Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-04-2024 - HEX Decision - code violation - weeds grass - Snyder 2024Code Enforcement Decision - 1 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER OF RENTON DECISION FILE NUMBER: FOV#: CODE24-000256 VIOLATION SITE ADDRESS: 10128 SE 188th St Renton, WA 98055 PROPERTY OWNER: Frank Snyder 10128 SE 188th Renton, WA 98055-6300 REVIEW AUTHORITY: City of Renton TYPE OF CASE: Appeal of Finding of Violation, three alleged violations. RULING: Weed and fence violations sustained. City failed to present any evidence that boat is “disabled” so that charge dismissed. $250 fine for weeds. $100 fine for fence suspended pending abatement. SUMMARY Frank Snyder appeals a Finding of Violation issued on July 18, 2024 asserting three code violations and imposing $100 in fines for each violation. Violation No. 1 is for a failing fence, Violation No. 2 is for overgrown weeds and Violation No. 3 is for an openly stored disabled boat. Violation No. 1 is sustained. The $100 fine for that offense is suspended for 90 days pending the repair or removal of the fence. If the fence is removed/repaired within that 90 days the fine will be waived. The boat charge is not sustained as the City presented no evidence that the boat was disabled. The fine for the weeds has been increased to the maximum $250 fine as there is no excuse for the continued weed violations on Mr. Snyder’s property. This is the third hearing examiner decision regarding the same type of violations repeatedly occurring on Mr. Snyder’s property. City staff testified that the violations have been on-going on the property since 2016. Mr. Snyder claims that he had understood the fence and boat violations to have been properly abated. City staff did not contest Mr. Snyder’s testimony on his communications with one of the code enforcement officers, but she was not present at the hearing as a witness. Mr. Snyder’s comments as to his understanding of the status of his code enforcement cases will be taken at face value and that is why the fines for the fence are suspended. There is no excuse for the weed violation. Mr. Snyder has known for eight years now that he must maintain control of the weeds on his property and repeatedly fails to do so. The last hearing examiner Code Enforcement Decision - 2 decision increased the FOV fine for the weeds from $100 to the maximum $250 fine because of the repeated failure of Mr. Snyder to take care of the violation. In that decision the fine was suspended to give Mr. Snyder yet another chance to abate the violation. The fine will not be suspended again this time. Mr. Snyder will have to pay the $250 fine and also abate the violation. If he fails to abate the violation immediately, staff has the authority (as it always has) to issue FOVs with $250 fines on a daily basis until the violation is abated. The boat charge of the FOV is not sustained because of technical error. It appears likely that the City would have prevailed on this charge if they had properly alleged in the FOV that the boat was unlicensed. Instead the City alleged that the boat was disabled. There is nothing from the evidence presented for this appeal that the boat was in fact disabled. The photographs of the boat submitted into the record show the boat as old and weathered but there is no basis to concluded that the boat isn’t seaworthy and/or doesn’t have a functioning motor. Mr. Snyder has actually already had his boat removed since the filing of the FOV. This was not done in vain. If Mr. Snyder had not removed the boat, the City could have charged him again on that basis and likely prevailed unless Mr. Snyder had successfully licensed his boat. HEARING A virtual hearing on the appeal was hosted from Renton City Hall on September 11, 2024 TESTIMONY A computer-generated transcript of the hearing has been prepared to provide an overview of the hearing testimony. The transcript is provided for informational purposes only as Appendix A. EXHIBITS Exhibits 1-12 identified in the City’s exhibit list were entered into the record during the hearing. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Violation Site. The violation site is located at 10128 SE 188th St. The site in question is owned by Frank Snyder, who resides at the site. 2. February 14, 2020 Finding of Violation. The July 18, 2024 Finding of Violation (“FOV”) under appeal alleges three code violations on Mr. Snyder’s property: (1) failing fence; (2) overgrown weeds, and (3) outdoor storage of disabled vehicle. Mr. Snyder filed an appeal of this FOV on August 1, 2024. 3. Fence. May 16, 2024 Ex. 5 photographs show Mr. Snyder’s fencing with several boards and sections missing. The fencing is heavily overgrown with vegetation and the vegetation appears to be the cause of the fencing structural problems. 