HomeMy WebLinkAboutDitty Appeal by Attorney920 Fifth Avenue
Suite 3300
Seattle, WA 98104
Clayton Graham
206.757.8052 tel
206.757.7052 fax
claytongraham@dwt.com
4867-1278-5464v.3 0026369-000043
October 12, 2022
City of Renton
Attention: City Clerk
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
Re:Notice of Violation and Order to Correct, Code Case No: CODE22-000184
dated September 27, 2022
Statement of Appeal and Request for Hearing
Subject Property: 215 SW Sunset Blvd Renton, WA 98057
To whom it may concern:
We write on behalf of this firm’s client, Ditty Properties Limited (“Ditty”), with respect
to the Notice of Violation and Order to Correct, Code Case No: CODE22-000184 (the “NOV”),
alleging violations of the City of Renton Municipal Code (“RMC” or “Code”) on real property
owned by Ditty (referred to here as the “Subject Property”). Pursuant to RMC 1-3 and 1-10,
Ditty hereby requests a hearing to challenge the allegations in the NOV.
As an initial matter, the NOV is facially invalid for failing to adhere to the Code’s
express requirements for these notices.1 As outlined in more detail below, several sections of the
NOV lack the “relevant details that form the basis of the Violation” and, in fact, fail to allege that
any violation has occurred. Moreover, if the City intended to assess any fines as a result of the
violations alleged in the NOV, it was required to inform Ditty of the “fine amount, if any” in the
NOV itself. See RMC 1-10-3.C. By failing to provide this information, the City failed to adhere
to requirements in the Code, which were conditions precedent to the City’s initiation of a Civil
Enforcement Action. See RMC 1-10-3 (“When initiating a Civil Enforcement Action, the CCI
shall inform the Violator of…”) (emphasis provided). It also deprives Ditty of information
necessary to understand the bases and impact of the NOV; information necessary for Ditty to
1 “Notice of Violation: When initiating a Civil Enforcement Action, the CCI shall inform the Violator of:
1. The relevant details that form the basis of the Violation; 2. The section or sections of the RMC that have
been violated; 3. The time in which the Violation must be corrected; 4. The fine amount for the Violation, if
any; and also that, 5. Any Violator who wants a hearing to challenge the Notice of Violation may have a hearing
before the Hearing Examiner, pursuant to the provisions of this chapter. The request for a hearing must be timely
and must satisfy all of the other requirements of this chapter.” RMC 1-10-3 (emphasis added)
City of Renton
Attn: City Clerk
October 12, 2022
Page 2
4867-1278-5464v.3 0026369-000043
fully protect its interests and ensure a full and fair process before this appeal and request for
hearing became due.
In addition, Ditty asserts the following specific errors resulting in the City’s issuance of
the NOV:
Alleged Violation 1: There are no bases for the violation. There are no broken windows or
plywood covering windows or doors on the Subject Property. All plywood was removed, and
broken windows replaced, on or around the date corrective action was to be completed, prior to
the inspections on August 1, 2022 and September 27, 2022. As a result, the City has failed to
provide “[t]he relevant details that form the basis of the Violation,” and no such violation is
present on the Subject Property.
Alleged Violation 2: All vegetation has been regularly maintained to twelve (12) inches in
height since at least receipt of the City’s Warning of Violation dated May 27, 2022.As a result,
the City has failed to provide “[t]he relevant details that form the basis of the Violation,” and no
such violation is present on the Subject Property.
Alleged Violation 3: The uses on the Subject Property are legal non-conforming, established and
maintained prior to the enactment of the Code restrictions identified in the NOV.
Alleged Violation 4: The uses on the Subject Property are legal non-conforming, established and
maintained prior to the enactment of the Code restrictions identified in the NOV.
Alleged Violation 5: The uses on the Subject Property are legal non-conforming, established and
maintained prior to the enactment of the Code restrictions identified in the NOV. The conduct
identified in the NOV is expressly permitted under other provisions of the Code including, but
not limited to, RMC 4-10-060, so the Code provisions cited cannot form the basis for a violation
and no such violation is present on the Subject Property.
Alleged Violation 6: The uses on the Subject Property are legal non-conforming, established and
maintained prior to the enactment of the Code restrictions identified in the NOV.
Alleged Violation 7: The City has failed to identify, among other Code requirements “[t]he
relevant details that form the basis of the Violation,” a condition precedent for initiating a Civil
Enforcement Action. Ditty reserves all rights to respond to any later allegations by the City
relating to the cited Code provisions and their application (if any) to the Subject Property.
Alleged Violation 8: There are no bases stated for the alleged violation. There are no recyclables
or garbage improperly stored on the Subject Property. Improperly stored garbage or recyclables,
if any, were removed on or around the date corrective action was to be completed, prior to the
City of Renton
Attn: City Clerk
October 12, 2022
Page 3
4867-1278-5464v.3 0026369-000043
inspections on August 1, 2022 and September 27, 2022. As a result, the City has failed to
provide “[t]he relevant details that form the basis of the Violation,” and no such violation is
present on the Subject Property.
Alleged Violation 9: The uses on the Subject Property are legal non-conforming, established and
maintained prior to the enactment of the Code restrictions identified in the NOV. The conduct
identified in the NOV is expressly permitted under other provisions of the Code including, but
not limited to, RMC 4-10-060, so the Code provisions cited cannot form the basis for a violation
notice, and no such violation is present on the Subject Property.
Alleged Violation 10: The uses on the Subject Property are legal non-conforming, established
and maintained prior to the enactment of the Code restrictions identified in the NOV.
Alleged Violation 11: The City has failed to identify, among other Code requirements “[t]he
relevant details that form the basis of the Violation,” a condition precedent for initiating a Civil
Enforcement Action. Ditty reserves all rights to respond to any later allegations by the City
relating to the cited Code provisions and their application (if any) to the Subject Property.
In addition to the above general and specific errors, Ditty reserves the right to identify
additional errors and raise additional defenses before or at the hearing. For the reasons outlined
above, including any additional errors and defenses raised before or at the hearing, Ditty
respectfully appeals the NOV and requests a hearing to challenge its allegations.
Very truly yours,
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
Clayton Graham
Nick Wegley
cc: Campbell Mathewson, representative for Ditty Properties Limited
Thatcher Mathewson, representative for Ditty Properties Limited
C.E. “Chip” Vincent, Community & Economic Development Administrator
Jason Churchill, Code Compliance Inspector