Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWebb Decision Denis Law Mayor O City Clerk-Jason A.Seth,CMC March 21, 2018 Mr. Brady Webb 11212 SE 168th St Renton, WA 98055 Re: Request for Code Compliance Violation Hearing Code Case No: CODE-17-000435 Dear Mr. Webb: I have attached the Hearing Examiner's Decision dated March 20, 2018, in the above referenced matter. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Jason A. Seth City Clerk cc: Hearing Examiner Craig Burnell, Building Official Donna Locher, Code Compliance Inspector Robert Shuey, Code Compliance Inspector Alex Tuttle, Assistant City Attorney Chip Vincent, CED Administrator Angie Mathias, Long Range Planning Manager Sandra Pedersen, Finance 1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98057 • (425)430-6510/Fax (425)430-6516 • rentonwa.gov BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER OF RENTON DECISION FILE NUMBER: FOV#: CODE17-000435 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 11212 SE 168TH St. Renton, WA 98055 PROPERTY OWNER: Brady Webb 11212 SE 168TH St. Renton, WA 98055 REVIEW AUTHORITY: City of Renton TYPE OF CASE: Appeal of Finding of Violation RULING: Finding of Violation sustained in part;no fines imposed. All weeds over 12 inches in height shall be removed from the Appellant's property by May 20, 2018. All tree branches less than 8 feet above grade over the sidewalk shall be removed by April 20, 2018. SUMMARY The Finding of Violation identified two violations—(1)obstruction of a sidewalk with the branches of the Appellant's Willow tree; and(2)weeds over 12 inches in height on the Appellant's property. Both violations are sustained, with the caveat that the photographs given to the examiner are in black and white and have very poor contrast'. Since no fines are imposed by this decision, the conclusions of this decision are based provisionally on what the photographs appear to show. As to Violation No. 1,it is important to recognize that the date of violation according to the Finding of Violation is November 16, 2017. Mr. Webb asserts that he took actions to clear the sidewalk area of Willow branches below 8 feet above grade, but these actions appear to have been taken after the November 16, 2017 violation date and so are not directly pertinent to the scope of this appeal. The photographs taken on November 16,2017 appear to show willow branches extending lower than 8 feet above grade over the sidewalk and that also extended to just within a few feet above grade along the roadway used for parking. The encroachment into the sidewalk area constitutes a violation of RMC 9-8-2 as alleged in the Finding of Violation. The branches need to At the hearing Ms.Locher showed color photographs and those clearly identified the alleged violations. However, the examiner did not have access to those photographs to write this decision. If fines had been involved,the examiner could have taken additional measures to acquire the color photographs. Code Enforcement Decision- 1 be more than eight feet above grade as asserted in the Finding of Violation. The encroachment into the roadway do not constitute a violation. RMC 9-8-2 only prohibits encroachments into sidewalks, not the adjoining roadway. At the hearing, the examiner noted he would advise as to whether other Renton Municipal Code provisions may prohibit the encroachment of tree limbs in the parking area of the right of way. There is at least one such provision, specifically RMC 9-15-1(B), which prohibits "[a]ny encroachment of any hedge,fence, vegetation, trees, bushes or other obstructions on any public alley, or other public right-of-way..." Violation of RMC 9-15-1(B) is a criminal misdemeanor, subject to penalties up to $1,000 and 90 days in jail. As to Violation No. 2, the photographs of Ex. 4 appear to show weeds over a foot in height. Mr. Webb noted that his property is over 3/4 in size and it is difficult to mow and maintain the entire property. However,as noted by Ms.Locher during the hearing,the Renton Municipal Code makes no exceptions for large properties. HEARING The hearing was held on the alleged violations of this case on February 20, 2018 at the Renton City Hall Council Chambers, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. TESTIMONY Donna Locher, code enforcement officer, summarized the circumstances of the Finding of Violation. She noted that the City is not seeking any fines. She noted that the City wants to keep the sidewalk clear of obstructions as a safety precaution. The subject case is one of four cases along the same sidewalk. In response to examiner questions, Ms. Locher noted that the second photograph of Ex.2 shows the weed violation for weeds over a foot in height. Brady Webb, Appellant, testified he's lived at the violation site for more than 20 years and the Willow tree that is hanging over the sidewalk has been there longer than he. He stated he has removed the parts of the tree that are less than eight feet over the sidewalk. He has not removed the parts that hang over the road. The tree hangs out onto the parking area, not travelled portions of the road. He has also cleared the sticker bushes encroaching into the sidewalk. The leaves of the Willow tree may touch vehicles, but not the branches themselves. The sticker bushes in the fourth picture of Ex. 2 have been removed. The grass in the second picture is from his backyard. His property is a little over%of an acre and is a large area. It's difficult to mow all the property. EXHIBITS Exhibits 1-5 identified in the staff's exhibit list were admitted into the record during the hearing. FINDINGS OF FACT Code Enforcement Decision-2 1. Site and Owner. The violation site is located at 11212 SE 168TH St. Renton, WA 98055. The site is owned by Brady Webb. 2. Appeal. Mr. Webb appeals a Finding of Violation issued on November 20, 2017 for violations based upon a site visit by City staff taken on November 16, 2017. For that date, the Finding of Violation asserts violation of RMC 9-8-2 (encroachment of tree limbs into sidewalk) and RMC 4-5-130 (weeds over 12 inches in height). The Finding of Violation did not impose any fines. Mr. Webb filed an appeal of the Finding of Violation on December 20, 2017. 