2. Overgrown Vegetation. The FOV asserts the existence of vegetation and grass over 12” in height on the violation site. Photographs taken on July 17, 2024, Ex 5, confirm this observation and Mr. Snyder doesn’t contest this fact. It is determined that there was vegetation and grass over 12” in height on the violation site on July 17, 2024. Code Enforcement Decision - 3 3. Boat. The FOV alleges that the boat is disabled. The photographs of the boat show it as old and weathered but there is no indication from those photographs that the boat isn’t seaworthy or has an inoperable motor. No other evidence was presented on the functionality of the boat. No conclusions can be drawn as to whether or not it is disabled. 4. Mitigating Circumstances. As identified in the prior examiner decisions, Mr. Snyder suffers from congestive heart failure and other medical problems that limit his ability to maintain his premises. He also states he doesn’t have the resources to pay for yard maintenance and needs to do it himself. However, it must also be recognized that Mr. Snyder was cited and found to have violated similar violations six years ago in CODE16-000264 for a Finding of Violation issued on January 2, 2018 and the same type of violations again in CODE20-000052 for a Finding of Violation issued on February 14, 2020. Mr. Snyder was served a Warning of Violation on May 3, 2024 and a second Warning of Violation on May 17, 2024 for the violations subject to this appeal. As documented in the City’s exhibits, City staff have spent months working with Mr. Snyder to try to get him to abate the violations on his property. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Authority of Examiner: The Hearing Examiner has the authority and jurisdiction to review code violations as provided in RMC 1-3-2. 2. Code Violation: The code violations identified in Finding of Fact No. 3 are quoted below and applied to this appeal via corresponding conclusions of law. Violation No. 3: International Property Maintenance Code Section 302.7 as adopted by RMC 4-5-130: All accessory structures, including detached garages, fences and walls, shall be maintained structurally sound and in good repair. 3. Violation Found. Mr. Snyder is in violation of IPMC 203.7. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 3, Mr. Snyder’s back fence has missing boards and sections. The fence is not maintained structurally or in good repair. Violation No. 2: International Property Maintenance Code Section 302.4 as amended by RMC 4-5- 130(B)(3): 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. Violation Found. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 4, the violation site contained vegetation and grasses exceeding 12 inches in height on July 17, 2024. It is concluded that as owner of the violation site, Mr. Snyder was in violation of RMC 4-5-130(B)(16) on July 17, 2024. Violation No. 3: Unlicensed Vehicle on Residentially Zoned Property (RMC 4-4-085(D)(2)): It is unlawful for any person to keep, store or park, or to permit any other person to keep, store or Code Enforcement Decision - 4 park, any disabled vehicle or boat, or unlicensed vehicle or boat, on any residentially zoned property within the City unless that vehicle or boat is stored and parked outside public view within a fully enclosed building at all times. Vehicles and boats which are kept on site and outside of an enclosed building shall be operational and currently registered. 5. No Violation. The FOV alleges Mr. Snyder’s boat to be disabled rather than unlicensed. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, there is no basis to conclude that the boat was disabled. There is no basis to conclude that Mr. Snyder has violated RMC 4-4-085(D)(2). 6. Mitigating Circumstances. RMC 1-3-2E(3)(f) grants the examiner discretion on the amount of fines imposed by a Finding of Violation. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 7, Mr. Snyder suffers from what appears to be a disability that limits his ability to abate the violations on his property. This is the same issue that confronted Mr. Snyder and the City in the code enforcement actions against him in 2018 and 2021. As in past enforcement actions, City staff have spent months working with Mr. Snyder trying to achieve compliance. For the reasons identified in the Summary section of this Decision, the responsibilities of Mr. Snyder as a homeowner dictates that he spend a few hundred dollars a year maintaining his home if he can’t take care of it himself. Given the repeated and on-going nature of the overgrown weed offense, the City’s extensive efforts to work with Mr. Snyder and the fact that the total fines imposed by the Finding of Violation are $300, the fine for the overgrown weed violation, Violation No. 1, is increased from that imposed by the FOV to the maximum allowed of $250. DECISION Violation No. 1 of the July 18, 2024 Finding of Violation is sustained. The $100 fine for that violation is suspended for 90 days to give Mr. Snyder an opportunity to abate the violation. If the violation is abated within that 90 days of issuance of this decision the $100 fine shall be waived. Violation No. 2 is sustained and the fine is increased to $250 and due within 15 days of this decision. Violation No. 3 is not sustained and dismissed. Decision issued October 4, 2024. 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.