4 F J a sue. f ro 3 de j.F. . r •le`ir 34 ,' 31•"'. ,„ . •.k. w r r ,.. P 7, 1T „4 N89'13'02"W 2646. 76 8 9 2653.08(RECORD) 9 3 A' 1, itV1323.38 0 -- 1/ 1 END CONC MON 1 7 1 ' ' 16 2653.13(MEAS) 16 44i W/COPPER PLUG 2-95) 1. o rn 00 rn• x' FND CONC MON a) W/2"BRASS DISK IN CASE Z`, CL N cD 2-95) uo 199' (RECORD) co CV 1122. 371 i N88 56 37 i'1 798.89' 526.41 " 4- - *- - _.- - w FND 5"X 5" CONC MON 0 6W/LEAD & TACK rn co 0.30'S AND 0.08,W N ENCROACHMENT ,REA) in OF THEO. POSITION j SEE DETAIL #1 ON SHEET 2) ici ON • 8-92) N O i 2651 . 17'_____ i/ L___. Ili 1325. 59'1. END 5"X 5" CONC MON W/TACK 0.5' HIGH 8-92) Q L• 0 Oi NC PETAININC WALL 0 00 r. A ,A FILED FOR RECORD AT REQUEST OF AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: David L.Halinen,Esq. Halinen Law Offices,P.S. 10500 N.E.8th Street,Suite 1900 Bellevue,Washington 98004 AGREEMENT REGARDING CONFIRMATION OF BOUNDARY LINE AND GRANT OF EASEMENT Grantor: GARY MERLIN() CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., a Washington corporation Grantee: WILLIAM COKELEY and F. MADELINE COKELEY, husband and wife Legal Description (abbreviated): Section 17, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M. and Lot 17,Block 4,Monterey Terrace, Volume 50 of Plats, Page 36, King County, Washington; additional legals on pages 1 and 2 hereof Assessor's Tax Parcel ID#s: 172305-9003-07; 172305-9025-01; 172305-9109-00; and 559290- 0005-09 This AGREEMENT REGARDING CONFIRMATION OF BOUNDARY LINE AND GRANT OF EASEMENT (this"Agreement") is entered into on this 16th day of October, 1998 by and between GARY MERLIN() CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., a Washington corporation GMCC"), and WILLIAM COKELEY and F. MADELINE COKELEY, husband and wife (the Cokeleys"), with respect to the following facts. RECITALS A. GMCC is the owner of the following-described property lying within the City of Renton, Washington (the"GMCC Property"): That portion of the Northeast quarter and Government Lots 7 and 8 of Section 17, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M. in King County, Washington described as follows: Beginning at the southwest corner of the southeast quarter of the northeast quarter of said Section 17;thence North along the West line of said subdivision a distance of 252.23 feet to the True Point of Beginning, said point also designated as Point A; thence South 89° 45' 17" East a distance of 526.41 feet; thence South 88° 52' 04" East a distance of 799 feet to the east line of Section 17; thence South along said east line to the east quarter corner of Section 17; thence continuing South along the east line of said section to an intersection with the northerly right-of-way line of State AGREEMENT AND GRANT OF EASEMENT--Page 1 C,(G1 . ( 0 Road No. 5 A.K.A. S.R. # 169 or the Maple Valley Highway; thence in a general northwesterly direction along said northerly right-of-way line to an intersection with a line that bears North 89° 45' 17" West from Point A;thence South 89° 45' 17" East a distance of 653.91 feet to Point A, the True Point of Beginning. SITUATE in the City of Renton, County of King, State of Washington. B. The Cokeleys are the owners of Lot 17,Block 4,Monterey Terrace, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 50 of Plats, at Page 36, records of King County, Washington (the Cokeley Property"). The Cokeley Property's south boundary abuts a portion of the GMCC Property's north boundary. C. The Cokeley's existing rear fence and shed encroaches at somewhat of a skew up to approximately one foot south and across the Cokeley Property's south boundary onto the GMCC Property as depicted on Exhibit A, attached. (The portion of the GMCC Property bounded by the Cokeley's existing fence and shed is hereinafter referred to as the"Encroachment Area") D. In this Agreement,the parties wish to (1) confirm the existing boundary line between the Cokeley Property and the GMCC Property and (2) provide for the grant of an easement by GMCC to Cokeley over and across the Encroachment Area. WHEREFORE, with respect to these facts, the parties agree as follows: 1.Confirmation of Boundary. Notwithstanding the fact that the Cokeley's existing fence and rear portion of the Cokeley's existing shed were not located on the exact boundary between the Cokeley Property and the GMCC Property, the parties hereby agree and confirm that the true and correct boundary between the Cokeley Property and the GMCC Property is the south lot line of the Cokeley Property as set forth on the plat of Monterey Terrace recorded in Volume 50 of Plats, at Page 36, records of King County, Washington. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, GMCC acknowledges that is has no rights in the Cokeley Property and the Cokeleys acknowledge that they have no rights in the GMCC Property. 2.Grant of Easement. GMCC hereby grants and conveys to the Cokeleys an exclusive easement over and across the Encroachment Area. This easement shall entitle the Cokeleys to (a) leave their existing fence and shed in their current locations and (b) use the Encroachment Area as part of their rear yard. This easement shall (1) run with the land, burdening the Encroachment Area and benefitting the Cokeley Property, (2) be binding upon GMCC and its heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns with respect to the Encroachment Area and (3) inure to the benefit of the Cokeleys and their heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns with respect to the Cokeley Property. 3.Successors. This Agreement and all of the terms and provisions hereof shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the heirs, executors, personal representatives, successors and AGREEMENT AND GRANT OF EASEMENT--Page 2 assigns of the parties hereto. 4. Partial Invalidity. If any provision of this Agreement is, becomes, or is deemed illegal, such provision shall be deemed amended to conform to applicable laws so as to be valid and enforceable, or, Wit cannot be so amended without materially altering the intention of the parties, it shall be stricken and the remainder of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., a Washington corporation r By: Gary M. erlino, President Date d-2P-1 E WILLIAM CO LEY Date F. MAD LINE COKELEY Date STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF KING I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that GARY M. MERLINO is the person who appeared before me and acknowledged that he signed the instrument, on oath stated that he was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as a president of GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., a Washington corporation, to be the free and voluntary act of such corporation for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: D/I YJ/cIV 001111184,,t 14Signature NOTARY N, No&,- /Corcct 4/mi'i'i. Title v''°c> 00/00 My Appointment Expires AGREEMENT AND GRANT OF EASEMENT--Page 3 STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss. COUNTY OF KING On this day of CY),-01,Er 1998 personally appeared before me WILLIAM COKELEY, to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he signed the same as his free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. Witness my hand and official hereto affixed the day and year first above written. t P /{L x P(i./L:1 .11' s a r •-•! ,No ry Public in an for the ate Vf oNDTARy*' M? Washington, residing at lAef4 . ac: ,'""" My commission expires Nlaq/o1 . t..,• rise'..d`•• STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss. COUNTY OF KING On this il` day of Odre,4 Y , 1998 personally appeared before me F. MADELINE COKELEY, to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that she signed the same as her free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. Witness my hand and official hereto affixed the day and year first above written. 