20020380.pdfDATE RECEIVED
L
PERMITEX IRES
CITY OF EDMONDS
USE PERMIT
ZONE
NUMBER_
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION
JOB ITEJAPT#
ADDRESS Z,3/
OWNER NAMEINAME OF SU INESS
FLAT NAMEISUBDlVIS10N N
LOT NO.
_
L10 NO�
Lt. TEE I
MAILING ADDRESS
_
PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP
EXISTING — PROPOSED�
read, Kan'..
a us
ate—s—I.e.
:PC BOX
CITY
3
REQUIRED DEDICATION— FT
fflure,se..
NAME
METER SIZE
LINE SIZE
No. OF FIXTURES
r'
PRV REQUIRED
I
YES 0 No C3
ADDRESS
REMARKS
OWNERICONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR EROSION CONTROUGRANIAGE
re ADDRESS
FIRE REVIEWED By DATE
CITY
STATE LICENSE NUMBER EXPIRATION
ED BY
VARIANCE OR CU
SHORELINE OR ADB#
INsrErTjoN
REQ�O
1 '10111)
OSTEC
[3YES C3 No
SEPA REVIEW
COMPLETE EXEMPT
EXP
SIGN AREA
ALLOWED , PROPOSED
HEIGHT
ALLOWED PFVOPO�E
PROPIE TAX ACCO PARCEL NO.
NEW
E] NEW A RESIDENTIAL PLUMBING I MECH
LOT C VERAGE
ALLOWED PROPOSED
REQUIRED SETBACKS (FT.)
FRONT SIDE REAR
PROPOSED SETBACKS (FT)
FRONT UPSIDE REAR
ADDITION 11 COMMERCIAL COMPLIA CE OR
0 ADDITION CHANGE OF USE
REMODEL 0 APARTMENT SIGN
0 E.ODETLO
PARKING
RECY0 I PROVIDED
LOT AREA
I PLANNING REVIEWED BY DATE
FENCE
REPAIR 11 GRADING CYOS 0 ( X FT)
REMARKS
0 DEMOLISH n TANK
o GARAGE o RETAINING WALL
C RENEWAL
ARPORT ROOKERY
C. UWE OF USE.;q.ESS 0 ITY) FXP
.11-KE.-
jlyl��7
I�W
-q�
COURANT
GROUP
43
- OF
0 STORIES
NUMBER 0 CRITICAL
UWELLING AREAS
NITS NUMBER
SPECIAL I.NSIE.T.. 1A.EA
REQUIRE 0 YES
R
OCCUPANT
LOAD
DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE
REMARKS
PROGRESS INSPECTIONS PER UBC 10B/FINAL INSPECTION RECITI
VAWATION
FEE I Description I FEE
HEAT SOURCE GLAZINQ % LOT SLOPE %
Building
-1
PLAN CHECK NO: LTED DATE
I
Plumbing
Mechanical
THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES ONLY THE WORK NOTED. THIS PERMIT COVERS WORKTO
z HE DONE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ONLY. ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE PUBLIC
Grading
Recording Fee
I a MARQUEES, ETC.) WILL REQUIRE
3 OMMUN (CURBS, SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS.
SEPARATE PERIESSIOW
Engr. Review
city Surcharge
PERMIT APPUCATION: IN RAYS
PERMIT LIMIT I YEAR - PROVIDED WORK IS STARTED WITHIN list DAYS
Engr, Inspection
State Surcharge
SEE BACK OF PINK PERMIT FOR MOREINFORMATION
'APILICANI ON OEHUILF 01 HIS 01 HER SPOUSE, HEIRS, A11IGN1 AND IUCCESORB
TISLIK 'itigation
Plan Chk Deposit
IN INTEREST, AGREES 70 INDEMNIFY, DEFEND AND HOLD HARMLESS THE CITY OF
Receipt #
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ITS OFFICIALS, EMPLOYEES, AND AGENTS FROM ANY AND
ALL CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES OF WHATEVER, NATURE. ARIS No DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY
Fire Review
FROM THE ISSUANCE OF THIS PERIAR. SSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT SHALL NOT BE
Fire Inspection
Total Amount Due
DEEMED To MODIFY; WAIVE OR REDU E ANY REQUIREMENT Or ANY CITY ORDINA CE
NOR LIMIT IN ANY WAY THE CITY$ ABILITY TO ENFORCE ANY ORDINANCE PROVI$ION�
_
Landscapoinsp.
Receipt #
I HEREBY ACKNOWLED -5 THAT I HAVE READ THIS APPLICATION; THAT THE INFORMATION
APPLICATION APPROVAL
GIVEN IS CORRECT., AND THAT I AM THE OWNER OR THE OULY AUTHORIZED AGENT OF
THE OWNER. I AGREE TO COMPLY WITH CITY AND STATE LAWS REGULATING CONSTRUC.