3. Weeds. The code compliance narrative states that on November 16, 2017 on site re- inspection"the property vegetation remains in violation." The narrative also notes that on August 8, 2017, the property had "grass and trees over 12: in height." Mr. Webb does not contest that there were weeds on his property over 12 inches in height on November 16, 2017 or any other date, but as a defense asserts that his property is too large to keep out the weeds of offending height. It is determined from the preponderance of evidence that weeds over 12 inches in height were located on Mr. Webb's property on November 16, 2017. 4. Willow Encroachment. The photographs of Ex. 4, the only photographs in the record showing the alleged violations on the November 16, 2017 violation date, are in black and white and have very poor contrast. As far as can be ascertained from these photographs, it appears that the branches of Willow tree(s) located on the Appellant's property encroached into the air space over the adjoining sidewalk and parking area of the road right of way. The encroachment over the sidewalks appears to be less than eight feet above grade and the encroachment over the parking area appears to be less than 14 feet above grade. Mr. Webb testified that he cleared tree limbs less than eight feet above grade over the sidewalk, but it appears he did this after the November 16, 2017 violation date, as confirmed by the code compliance narrative, Ex. 1, which doesn't identify any remedial action undertaken by Mr. Webb as of the November 16, 2017 violation date. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Authority of Examiner: The Hearing Examiner has the authority and jurisdiction to review code violation as provided in RMC 1-3-2. 2. Code Violation: The Finding of Violation of this case (Ex. 4) is based upon the violation of Renton Municipal Code regulations, specifically RMC 9-8-2 and RMC 4-5-130(B)(16). The applicable criteria are quoted below in bold and italics with accompanying Conclusions of Law that apply those criteria to the Findings of Fact made above. Finding of Violation No. 9-8-2 -- RMC 9-8-2: It shall be the responsibility of the owner of property abutting upon a public sidewalk to maintain the sidewalk at all times in a safe condition,free of any and all obstructions or hazardous conditions, including but not limited to ice, snow, vegetation, loose dirt, rocks and debris. 3. It is concluded that the Appellant has violated RMC 9-8-2 as it pertains to sidewalks but not to the roadway. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 4, there are tree branches from the Appellant's property encroaching into an adjoining sidewalk that are less than eight feet above Code Enforcement Decision-3 grade. Any tree limbs extending over the sidewalk that are less than eight feet above grade are concluded to be in violation of RMC 9-8-2. The text of RMC 9-8-2 clearly only applies to sidewalks, not the roadway. "Sidewalk" is defined by RMC 9-8-1C as"[gill structures or forms of improvement for pedestrians included in the space between the street margin, as defined by a curb or the edge of the traveled road surface, and the line where the public right-of-way meets the abutting property." The roadway area over which the branches extend isn't the travelled portion of the roadway, but it also is not the section of right of way devoted for pedestrians. Although the sidewalk definition is a little ambiguous as to whether it applies to developed roadway used for parking, given the common meaning of sidewalks, a reasonable construction of the term does not include the parking area. Since RMC 9-8-2 does not apply to roadway parking areas, the Appellant's encroachment into those parking areas does not constitute a violation of RMC 9-8-2. As to the sidewalk encroachment, the branches violate RMC 9-8-2 if they extend less than eight feet over grade. RMC 9-8-2 prohibits any the Appellant from creating any "obstructions" or "hazardous conditions" upon the sidewalk. Overhanging tree limbs will only create such an obstruction or hazard if they are low enough to obstruct the passage of pedestrians. The eight-foot limit imposed by the Finding of Violation reasonably sets a safe height for pedestrians to pass without obstruction or hazard. Finding of Violation No. 2: International Property Maintenance Code Section 302.4 as amended by RMC 4-5-130(B)(16): Weeds: All premises and exterior property shall be maintained free from weeds or plant growth in excess of twelve inches in height on development property or twenty-four inches (24") in height on vacant land. All noxious weeds shall be prohibited. Weeds shall be defined as all grasses, annual plants and vegetation, other than trees or shrubs;provided, however, this term shall not include cultivated flowers and gardens. 4. The Appellant is found to be in violation of International Property Maintenance Code Section 302.4. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 3, the Appellant has weeds on his property over 12 inches in height. The Appellant does not contest the presence of these weeds, but rather as a defense asserts that his 3/4 acre property is too large to maintain. International Property Maintenance Code Section 302.4 does not contain any exceptions for large properties, so the size of the property does not excuse compliance. DECISION The two violations of asserted in the Finding of Violation, Ex. 4, are sustained, except that no violation under RMC 9-8-2 is found for tree branches overhanging the parking area of the adjoining roadway. All weeds over 12 inches in height shall be removed from the Appellant's property by May 20, 2018. All tree branches less than 8 feet above grade over the sidewalk shall be removed by April 20, 20182. 2 It is recognized that the Appellant has probably already removed all such branches at this time and no further action is necessary. Code Enforcement Decision-4 Decision issued March 20, 2018. Pin iA,Olbrechts Hearing Examiner NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL Appeal to Superior Court. An appeal of the decision of the Hearing Examiner must be filed with Superior Court within twenty-one calendar days,as required by the Land Use Petition Act,Chapter 36.70C RCW. Code Enforcement Decision-5