0I41I C "I /1 Ij/ VCtii •Luq,f La itkOTAq} N tary Public in andfor tI Statae of t •.= Washington, residing at .tier-1- ue. vr•. t`: I ,p . My commission expires 1-k/i4 of d:\cfl2009\009 montcrey\cokeley\.igmt fl AGREEMENT AND GRANT OF EASEMENT--Page 4 COKELEY PROPERTY F-< I I I I K / A es L/ L_ \/ \/ I \ —} I r\ i r 7 SHED 1 , 2 7' 6' WOOD FENCE 0 0 0 PROPERTY OWNED BY GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. ENCROACHMENT AREA AI 1M — SCALE: 100' LA COLINA M ENCROACHMENT EXHIBIT ANEWAMIIV WNW IATES 11415 NE 128th Street Kirklond, WA 98034 DRAWN: SHPJR 425) 821-8448 (425) 821-3481 FAX CHECKED: 87-F FILED FOR RECORD AT REQUEST OF AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: David L.Halinen,Esq. Halinen Law Offices,P.S. 10500 N.E.8th Street,Suite 1900 Bellevue,Washington 98004 AGREEMENT REGARDING CONFIRMATION OF BOUNDARY LINE AND GRANT OF EASEMENT Grantor: GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., a Washington corporation Grantee: MARJORIE G. WALLIS, a widow Legal Description (abbreviated): Section 17, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M. and Lot 16,Block 4,Monterey Terrace, Volume 50 of Plats, Page 36, King County, Washington; additional legals on pages 1 and 2 hereof Assessor's Tax Parcel ID#s: 172305-9003-07; 172305-9025-01; 172305-9109-00; and 559290- 0305-05 This AGREEMENT REGARDING CONFIRMATION OF BOUNDARY LINE AND GRANT OF EASEMENT (this"Agreement") is entered into on this 16th day of October, 1998 by and between GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., a Washington corporation GMCC"), and MARJORIE G. WALLIS, a widow ("Wallis"), with respect to the following facts. RECITALS A. GMCC is the owner of the following-described property lying within the City of Renton, Washington (the"GMCC Property"): That portion of the Northeast quarter and Government Lots 7 and 8 of Section 17, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M. in King County, Washington described as follows: Beginning at the southwest corner of the southeast quarter of the northeast quarter of said Section 17;thence North along the West line of said subdivision a distance of 252.23 feet to the True Point of Beginning, said point also designated as Point A; thence South 89° 45' 17" East a distance of 526.41 feet; thence South 88° 52' 04" East a distance of 799 feet to the east line of Section 17; thence South along said east line to the east quarter corner of Section 17; thence continuing South along the east line of said section to an intersection with the northerly right-of-way line of State Road No. 5 A.K.A. S.R. # 169 or the Maple Valley Highway; thence in a general AGREEMENTAND GRANT OF EASEMENT--Page 1 e„1„- I I northwesterly direction along said northerly right-of-way line to an intersection with a line that bears North 89° 45' 17" West from Point A;thence South 89° 45' 17" East a distance of 653.91 feet to Point A, the True Point of Beginning. SITUATE in the City of Renton, County of King, State of Washington. B. Wallis is the owner of Lot 16, Block 4, Monterey Terrace, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 50 of Plats, at Page 36, records of King County, Washington (the "Wallis Property"). The south tip of the Wallis Property abuts a portion of the GMCC Property's north boundary. C. The south tip of Wallis's existing rear fence encroaches approximately one foot south and across the GMCC Property's north boundary as depicted on Exhibit A, attached. (The portion of the GMCC Property bounded by Wallis's existing fence is hereinafter referred to as the Encroachment Area") D. In this Agreement, the parties wish to (1) confirm the existing boundary line between the Wallis Property and the GMCC Property and(2) provide for the grant of an easement by GMCC over and across the Encroachment Area. WHEREFORE, with respect to these facts, the parties agree as follows: 1.Confirmation of Boundary. Notwithstanding the fact that the tip of Wallis's existing fence is not located on the exact boundary between the Wallis Property and the GMCC Property,the parties hereby agree and confirm that the true and correct boundary between the Wallis - Property and the GMCC Property is the southerlymost tip of the Wallis Property as set forth on the plat of Monterey Terrace recorded in Volume 50 of Plats, at Page 36, records of King County, Washington. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, GMCC acknowledges that is has no rights in the Wallis Property and Wallis acknowledges that she has no rights in the GMCC Property. 2.Grant of Easement. GMCC hereby grants and conveys to Wallis an exclusive easement over and across the Encroachment Area. This easement shall entitle Wallis to (a) leave the portion of her existing fence that encroaches onto the GMCC Property in its current location and (b) use the Encroachment Area as part of her rear yard. This easement (1) shall run with the land, burdening the Encroachment Area and benefitting the Wallis Property, (2) shall be binding upon GMCC and its heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns with respect to the Encroachment Area and(3)shall inure to the benefit of Wallis and her heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns with respect to the Wallis Property. 3.Successors. This Agreement and all of the terms and provisions hereof shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the heirs, executors, personal representatives, successors and- assigns of the parties hereto. AGREEMENTAND GRANT OF EASEMENT--Page 2 4. Partial Invalidity. If any provision of this Agreement is, becomes, or is deemed illegal, such provision shall be deemed amended to conform to applicable laws so as to be valid and enforceable, or, if it cannot be so amended without materially altering the intention of the parties, it shall be stricken and the remainder of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., a Washington corporation B : tL 1t0-gc Gary M. M r o, President Date MARJO' ID G. WALLIS Date STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF KING I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that GARY M. MERLINO is the person who appeared before me and acknowledged that he signed the instrument, on oath stated that he was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as a president of GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., a Washington corporation, to be the free and voluntary act of such corporation for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: i0116/g8 s.REQu'•e. Signatu1re. p.SoN F• ., CO a c- f d iru/) o NOTARY ,; Title o puBUG o o D/l 0/00 o 1 My Appointment Expires AGREEMENTAND GRANT OF EASEMENT--Page 3 STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss. COUNTY OF KING On thisab 'day of OC,-6ber , 1998 personally appeared before me MARJORIE G. WALLIS,to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that she signed the same as her free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. Witness my hand and official hereto affixed the day and year first above written. OTARy*;.. L. «.. 