Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLiu Decision Ltr � Denis Law Mayor � _.. City Clerk-Jasan A.Seth,CMC November 18, 2Q16 Boyu Liu &Zao �in Liu 272� NE 4t�' Court Renton, WA 98056 Re: Hearing Examiner Decision, FOV#: 16-000358 Dear Boyu Liu &Zaa Lin Liu: I have attached the Hearing Examiner's Decision dated November 18, 2016, in the above referenced matter, If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to cantact me. Sincerely, . � � lason A. Seth, CMC City Clerk Attachment cc: Hearing Examiner Craig Burnell, Building Officia! ponna Locher, Cade Compliance Inspector Tim Lawless, Code Compliance Inspector Rabert Shuey, Code Compliance Inspector Sandra Pedersen, Finanee 1d55 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 9$057 � t425}430-6510/Fax t425}430-6516 • rentonwa.gov BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER OF RENTON DECISION FILE NUMBER: FOV#: CODE16-000358 ADDRESS: 2714 NE 4t" Ct. Renton, WA 9$056 PROPERTY OWNER: Boyu Liu 27I 4 NE 4th Ct. Renton, WA 98056 REWIEVV AUTHORITY: City of Renton TYPE OF CASE: Appea) of Finding of Viotation RULINC�: Finding of Vialation sustained, $300 fine due and owing. SUMMARY Mr. Liu contests a third Finding of Violation far violation of International Property Maintenance Code Section 302.4, which prohibits grass and weeds from growing more than 12 inches in height. Mr. Liu did not appear at the appeal hearing and had his mother, Zhao Lin Liu,testify on his behalf. Ms. Liu testified that Mr. Liu was unable to maintain his lawn because he's extremely busy. He's had to spend several weeks taking care of his father in China, who recently was in a corna and before that had cancer. Mr. Liu also recently acquired his master's degree, is working on a business and is planning an continuing his studies in Boston. Although it is fairly clear that Mr. Liu has a full schedule, this daesn't excuse failing to act during the three manths that the City has been attempting to campel Mr. L`ru to abate the violations on his property. In the period from early June ta the end of August, the Gity sent twa Warnings of Violation, three Findings of Violation and engaged in numerous personal, phone and email contacts with Mr, Liu. Even if Mr. Liu was in China the entire time, he should have at the least hired sorneone ta take care of the lawn and weeds on his property. It is acknowledged that shortly after the third Finding of Vioiatian Mr. Liu finally abated the violation. Such abatement may be cause to reduce the fines after a first or maybe even a second Finding of Violation, but by the third Finding of Violation any semblance of a gaod faith effort to comply with City code has heen tost. The third Finding of Vialation is sustained and the $300 fine far the viotation remains due and owing. HEARING Code Enforcement Decision- 1 The hearing was held on the alleged violations of this case an Qctober 1$, 2016 at 10:00 a.m. at the Rentan City Hall Council Chambers„ 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. TESTIMONY Rob 5huey, Renton Code Campliance Inspector, testified that he had just received infarmation Mr. Liu had left in the first and second of June and came back the 29th of September to visit his ill father in China. He was gone far faur months during the growing season and during that time did not maintain his lawn area. The neighbors were very angry abaut this. Warnings of violation were sent to Mr. Liu at the address identified in King County tax assessar recards and the City's utility billing records. The address in these recards turned aut to be incorrect and the second Warning of Vialation was returned. Mr. Shuey had alsa emailed Mr. Liu about the violations. Mr. Liu responded ta the email and Mr. Shuey and Mr. Liu then discussed by email the abatement of the violations. Mr. Liu ultimately told Mr. Shuey to abate the violation. Mr. Liu acknowledged that the address of the vioIation site was his home address so Mr. Shuey mailed Mr. Liu the second Finding of Violation at the home address. Mr. Liu calied Mr. Shuey and asked him to waive the fines of the secand Finding of Vialation. Mr. Liu then went and met with Mr. Shuey at Renton City Hail on August 12, 2016, which contradicts his recent assertions to Mr. Shuey#hat he was in China from the beginning of June through Septernber 29, 201b. Mr. Shuey then drove by the vialation site on the compliance deadline for the third Finding of Violation and found the grass had still nat been cut. The first and second Findings of Violatian have been cut by the property awner. The vioiation was abated a week after issuance of the third Finding of Violation. Zhao Lin Liu, the mother of the appellant, testified that her son