CALL
T permit until signed by the
&P
TION; AND IN DING THE WORK AUTHORIZED THEREBY, NO PERSON WILL BE EMPLOYED
D
IN VIOLATION OF THE LABOR CODE OF THE STATE F WASHINGTON REUTING TO
FOR INSPECTION
U'Ka�'E . L:a'd' b:ib spety: and Fees are paid. and
aju 1, Itsk—kidg.d in are ... pn,,Idedy�
SURAN
WORKMENe C� �ATION INE CC AN ACW 18.27. As
_TtGmTUAE�s6WNERePA AGENT) 1
(425)
SIGNATURE,,,/ . /DATE
771-0220
RELEASED BY DATE
EXT 1333
IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTIL
771-0221
A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR A CERTIFI-
ORIGINAL - FILE - YELLOW - INSPECTO
CATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC SECTION 109
FAX
PINK � OWNER - GOLD - ASSESSOR
10/01
z
0
C In
AT 0.
80
C
IT!
01
C
0
It
In M
�i I,!
0 rn
C (j)
C (a
M 0
Z
X
z
z
9
0
IT1
CITY OF EDMONDS
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
22061
DATE:
1RW2
0.
=
2.
Ln
0
cr� jCash
Tot at Received
3F=
En
m
A—w
-a
IRK
Water Size:
03
Water Connection Fee
.0
Sewer Permit/Repair
IJU
Sewer Connection/1-ID Fee
0
01
Street Disruption F69 (Ill Fund)
0
Storm Drainage Fee
03
Engineering Inspection Fee (SFR)
U1
Engineering 2.2% Inspection Fee (SP, Multi. Comm)
10�
Engineering Review Fees (SP, Multi.
ROW/Street Use/Encroachment Permit
0
Street Cut/ Restoration Fee (620 Fund)
Traffic Mitigation e/Sidewalk Contribution
Fire Inspection Fee
Fire Plan Check Fee
Building Permit Fee - Type
Plan Check Fee
Reimbursable Consulting Fees
Critical Areas
U3
Landscape Inspection Fee (1 %)
v
SERA Review Fee
Shoreline Permit Fee
Sign Installation (620 Fund)
Zoning Application Fee -Type:
Maps / Books
Photocopies
RecordlLg Fee
_qjty Surcharge
State Surcharge (622 Fund)
OV EDAf 0
0
NTlub
TO PERMITTEE AND/OR OWNER
6
DO NOT REMOVE
PARTIAL APPROVAL CORRECTON REQUIRED &"ENFORCEMENT VIOLATION
Owner--s7C—/W//4Pt &6'�7WW __Permit Number-2,00Z-0380
JobAddress 96a SiteContact
13 WORK DESCRIBED BELOW HAS BEEN INSPECTED AND IS APPROVED
L3 APPROVED PLANS AND JOB CARD MUST BE AVAILABLE To INSPECTOR ON SITE
CORRECTIONS LISTED BELOW MUST BE MADE* BEFORE WORK CAN BE APPROVED AND/OR THE NEXT PHASE
OF WORK IS STARTED
RECALL FOR INSPECTION L3 $45 REINSPECTION FEE MUST BE PAID PRIOR TO INSPECTION REQUEST
STOP WORK -UNTIL AUTHORIZED TO CONTINUE By CITY INSPECTOR
L3 No PERmrr.sTop woRK-REmovE CONSTRUCTION OR OBTAIN PERMIT AND MAKE WORK COMPLY wrru
ALL APPLICABLE CITY CODES
1U4AW,j-,- IV rR-- 11rNX WK 0�1- r- a ?124119 2-
Z& -Qloulk-6 musl he Mtftle-
1111-hv 11'74z 2;z, 2-003
Amay- �f // A-il-ckv 1boo1141vZe_r ��1�4edl4l h4el-IV-01-
lh-vd
4j Aemae- 4ow
s) A M avle- 0 1 W I;q- 71) X A W ISIO�e e, e jA e
hluqbm AX-1-Air wws�lnv-
THE ACTIONS OR CORRECTIONS INDICA179D Af3OVlfARE REQUIRED TO BE CORRECTED WITHIN
_CALENDAR DAYS OR PENALTIES MAY BE APPLIED. FOR INSPECTION CALL 425-771-0220
0"Building Planning El Engineering Ll Fire U Public Works
.e~t W1771 Xffq'1-67(1111 IFW-r
Perinlffifex,�v5/27/,02 PinluEnforcement Buff. Applicant
z
C
m
80 t
C
-49 1 !"