0. .a N tary Public in and for e State of Afoot ;ar Washington, residing at My commission expires 'Ml d /01 . w SN ` d:\cf\2009\009\monterry\wallis\ag t_fl AGREEMENTAND GRANT OF EASEMENT--Page 4 i k. WALLIS AW AV IL PROPERTY VAMIIIIIIV 1 r, SCALE: 100' r, I /\ :\ 1 / / I-< I 1 I I V. / L/ L_ 5. Si , \ -I- r, 6' WOOD FENCE 6' WOOD FENCE rP PROPERTY OWNED BY I GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.o ENCROACHMENT AREA LA COLINA AIM ENCROACHMENT EXHIBIT Amor ImIli MINMININEWVAMMIM IATES 11415 NE 128th Street Kirkland, WA 98034 DRAWN: SHPJR 425) 821-8448 (425) 821-3481 FAX CHECKED: 8TF TITLE 68 CEMETERIES, MORGUES, AND HUMAN REMAINS TITLE 68 CEMETERIES, MORGUES, AND HUMAN REMAINS Chapters 68 . 04 Definitions .'"-- 68 . 05 Cemetery board. 68 .20 Private cemeteries .E- 68 . 24 Cemetery property. 68 .28 Mausoleums and columbariums . 68 . 32 Title and rights to cemetery plots . 68 . 36 Abandoned lots . 68 . 40 Endowment and nonendowment care . 68 . 44 Endowment care fund. 68 . 46 Prearrangement contracts . 68 . 50 Human remains . 68 . 52 Public cemeteries and morgues. 68 . 54 Annexation and merger of cemetery districts . 68 . 56 Penal and miscellaneous provisions .4 68 . 60 Abandoned and historic cemeteries and historic graves . 4 NOTES : Burial and removal permits, death certificates, vital statistics : Chapter 70 . 58 RCW. Burial insurance: RCW 18 . 39.240 through 18 . 39. 360 . Cemetery districts, excess levies authorized: RCW 84 . 52 . 052 . Cemetery funds transferred to state treasury: RCW 43 . 79. 330 . Conveyance of real property by public bodies--Recording: RCW 65. 08 . 095. Embalmers and funeral directors: Chapter 18 . 39 RCW. Funeral service contracts : RCW 18 . 39. 240 through 18 . 39 . 360 . Page 1 k,, rz TITLE 68 CEMETERIES, MORGUES, AND HUMAN REMAINS Indian graves and records : Chapter 27 . 44 RCW. Indigent persons : RCW 36. 39. 030. Veterans, burial : Chapter 73 .24 RCW. Vital statistics : Chapter 70 . 58 RCW. Washington veterans ' home and soldiers ' home, burial of deceased members : RCW 72 . 36. 110 . Page 2 CHAPTER 68 . 04 DEFINITIONS CHAPTER 68 . 04 DEFINITIONS Sections 68 . 04 . 020 Human remains, " "remains" defined. 68 . 04 . 030 Cremated remains . " 68 . 04 . 040 Cemetery. "..‹ 68 . 04 . 050 Burial park. " 68 . 04 . 060 Mausoleum. " 68 . 04 . 070 Crematory. " 68 . 04 . 080 Columbarium. " 68 . 04 . 090 Crematory and columbarium. " 68 . 04 . 100 Interment . ".Ct. 68 . 04 . 110 Cremation. " 68 . 04 . 120 Inurnment . " 68 . 04 . 130 Entombment . " 68 . 04 . 140 Burial . " 68 . 04 . 150 Grave. ". 68 . 04 . 160 Crypt . " 68 . 04 . 165 Vault", "lawn crypt", "liner. " 68 . 04 . 170 Niche. " 68 . 04 . 180 Temporary receiving vault . " 68 . 04 . 190 Cemetery authority. " 68 . 04 .200 Cemetery corporation", "cemetery association", cemetery corporation or association. " 68 . 04 .210 Cemetery business", "cemetery businesses", cemetery purposes . " 68 . 04 .220 Directors, " "governing body. " 4--- 68 . 04 .230 Lot", "plot", "interment plot . " 68 . 04 .240 Plot owner, " "owner, " "lot proprietor. " - Page 1 RCW 68 . 04 . 020 "Human remains, " "remains" defined. RCW 68 . 04 . 020 "Human remains, " "remains" defined. 6804020 Human remains" or "remains" means the body of a deceased person, and includes the body in any stage of decomposition except cremated remains . 1977 c 47 § 1; 1943 c 247 § 2; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-2 . ] NOTES : Short title--1943 c 247 : "This act shall be known as the General Cemetery Act . '" [1943 c 247 § 1 . ] Severability--1943 c 247 : "If any section, subdivision, sentence or clause of this act shall be held invalid or unconstitutional, such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this act . " [1943 c 247 § 147 . ] The annotations apply to 1943 c 247, the general cemetery act, which was codified as RCW 68 . 04 . 020 through 68 . 04 . 240, 68 . 08 . 010 through 68 . 08 . 030, 68 . 08 . 120 through 68 . 08 .220, 68 . 08 .240, 68 .20 . 010 through 68 .20 . 100, 68 .24 . 010 through 68 .24 . 180, 68 . 28 . 010 through 68 . 28 . 070, 68 . 32 . 010 through 68 . 32 . 170, 68 . 36. 010 through 68 . 36. 100, 68 . 40 . 010 through 68 . 40 . 090, 68 . 44 . 010 through 68 . 44 . 170, and 68 . 48 . 040 through 68 . 48 . 090 . Page 1 RCW 68 . 04 . 040 "Cemetery. " RCW 68 . 04 . 040 "Cemetery. " 6804040 Cemetery" means: (1) Any one, or a combination of more than one, of the following, in a place used or intended to be used,, and dedicated, for cemetery purposes : a) A burial park, tor earth interments . b) A mausoleum, for crypt interments . c) A columbarium, for permanent cinerary interments; or 2) For the purposes of chapter 68 . 60 RCW on1/, "cemetery" means any burial site buri 1 r unds, or lace wh r fi or more uman remains are bury PcI. i,Tnless a cemetexv is desianated as a parcel of land identifiable and unictue as a cemetery within the records of the county assessor, a cemetery' s boundaries shall be a minimum of ten feet in any direction from any burials th.esein. sea lzcw C . 04, l4 o 1990 c 92 § 7; 1979 c 21 § 1; 1943 c 247 § 4; Rem. Supp. § 3778-4 . ] Page 1 RCW 68 . 04 . 050 "Burial park. " RCW 68 . 04 . 050 "Burial park. " 6804050 Burial park" means a tract of land for the burial of human remains in the ground, used or intended to be uaed, and dedicated, for cemetery purposes . I • SQ.-€e.- R C(, g c1 • Z 4 . D 3.0 7 i _o i e 68 . 2 4 . 0 7 0 1943 c 247 § 5; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-5. ] Page 1 RCW 68 . 04 . 100 "Interment. " RCW 68 . 04 . 100 "Interment. " 6804100 Interment" means the disposition of human remains ty cremation and inurnment, entombment, or burial in a place uset or intended to be used, and dedicated, for cemetery purposes. t Se42 R.0 c.J 6 8. 2 4.0 2-o 1943 c 247 § 10; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-10 . ]Aro 74 es. 24.046 Page 1 RCW 68 . 04 . 140 "Burial . " RCW 68 . 04 . 140 "Burial . " 6804140 Burial" means the placement of human remains in a grave. 1943 c 247 § 14; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-14 . ] S!e_ kcl, CS . 0 4. /co Page 1 RCW 68 . 04 . 150 "Grave. " RCW 68 . 04 . 150 "Grave. " 6804150 Grave" means a space of ground in a burial ark, used or intended to be used, for burial . Sto Rcwea004. os`0 1943 c 247 § 15; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-15. ] Page 1 RCW 68 . 04 . 190 "Cemetery authority. " RCW 68 . 04 . 190 "Cemetery authority. " 6804190 Cemetery authority" includes cemetery corporation, association, corporation sole, or other person owning or controlling cemetery lands or property. 1943 c 247 § 19; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-19. ] Page 1 RCW 68 . 04 .220 "Directors, " "governing body. " RCW 68 . 04 .220 "Directors, " "governing body. " 6804220 Directors" or "governing body" means the board of directors, board of trustees, or other governing body of a cemetery association. 1943 c 247 § 22; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-22 . ] Page 1 RCW 68 . 04 .230 "Lot", "plot", "interment plot. " RCW 68 . 04 .230 "Lot", "plot", "interment plot. " 6804230 Q gCL() 68, 04, /Od Lot", "plot", or "interment plot" means space in cemetery, used or intended to be used for the f human rvitains. Such terms include and apply to one or more than one adjoining graves, one or more than one adjoining crypts or vaults, or one or more than one adjoining niches . 1943 c 247 § 23; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-23 . ] Page 1 RCW 68 . 04 .240 "Plot owner", "owner", "lot proprietor. " RCW 68 . 