is very busy. She and her san are the anly persons from her famity in America. He son takes care of her and his father in China. She noted that her son flies back and forth to China to take care of his father. Her son has acquired a master's degree and is trying to continue his studies in Boston. He's very busy. He's working on a business. Her son's father financially supports his san and he paid for the house at the violation site. Her san doesn"t know how to mow a lawn. His father had cancer and also was in a coma. He was first sick in 2005. EXHIBITS Exhibits 1-9 identified in the City's exhibit list were entered into the record during the hearing. Ex. 10: Three 8x11 phatagraphs taken in July submitted by Ms. Liu Ex. 11: Airline documentation of Mr. Liu's travels to China FINDINGS OF FACT l. The violation site is lacated at 2714 NE 4`h Court, Renton. The site in question is owned by Bayu Liu. Code Enforcement Decision-2 2. It is uncantested that on August 16, 2016 the vialation site had grass and weeds at a height that exceeds twelve inches. A photograph taken an June 6, 2416 clearly shows the lawn and weeds at greater ihan 12 inch height. In his compliance narrative, Ex. 2, code case activity report, Ex. 3, and his testimony, Mr. Shuey noted that through site visits he canfirmed that the weeds and grass remained unabated fram June 6, 2016 through August 4, 2Q 16. From this evidence it is determined that grass and weeks were growing at the violation site rn excess of 12 inches in height on August 16, 2016. 3. Mr. Shuey issued a Warning af Violation for the exceed weed and grass growth on June 6, 2016 and June 30, 2016. The warnings were rnailed to the address of the property owner listed in King Caunty Assessor records and City of Renton utility billing records. The secand Warning of Violation was sent back "Return to Sender". Mr. Shuey then sent an ernail to Mr. Liu on July 18, 2016 and engaged in back and forth email correspandence with Mr. Liu. From this email correspondence it is deterrnined that Mr. Liu was made aware of the nature of the weed and grass violations and what he needed to abate thern. In those email exchanges, Mr. Liu also noted that his correct address was the address of the violation site as opposed to the address where the warnings were maited. 4. Mr. Shuey issued a first Finding of Violation for the excess grass and weed growth on 3uly 18, 20ib with a$l00 fine and a secand Finding of Vialation with a$200 fine was maiied on August 3, 2016. Mr. Liu has paid for both of the fines. 5. Mr. Shuey issued a third Finding of Violation on August l6, 2016 for excess weed and lawn growth on the property in vialation of International Property Maintenance Cade Sectian 302.4. Mr. Liu timely filed the Finding of Violation on August 23, 2036. CUNCLUSIONS OF LAW l. Authoritv of Examiner: The Hearing Examiner has the authority and jurisdiction to review code violation as provided in RMC 1-3-2. 2. Code Vialation: The Finding of Violation of this case (Ex. 3) is based upon the violation of Rentan Municipal Code regulations, specifically RMC 4-5-13Q(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. International Pronertv Maintenance Code Section 302.4 as amended bv RMC 4-5-, 130(B)(16): Weeds:All premises and exterror property shall be maintained free from weeds or plant growth in eaccess of tweXve inches rn height on developrnent property or twenty four inches (24') in her`ght an vacant land. All noxious weeds shal! be prohibited. Weeds shall be defined as all grasses, annual plants and vegetation, other than trees or shrubs; providecl, however, this term shall not include cultivated flowers and gardens. Code Enforcernent Decision-3 Upon failure of the owner vr agent having eharge of a praperty to cut and destroy weeds after service of a FinclinR of Violativn, they shaCl be subject tv the provisians of RMC 1- 3-2, Civil Enfarcement of Code. 3. The violation is affirmed. As determined in Findin� of Fact Na. 2, grass and weeds were growing on the violation site in excess of 12 inches on August 16, 2016. DECISION The third Finding of Violation of the abave-captioned case, issued August l6, 2016, is affirmed and no cause for reduction in the assessed $300 fine is warranted far the reasons identified in the surnmary of this decision. Decision issued October I8, 2016. �_.� �`�"'v.�-�',..�' �,i'-�._.._... .....--- PhiT't�.l�lbrecchts Hearing Examiner NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APFEAL Appeai to Superiar Court. An appeal of the decision of the Hearing Examiner must be filed with Superior Court within twenty-ane calendar days, as required by the Land Use Petition Act, Chapter 36.70C RCW. Code Enforcement Decision-4