04 .240 "Plot owner", "owner", "lot proprietor. " 6804240 Plot owner", "owner", or "lot proprietor", means any person in whose nameean interment plot stands of record as owner, in the office of a cemetery authority. lac-C.c) CS. O si , Ito 1943 c 247 § 24; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-24 . 1 Page 1 CHAPTER 68 .20 PRIVATE CEMETERIES CHAPTER 68 .20 PRIVATE CEMETERIES Sections 68 .20 . 010 Incorporation required. 68 .20 . 020 Corporations, how organized. 68 .20 . 030 Powers of existing corporations enlarged. 68 .20 . 040 Prior corporations not affected. 68 .20. 050 General powers of cemetery corporations . 68 .20. 060 Specific powers--Rule making and enforcement. 68 .20. 061 Specific powers--Control of property. 68 .20 . 062 Specific powers--Regulation as to type of markers, monuments, etc. 68 .20 . 063 Specific powers--Regulation or prohibition as to the erection of monuments, effigies, etc. 68 .20 . 064 Specific powers--Regulation of plants and shrubs . 68 .20 . 065 Specific powers--Prevention of interment . 68 .20 . 066 Specific powers--Prevention of improper assemblages . 68 . 20 . 067 Specific powers--Rules and regulations for general purposes . 68 .20 . 070 Rules and regulations--Posting. 68 .20 . 080 Cities and counties may regulate cemeteries . 68 .20 . 090 Permit required, when. 68 .20 . 110 Nonprofit cemetery association--Tax exempt land--Irreducible fund--Bonds . 68 .20 . 120 Sold lots exempt from taxes, etc. --Nonprofit associations . 68 .20 . 130 Ground plans . 68 .20. 140 Certain cemeteries exempt from chapter. Page 1 RCW 68 .20 . 010 Incorporation required. RCW 68 .20 . 010 Incorporation required. 6820010 It is unlawful for any corporation, copartnership, firm, trust, association, or individual to engage in or transact any of the businesses of a cemetery within this state except by means of a corporation duly organized for that purpose. 1943 c 247 § 42; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-42 . ] Page 1 RCW 68 . 20. 020 Corporations, how organized. RCW 68 .20 . 020 Corporations, how organized. 6820020 Any private corporation authorized by its articles so to do, may establish, maintain, manage, improve, or operate a cemetery, and conduct any or all of the businesses of a cemetery, either for or without profit to its members or stockholders . A nonprofit cemetery corporation may be organized in the manner provided in chapter 24 . 03 RCW. A profit corporation may be organized in the manner provided in the general corporation laws of the state of Washington. 1983 c 3 § 167; 1943 c 247 § 43; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778- 43 . Prior: 1899 c 33 § 1; 1856-7 p 28 § 1 . ] Page 1 RCW 68 .20 . 030 Powers of existing corporations enlarged. RCW 68 .20 . 030 Powers of existing corporations enlarged. 6820030 The powers, privileges and duties conferred and imposed upon any corporation, firm, copartnership, association, trust, or individual, existing and doing business under the laws of this state, are hereby enlarged as each particular case may require to conform to the provisions of *this act . 1943 c 247 § 45; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-45. ] NOTES : Reviser' s note: For "this act, " see note following RCW 68 . 04 . 020 . Page 1 RCW 68 .20 . 040 Prior corporations not affected. RCW 68 .20 . 040 Prior corporations not affected. 6820040 The provisions of *this act do not affect the corporate existence or rights or powers of any cemetery organized under any law then existing prior to June 9, 1943, and as to such cemeteries and their rights, powers specified in their charters or articles of incorporation, the laws under which the corporation was organized and existed and under which such rights and powers become fixed or vested are applicable. 1943 c 247 § 44; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-44 . ] NOTES : Reviser' s note: For "this act, " see note following RCW 68 . 04 . 020. Page 1 RCW 68 .20 . 080 Cities and counties may regulate cemeteries . RCW 68 .20. 080 Cities and counties may regulate cemeteries. 6820080 Cities and counties are authorized to enact ordinances regulating or prohibiting the establishment of new cemeteries or the extension of existing one and to give power to local planning commissions to pass upon and make recommendations to local legislative bodies concerning the establishment or extension of cemeteries . 1943 c 247 § 143; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-143 . ] NOTES : Section applies to certain mausoleums, columbariums, etc. : RCW 68 . 28 . 010 . Page 1 RCW 68 .20 . 090 Permit required, when. RCW 68 .20 . 090 Permit required, when. 6820090 It shall be nlawful for any person, firm, or corporation t, establish or maintain any cemetery or to extend the boundaries of any existing cemetery in this state without a permit first having been applied for and permission obtained in accordance with the city and county ordinance ellb other zoning or statutory provisions aovern,na the sam . 1943 c 247 § 144; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-144 . ] NOTES : Section applies to certain mausoleums, columbariums, etc. : RCW 68 .28 . 010 . Page 1 CHAPTER 68 .24 CEMETERY PROPERTY CHAPTER 68 .24 CEMETERY PROPERTY Sections 68 .24 . 010 Right to acquire property. 68 .24 . 020 Surveys and maps .4---- 68 .24 . 030 Declaration of dedication and maps--Filing.. -- 68 . 24 . 040 Dedication, when complete. 68 . 24 . 050 Constructive notice. 68 . 24 . 060 Maps and plats--Amendment . 68 .24 . 070 Permanency of dedication. 68 .24 . 080 Rule against perpetuities, etc. , inapplicable. 68 .24 . 090 Removal of dedication--Procedure . 68 .24 . 100 Notice of hearing. 68 .24 . 110 Sale of plots . .47----- 68 .24 . 115 Execution of conveyances . 68 .24 . 120 Plots indivisible. 68 .24 . 130 Sale for resale prohibited--Penalty. 68 .24 . 140 Commission on sales prohibited--Penalty. 68 .24 . 150 Employment of "runners" prohibited--Penalty. 68 .24 . 160 Liens subordinate to dedication. 68 .24 . 170 Record of ownership and transfers . 68 .24 . 175 Inspection of records . 68 .24 . 180 Opening of roads, railroads through cemetery-- Consent required--Exception. 68 . 24 . 190 Opening road through cemetery--Penalty. 68 .24 .220 Burying place exempt from execution. 68 .24 .240 Certain cemetery lands exempt from taxes, etc. -- 1901 c 147 . Page 1 RCW 68 . 24 . 010 Right to acquire property. RCW 68 .24 . 010 Right to acquire property. A-d v Qvs-- - PoS,1'e..rst vi 6824010 I S 1 J if'S Cemetery authorities may take by purchase, donation or devise, property consisting of lands, mausoleums, crematories, and columbariums, or other property within which the interment of the dead may be authorized by law. 1943 c 247 § 61; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-61 . ] Page 1 RCW 68 .24 . 020 Surveys and maps . RCW 68 .24 . 020 Surveys and maps . 6824020 Every cemetery authority, from time to time .s property may be required for cemetery purpose, 1) In case of land, survey and subdivide it into sections, blocks, plots, avenues, walks, or other subdivisions; makea good and substntil map or plat showing the sections, plots, avenues, walks or other subdivisions, with descriptive names or numbers . 2) In case of a mausoleum, or columbarium, it shall make a good and substantial map or plat on which shall be delineated the sections, halls, rooms, corridors, elevation, and other divisions, with descriptive names or numbers . 1943 c 247 § 62; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-62 . ] Page 1 RCW 68 .24 . 030 Declaration of dedication and maps--Filing. RCW 68 . 24 . 030 Declaration of dedication and maps--Filing. 6824030 The cemeter authorit _ file the map or plat in the office of the recorder of e county in which all or a ion of the property is situated. The cemetery authority map also file for record in the county recorder' s office a wri ten declaration of dedication of the property delineated on the plat or mae, dedicating the property exclusively to cemetery purposes. 1943 c 247 § 63; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-63 . ] NOTES : County auditor: Chapter 36.22 RCW. County auditor fees, generally: RCW 36. 18 . 010 . Page 1 RCW 68 .24 . 040 Dedication, when complete. RCW 68 .24 . 040 Dedication, when complete. 6824040 Upon the filing of the ma or plat and the f> > ina of the declaration for record, the dedication is complete for all, purposeq and thereafter the property shall be held, occupied, and used exclusively for a cemetery and for cemetery purposes . 1943 c 247 § 64; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-64 . ] Page 1 RCW 68 .24 . 050 Constructive notice. RCW 68 .24 . 050 Constructive notice. 6824050 The filed map or plat and the recorded declaration are constructive notice to all persons of the dedication of the property to cemetery purposes . 1943 c 247 § 66; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-66 . ] Page 1 RCW 68 .24 . 060 Maps and plats--Amendment . RCW 68 .24 . 060 Maps and plats--Amendment. 6824060 Any part or subdivision of the property so mapped and plotted may, by order of the directors, be resurveyed and altered in shape and size and an amended map or plat filed, so long as such change does not disturb the interred remains of any deceased person. 1943 c 247 § 65; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-65 . ] Page 1 RCW 68 .24 . 070 Permanency of dedication. RCW 68 .24 . 070 Permanency of dedication. 6824070 After property is dedicated to cemetery purposes pursuant to RCW 68 .24 . 010 through 68 . 24 . 060, neither the dedication, nor the title of a plot owner, shall be affected by the dissolution of the cemetery authority, by nonuser on its part, by alienation of the property, by any incumbrances, by sale under execution, or otherwise except as provided in this act. 1943 c 247 § 67; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-67 . ] NOTES : Reviser' s note: For "this act, " see note following RCW 68 . 04 . 020 . Page 1 RCW 68 .24 . 090 Removal of dedication--Procedure. RCW 68 .24 . 090 Removal of dedication--Procedure. 6824090 Property dedicated to cemetery purposes shall be held and used exclusively for cemetery purposes, unless and until the dedication is removed from all or any part of it by an order and decree of the superior court of the county in which the property is situated, in a proceeding brought by the cemetery authority for that purpose and upon notice of hearing and proof satisfactory to the court: 1) That no interments were made in or that all interments have been removed from that portion of the property from which dedication is sought to be removed. 2) That the portion of the property from which dedication is sought to be removed is not being used for interment of human remains . 3) That notice of the proposed removal of dedication has been given the cemetery board in writing at least sixty days before filing the proceedings in superior court . 1987 c 331 § 34; 1943 c 247 § 76; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778- 76. ] NOTES : Effective date--1987 c 331 : See RCW 68 . 05. 900. Page 1 RCW 68 .24 . 100 Notice of hearing. RCW 68 .24 . 100 Notice of hearing. 6824100 The notice of hearing provided in RCW 68 .24 . 090 shall be given by publication once a week for at least three consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the county where said cemetery is located, and the posting of copies of the notice in three conspicuous places on that portion of the property from which the dedication is to be removed. Said notice shall : 1) Describe the portion of the cemetery property sought to be removed from dedication. 2) State that all remains have been removed or that no interments have been made in the portion of the cemetery property sought to be removed from dedication. 3) Specify the time and place of the hearing. 1943 c 247 § 77; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-77 . ] Page 1 RCW 68 .24 . 110 Sale of plots . RCW 68 .24 . 110 Sale of plots . 6824110 After filing the map or plat and recording the declaration o •edication, a cemetery authority may sell and convey plots subject to such rules and regulations as may be then in effect or thereafter adopted by the cemetery authority, and subject to such oth r imitations zon itions and restrictions as may be inserted in or made a art of the of ion by reference, or included in the instrument f conveyance of such plot. SQ_-e_ E.c i (SA. 24, 03o 1943 c 247 § 70; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-70 . FORMER PART OF SECTION: 1943 c 247 § 72 now codified as RCW 68 .24 . 115. 1 Page 1 RCW 68 .24 . 115 Execution of conveyances . RCW 68 . 24 . 115 Execution of conveyances . 6824115 All conveyances made by a cemetery authority shall be signed Ily such officer or officers as are authorized by the cemetery authority. 1943 c 247 § 72; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-72 . Formerly RCW 68 .24 . 110, part . ] Page 1 RCW 68 .24 . 170 Record of ownership and transfers. RCW 68 .24 . 170 Record of ownership and transfers . 6824170 A record shall be kept of the ownership of all plots in the cemetery which have been conveyed by the cemetery authority and of all transfers of plots in the cemetery. No transfer of any plot, heretofore or hereafter made, or any right of interment, shall be complete or effective until recorded on the books of the cemetery authority. 1943 c 247 § 40; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-40. FORMER PART OF SECTION: 1943 c 247 § 41 now codified as RCW 68 .24 . 175. ] Page 1 RCW 68 .24 . 175 Inspection of records . RCW 68 .24 . 175 Inspection of records . 6824175 The records shall be open to inspection during the customary office hours of the cemetery. 1943 c 247 § 41; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-41 . Formerly RCW 68 .24 . 170, part. ] Page 1 CHAPTER 68 . 56 PENAL AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS CHAPTER 68 . 56 PENAL AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS Sections 68 . 56. 010 Unlawful damage to graves, markers, shrubs, etc.--Interfering with funeral . 68 . 56. 020 Unlawful damage to graves, markers, shrubs, etc.--Civil liability for damage. 68 . 56 . 030 Unlawful damage to graves, markers, shrubs, etc.--Exceptions . 68 . 56. 040 Nonconforming cemetery a nuisance--Penalty-- Costs of prosecution. 68 . 56. 050 Defendant liable for costs . 68 . 56. 060 Police authority--Who may exercise. 68 . 56. 070 Forfeiture of office for inattention to duty. — . 68 . 56. 900 Effective date--1987 c 331 . NOTES : Burial, removal permits required: RCW 70 . 58 . 230 . Care of veterans ' plot at Olympia: RCW 73 . 24 . 020 . Page 1 RCW 68 . 56. 040 Nonconforming cemetery a nuisance-- Penalty--Co RCW 68 . 56. 040 Nonconforming cemetery a nuisance-- Penalty--Costs of prosecution. 6856040 Avery person, firm or corporation who is the owner or operator of a cemetery established in violation of *this act is guilty of maintaining a public nub and upon conviction is punishable by a fine of not less than five hundred dollars nor more than five thousand dollars or by imprisonment in a county jail for not less than one month nor more than six months, or by both; and, in addition is liable for all costs, expenses and disbursements paid or incurred in prosecuting the case. 1943 c 247 § 145; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-145 . Formerly RCW 68 . 48 . 040 . ] NOTES : Reviser' s note: For "this act, " see note following RCW 68 . 04 . 020 . Section applies to certain mausoleums, columbariums, etc. : RCW 68 .28 . 010 . Page 1 RCW 68 . 56. 050 Defendant liable for costs . RCW 68 . 56. 050 Defendant liable for costs . 6856050 Every person who violates any provision of *this act is guilty of a misdemeanor,, and in addition is liable for all costs, expenses, and disbursements paid or incurred by a person prosecuting the case . 1943 c 247 § 139; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-139. Formerly RCW 68 . 48 . 060 . ] NOTES : Reviser' s note: For "this act, " see note following RCW 68 . 04 . 020 . Costs, etc. , to be fixed by court having jurisdiction: RCW 68 .28 . 065. Section applies to certain mausoleums, columbariums, etc. : RCW 68 .28 . 010 . Page 1 RCW 68 . 56. 070 Forfeiture of office for inattention to duty. RCW 68 . 56. 070 Forfeiture of office for inattention to duty. 6856070 Sr''Q- c4 .cW 62 220 The office of any irecto or officer who acts or permits ction contrary to *this act immediately thereupon becomes vacan . 1943 c 247 § 132; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-132 . Formerly RCW 68 . 48 . 090 . ] NOTES : Reviser' s note: For "this act, " see note following RCW 68 . 04 . 020. Page 1 CHAPTER 68 . 32 TITLE AND RIGHTS TO CEMETERY PLOTS CHAPTER 68 . 32 TITLE AND RIGHTS TO CEMETERY PLOTS Sections 68 . 32 . 010 Presumption as to title. 68 . 32 . 020 Vested right of spouse. 68 . 32 . 030 Vested right--Termination. 68 . 32 . 040 Descent of title to plot. 68 . 32 . 050 Affidavit as authorization. 68 . 32 . 060 Family plot--Alienability. 68 . 32 . 070 Joint tenants--Vested rights . 68 . 32 . 080 Joint tenants--Survivorship. 68 . 32 . 090 Joint tenants--Identification. 68 . 32 . 100 Co-owners may designate representative. 68 . 32 . 110 Order of interment--General . 68 . 32 . 120 Order of interment, when no parent or child survives . 68 . 32 . 130 Waiver of right of interment. 68 . 32 . 140 Termination of vested right by waiver. 68 . 32 . 150 Limitations on vested rights . 68 . 32 . 160 Conveyance of plot to cemetery authority, effect. 68 . 32 . 170 Exemption from inheritance tax. Page 1 RCW 68 . 32 . 010 Presumption as to title. RCW 68 . 32 . 010 Presumption as to title. 6832010 S.Q.,.z 1G(..> a. 04, 2 36 All 'lots conveyed to individuals are presumed to be the sole and separate property of the owner named in the instrument of conveyance. 1943 c 247 § 88; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-88 . ] Page 1 RCW 68 . 32 . 020 Vested right of spouse. RCW 68 . 32 . 020 Vested right of spouse. 6832020 She /LC( 04 /c'c6 . The s ouse of an owner of any pl. con .inin. more than one interment space has a vested rig' of ONICOMMIDOof his remains in the plot and any person the -after .ecoming the spouse of the owner has a vested right o EIMIEMIDO of his remains in the plot if more than one intermen space is unoccupied at the time the person becomes the spouse of the owner. 1943 c 247 § 89; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-89. ] Page 1 RCW 68 . 32 . 030 Vested right--Termination. RCW 68 . 32 . 030 Vested right--Termination. 6832030 No conveyance or other action of the owner without the written consent or joinder of the spouse of the owner divests the spouse of a vested right of interment, except that a final decree of divorce between them terminates the vested right of interment unless otherwise provided in the decree. 1943 c 247 § 90; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-90 . ] Page 1 RCW 68 . 32 . 040 Descent of title to plot. RCW 68 . 32 . 040 Descent of title to plot. 6832040 Se-42_ &) G8. O4. 2 36 If no interment is made in an nterment •lot which has been transferred by deed or certificate of ownership to an individual owner, or if all remains previously interred are lawfully removed, upon the death of the owner, unless the owner has disposed of the plot either by specific devise or by a written declaration filed and recorded in the office of the cemetery authority, the plot descends to the surviving spouse or, if there is no surviving spouse, to the heirs at law of the owner subject to the rights of interment of the decedent. 1979 c 21 § 15; 1943 c 247 § 91; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778- 91 . ] Page 1 RCW 68 . 32 . 070 Joint tenants--Vested rights . RCW 68 . 32 . 070 Joint tenants--Vested rights . 6832070 In a conveyance to two or more persons as joint tenants each joint tenant has a vested right of interment in the plot conveyed. 1943 c 247 § 94; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-94 . ] Page 1 RCW 68 . 32 . 080 Joint tenants--Survivorship. RCW 68 . 32 . 080 Joint tenants--Survivorship. 6832080 Upon the death of a joint tenant, the title to the plot held in joint tenancy immediately vests in the survivors, subject to the vested right of interment of the remains of the deceased joint tenant. 1943 c 247 § 95; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-95. ] NOTES : Joint tenants, simultaneous death: RCW 11 . 05 . 030 . Page 1 RCW 68 . 32 . 100 Co-owners may designate representative. RCW 68 . 32 . 100 Co-owners may designate representative . 6832100 When there are several owners of a plot, or of rights of interment in it, they may designate one or more persons to represent the plot and file written notice of designation with the cemetery authority. In the absence of such notice or of written objection to its so doing, the cemetery authority is not liable to any owner for interring or permitting an interment in the plot upon the request or direction of any co-owner of the plot . 1943 c 247 § 97; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-97 . ] Page 1 RCW 68 . 32 . 110 Order of interment--General . RCW 68 . 32 . 110 Order of interment--General . 6832110 In a family plot one grave, niche or crypt may be used for the owner' s interment; one for the owner' s surviving spouse, if any, who by law has a vested right of interment in it; and in those remaining, if any, the parents and children of the deceased owner in order of death may be interred without the consent of any person claiming any interest in the plot . 1943 c 247 § 99; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-99 . ] Page 1 RCW 68 . 32 . 120 Order of interment, when no parent or child sur RCW 68 . 32 . 120 Order of interment, when no parent or child survives. 6832120 If no parents or child survives, the right of interment goes in the order of death first, to the spouse of any child of the record owner, and second, in the order of death to the next heirs at law of the owner or the spouse of any heir at law. 1943 c 247 § 100; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-100 . ] Page 1 RCW 68 . 32 . 130 Waiver of right of interment. RCW 68 . 32 . 130 Waiver of right of interment. 6832130 Any surviving spouse, parent, child, or heir having a right of interment in a family plot may waive such right in favor of any other relative or spouse of a relative of the deceased owner; and upon such waiver the remains of the person in whose favor the waiver is made may be interred in the plot. 1943 c 247 § 101; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-101 . ] Page 1 RCW 68 . 32 . 140 Termination of vested right by waiver. RCW 68 . 32 . 140 Termination of vested right by waiver. 6832140 A vested right of interment may be waived and is terminated upon the interment elsewhere of the remains of the person in whom vested. 1943 c 247 § 102; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-102 . ] Page 1 RCW 68 . 32 . 150 Limitations on vested rights . RCW 68 . 32 . 150 Limitations on vested rights . 6832150 No vested right of interment gives to any person the right to have his remains interred in any interment space in which the remains of any deceased person having a prior vested right of interment have been interred, nor does it give any person the right to have the remains of more than one deceased person interred in a single interment space in violation of the rules and regulations of the cemetery in which the interment space is located. 1943 c 247 § 103; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-103 . ] Page 1 RCW 68 . 32 . 160 Conveyance of plot to cemetery authority, effec RCW 68 . 32 . 160 Conveyance of plot to cemetery authority, effect. 6832160 A cemetery authority may take and hold any plot conveyed or devised to it by the plot owner so that it will be inalienable, and interments shall be restricted to the persons designated in the conveyance or devise. 1943 c 247 § 104; Rem. Supp. 1943 § 3778-104 . ] Page 1 CHAPTER 68 . 60 ABANDONED AND HISTORIC CEMETERIES AND HISTORIC CHAPTER 68 . 60 ABANDONED AND HISTORIC CEMETERIES AND HISTORIC GRAVES Sections 68 . 60 . 010 Definitions . 68 . 60. 020 Dedication. 68 . 60. 030 Preservation and maintenance corporations-- Authorization of other corporations to restore, maintain, and protect abandoned cemeteries . 68 . 60. 040 Protection of cemeteries--Penalties . 68 . 60 . 050 Protection of historic graves--Penalty. 68 . 60 . 060 Violations--Civil liability. Page 1 RCW 68 . 60 . 010 Definitions . RCW 68 . 60 . 010 Definitions . 6860010 Unless the context clearly requires otherwise, the definitions in this section apply throughout this chapter. 1) "Abandoned cemetery" means a burial ground of the human dead in [for] which the county assessor can find no record of an owner; or where the last known owner is deceased and lawful conveyance of the title has not been made; or in which a cemetery company, cemetery association, corporation, or other organization formed for the purposes of burying the human dead has either disbanded, been administratively dissolved by the secretary of state, or otherwise ceased to exist, and for which title has not been conveyed. 2) "Historical cemetery" means any burial site or grounds which contain within them human remains buried prior to November 11, 1889; except that (a) cemeteries holding a valid certificate of authority to operate granted under RCW 68 . 05. 115 and 68 . 05.215, (b) cemeteries owned or operated by any recognized religious denomination that qualifies for an exemption from real estate taxation under RCW 84 . 36. 020 on any of its churches or the ground upon which any of its churches are or will be built, and (c) cemeteries controlled or operated by a coroner, county, city, town, or cemetery district shall not be considered historical cemeteries . 3) "Historic grave" means a grave or graves that were placed outside a cemetery dedicated pursuant to this chapter and to chapter 68 . 24 RCW, prior to June 7, 1990, except Indian graves and burial cairns protected under chapter 27 . 44 RCW. 4) "Cemetery" has the meaning provided in RCW 68 . 04 . 040 (2) . 1990 c 92 § 1 . ] Page 1 RCW 68 . 60. 020 Dedication. RCW 68 . 60 . 020 Dedication. 6860020 Lax_cemetery, historical cemetery, or historic grave that has not been dedicated pursuant to RCW 68 .24 . 030 and 68 .24 . 040 shill he oinsidered permanently dedicated and subject to RCW 68 .24 . 070 . Removal of dedication may only be made pursuant to RCW 68 . 24 . 090 and 68 .24 . 100 . 1990 c 92 § 2 . ] Page 1 RCW 68 . 60 . 030 Preservation and maintenance corporations-- Aut RCW 68 . 60 . 030 Preservation and maintenance corporations-- Authorization of other corporations to restore, maintain, and protect abandoned cemeteries . 6860030 1) (a) The archaeological and historical division of the department of community, trade, and economic development may grant by nontransferable certificate authority to maintain and protect an abandoned cemetery upon application made by a preservation organization which has been incorporated for the purpose of restoring, maintaining, and protecting an abandoned cemetery. Such authority shall be limited to the care, maintenance, restoration, protection, and historical preservation of the abandoned cemetery, and shall not include authority to make burials, unless specifically granted by the cemetery board. b) Those preservation and maintenance corporations that are granted authority to maintain and protect an abandoned cemetery shall be entitled to hold and possess burial records, maps, and other historical documents as may exist. Maintenance and preservation corporations that are granted authority to maintain and protect an abandoned cemetery shall not be liable to those claiming burial rights, ancestral ownership, or to any other person or organization alleging to have control by any form of conveyance not previously recorded at the county auditor' s office within the county in which the abandoned cemetery exists . Such organizations shall not be liable for any reasonable alterations made during restoration work on memorials, roadways, walkways, features, plantings, or any other detail of the abandoned cemetery. c) Should the maintenance and preservation corporation be dissolved, the archaeological and historical division of the department of community, trade, and economic development shall revoke the certificate of authority. d) Maintenance and preservation corporations that are granted authority to maintain and protect an abandoned cemetery may establish care funds pursuant to chapter 68 . 44 Page 1 RCW 68 . 60. 030 Preservation and maintenance corporations-- Aut RCW, and shall report in accordance with chapter 68 . 44 RCW to the state cemetery board. 2) Except as provided in subsection (1) of this section, the department of community, trade, and economic development may, in its sole discretion, authorize any Washington nonprofit corporation that is not expressly incorporated for the purpose of restoring, maintaining, and protecting an abandoned cemetery, to restore, maintain, and protect one or more abandoned cemeteries . The authorization may include the right of access to any burial records, maps, and other historical documents, but shall not include the right to be the permanent custodian of original records, maps, or documents . This authorization shall be granted by a nontransferable certificate of authority. Any nonprofit corporation authorized and acting under this subsection is immune from liability to the same extent as if it were a preservation organization holding a certificate of authority under subsection (1) of this section. 3) The department of community, trade, and economic development shall establish standards and guidelines for granting certificates of authority under subsections (1) and 2) of this section to assure that any restoration, maintenance, and protection activities authorized under this subsection are conducted and supervised in an appropriate manner. 1995 c 399 § 168; 1993 c 67 § 1; 1990 c 92 § 3 . ] Page 2 RCW 68 . 60. 040 Protection of cemeteries--Penalties . RCW 68 . 60. 040 Protection of cemeteries--Penalties . 6860040 1) Every person who in a cemetery unlawfully or without right willfully destroys, cuts, mutilates, effaces, or otherwise injures, tears down or removes, any tomb, plot, monument, memorial, or marker in a cemetery, or any gate, door, fence, wall, post, or railing, or any enclosure for the protection of a cemetery or any property in a cemetery is guilty of a class C felony punishable under chapter 9A.20 RCW. 2) Every person who in a cemetery unlawfully or without right willfully destroys, cuts, breaks, removes, or injures any building, statuary, ornamentation, tree, shrub, flower, or plant within the limits of a cemetery is guilty of a gross misdemeanor punishable under chapter 9A. 20 RCW. 3) Every person who in a cemetery unlawfully or without right willfully opens a grave; removes personal effects of the decedent; removes all or portions of human remains; removes or damages caskets, surrounds, outer burial containers, or any other device used in making the original burial; transports unlawfully removed human remains from the cemetery; or knowingly receives unlawfully removed human remains from the cemetery is guilty of a class C felony punishable under chapter 9A.20 RCW. 1990 c 92 § 4 . ] Page 1 RCW 68 . 60. 050 Protection of historic graves--Penalty. RCW 68 . 60 . 050 Protection of historic graves--Penalty. 6860050 1) Any person who knowingly removes, mutilates, defaces, injures, or destroys any historic grave shall be guilty of a class C felony punishable under chapter 9A.20 RCW. Persons disturbing historic graves through inadvertence, including disturbance through construction, shall reinter the human remains under the supervision of the cemetery board. Expenses to reinter such human remains are to be provided by the office of archaeology and historic preservation. 2) This section does not apply to actions taken in the performance of official law enforcement duties . 3) It shall be a complete defense in a prosecution under subsection (1) of this section if the defendant can prove by a preponderance of evidence that the alleged acts were accidental or inadvertent and that reasonable efforts were made to preserve the remains accidentally disturbed or discovered, and that the accidental discovery or disturbance was properly reported. 1989 c 44 § 5. Formerly RCW 68 . 05. 420 . ] NOTES : Intent--1989 c 44 : See RCW 27 . 44 . 030 . Captions not law--Liberal construction--1989 c 44 : See RCW 27 . 44 . 900 and 27 . 44 . 901 . Page 1 RCW 68 . 60 . 060 Violations--Civil liability. RCW 68 . 60 . 060 Violations--Civil liability. 6860060 Any person who violates any provision of this chapter is liable in a civil action by and in the name of the state cemetery board to pay all damages occasioned by their unlawful acts . The sum recovered shall be applied in payment for the repair and restoration of the property injured or destroyed and to the care fund if one is established. 1990 c 92 § 5. ] Page 1 s DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS WHEREAS, Stoneway Concrete Inc. , a firm incorporated in the State of Washington, are the owners of real property in the City of Renton, County of King, State of Washington, described as follows: The Northerly 100 feet, measured perpendicularly to i the Northerly line of those portions of the following described properties lying Westerly of a line drawn Southerly, perpendicularly to said Northerly line, from the most Easterly corner of Lot 17, Block 4 , Monterey Terrace Addition, according to the plat Cr)recorded in Volume 50 of Plats, page 36, records of King County, Washington: Aa id properties being C") CD described as follows: Parcel A: (Tax Lot 3) All that portion of the CD Southwest one-quarter of the Northeast one-quarterCV CV of Section 17, Township 23 North, Range 5 East; W.M. , lying East of State Road No. 5 (Maple Valley Highway) SR169) and South of a line beginning at the East one- quarter corner of said Section; thence West 1,325.85 f8et from said East one-quarter corner; thence North 1 00'00" East a distance of 252.22 feet to the true point of beginning of said line; thence West 653.91 feet to said State Road No. 5, and Parcel B: (Tax Lot 109) Beginning at the Southwest corner of the Southeast one-quarter of the Northeast one-quarter of Section 17, Township 23 North, Range 5 East; W.M. ; thence North along West line of said sub- division a distance cf 252.28 feet; thence East 526.41 feet; thence South 88 00'00" East a distance of 799 feet to the East line of said Section 17; thence South along said East line to the East one-quarter corner of said Section 17; thence West along the : )uth line of said Northeast one-quarter to the point of beginning; WHEREAS, the owners of said described property desire to impose the following restrictive covenants running with the land as to use, present and future, of the above described real property; NOW, THEREFORE, the aforesaid owners hereby establish, grant and impose restrictions and covenants running with the land as to the use of the land hereinabove described with respect to the use by the undersigned, their successors, heirs, and assigns, as follows: NO BUILDING OR STRUCTURE, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES, SHALL BE LOCATED OR CONSTRUCTED WITHIN ONE HUNDRED 100) FEET OF THE SOUTHERLY PROPERTY LINE OF THE H. G. WHITE MONTEREY TERRACE ADDITION TO THE CITY OF RENTON, AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 50 OF PLATS, PAGE 36, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, STATE OF WASHINGTON. SUCH AREA SHALL BE MAINTAINED CONTINUOUSLY IN A NEAT AND CLEAN MANNER. IF NOT SO MAINTAINED, THE CITY OF RENTON SHALL HAVE THE OPTION TO ASSUME RESPONSIBILITY FOR SUCH MAINTENANCE AND SHALL BILL THE PROPERTY OWNERS FOR THE COST THEREOF. IF UNPAID FOR MORE THAN SIXTY (60) DAYS, SUCH BILL SHALL BECOME A LIEN AGAINST THE PROPERTY. 1 ti Declaration of Restrictive Covenants it Stoneway Concrete Inc. Page 2 s i Any violation or breach of any of these restrictive covenants may I be enforced by proper legal procedures in the Superior Court of ir) King County by either the City of Renton or any property owners 1 Jadjoining subject property who are adversely affected by said if) breach. It Stoneway/oncrete Inc. , by: c• • ., : 1 i ;P. D.1 OON-Y10E PRESIDEN1 f Stoneway Concrete Inc. , bV: f STATE OF WASHINGTON t' COUNTY OF KING 1 On this 5--- day of 1Ll ri.y 19 77-, before me personally appeared P. p_ lc-eon and<.,,1,• ti,,,{a,,- fie L. --- , who executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged said instrument to be the free and voluntary act Rr',4"4 deed of said persons for the uses and purposes3 :.•...p(ennto4oned therein. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have 0: s1oM to set my hand and affixed my official seal 1127;tt 8ay and year first above written. 1311V°7‘/ 14?:: ".-.-:- r. .. ' Notary Pu lic in and the State of Washington, residing at ,-,,r LA-' -- m% KAY-16-7Z 0 0 i 2 9 7205160513 --RF 3.0C m o ircg, N o • t ILlp R , R/quest u. Sow cet," altlt her•ur r ILL Ct 1 r+tern'uER1t RENT011 MUNICIPAL,BLDG.-a' Zoo TILL AVE. SOUTH RENTON, WASH. 98055 I AO r on 110 4101, Fes• M tlit 4.....* ,... 4 . .., ,,,, ,,..11, i::, 1:10‘ 1, • ' ' m 4I4b. 11, . . I+, , ti • Nit 4810., 0 r. pit.. V. • 61 '."/. s+ "tr'Iv Y. w... r .. r jar i 7 r.." w f 7 r a s' u+t.4M , k I . ' M+ ems~ 4w ..jarm ot r4-- •i " i I T c — I _----- j. - M t I b.. i • jill'1 4 a, w P. r „ 010 µ.• w