3: m
no z
C:�
0 -n
n�
m
C
K ca
m 0
z
z
9
0
to
GARY HAAKENSON
CITY OF EDMONDS MAYOR
121 STHAVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA98020 - (425) 771-0220 FAX (425) 771-0221
Website: �.Cledrnondsma.uS
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Planning Building Engineering
January 31, 2003
z
In
lN
Ms. Jennifer Mantooth
ra ;i
K�',
Post Office Box 462
0 m
100
k
Edmonds, Washington 98020
m
0
0 C
RE: 960123 1` Place Southwest, Edmonds
7: M
M Z,
Dear Ms. Mantooth:
C
Pending the outcome of your Land Use Petition Act Appeal, the City is verifying the
V
condition of the guest house. Since you did not request a stay of the decision and under
0 -n
1-1.�,
the terms of the Hearing Examiner's decision of file number AP-02-130, dated August
24, 2002, you are required to return the second story of the detached garage structure
M
located at 9601 231" Place Southwest, Edmonds back to a 'guesthouse' as defined by
0
Snohomish County Code. In order to verify that the Hearing Examiner's decision has.
0 FM
been met, under the authority of Uniform Building Code Section 104.2.3, 1 hereb y
IT!
request inspection of the premises during normal City business hours for the purpose of
0
t
such verification. Please contact my office within 10 days date of this letter to schedule
for a mutually agreeable day and time for inspection.
If your appeal is unsuccessful and you have not complied with the terms of the Hearing
z
Examiner's decision, please be advised that the City intends to pursue Civil Violation
penalties of $100.00 per day for the period from August 15, 2002 until the date of
CID
z
compliance with the Hearing Examiner's decision, Your appeal, without a court issued
stay, does not permit you to continue to illegally use and occupy this structure.
0
M
If you have any questions please feel free to contact me at 425-771-0220.
Sincerely,
Jeannine L. Graf
Building Official
Incorporated August 11, 1890
Sister Citv - Hekinan. Janan
Attachment 12
CITY OF EDMONDS - GARY HAAKENSON
MAYOR
121 6TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 - FAX (425) 771-0221
DEVELOPME NT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Planning Building Engineering
4c, 189
April 11, 2002
Jennifer Mantooth
Z
PO Box 462
Edmonds, WA 98020
71
Dear Ms. Mantooth:
The purpose of this letter is to officially respond to your April 2, 2002 letter. Your letter states
vi
that you've utilized professional resources and have decided to keep the unpermitted dwelling
a m
C:
unit above the garage and in the near future make applications for a conpehensive plan
m
0
4
amendment and rezone to comply with the code. You also ask that the City ofEdmonds not take
C,
enforcement action until these applications may be processed and approved. The following*is
intended to represent the City's official response to your letter and provide another outline of
expectations and timelines to correct the violation on your property.
C
The Order to Correct Violation originally posted on Marc h 8, 2002 shall continue to provide an
accurate outline for compliance. To prevent the posting ofa Notice of Civil Violation thereby
0 -n,
accruing fines ofS100 daily you must follow the corrective measures outlined in the Order to
-n Lo
Correct Violation by May 31, 2002. Ifyour intention is to appeA then you may only appeal
within 14 calendar d ofthe date that the Notice ofCivil Violation is posted on your property.
m M
aj
We understand your interest in remaining the resident ofthe unpermitted third unit. However, we
0
0 Fal
D)
are obligated to enforce the Edmonds Community Development Code which does not allow your
r cl)
third unit to remain legally without a change in both the Comprehensive Plan and a Rezone of the
0,
property. As a result� to comply with the code, you must vacate the unpermitted dwelling and
follow the corrective actions outlined in the enclosed March 8, 2002 Order to Correct Violation
X
by DI&X21 2.002. In the future, ifyour property is granted a now zoning designation that allows
3 dwellings on your property then you may consider the option oflegally providing a dwelling
Z
above your garage.
--j
Ifyout have any questions, comments or concerns then please contact me at (425) 771-0220.
Z
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Si ly,
m
Ja—son =Lilot
f .t
orcernent Officer
5
Incorporated August 11, IS90
SiMpr Ctfu 14.W...
CITY OF EDMONDS GARY HAAKENSON
MAYOR
121 STH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 FAX (425) 771,0221
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Planning - Building - Engineering
March 8, 2002
V,
Jennifer Mantooth
Z;
0
PO BOX 462
0
Edmonds, WA 98020
m
Dear Ms. Mantooth:
"n
The purpose ofthis letter is to respond to your letter received March 6, 2002. In your
as
rn
C
letter, you state that the Order to Correct Violation was issued without consideration of
M 0
Snohomish County Codes and that you need a more reasonable tinteline to comply with
�g
the City's requirements.
M�
M
In this case, the City of Edmonds had researched official Snohomish County records that
Z,
indicate your garage was originally constructed and granted final approval with the space
0 -n,
above the garage left as unfinished storage space. I am also aware of your involvement
with the County's code enforcement efforts and the official determination made by the
County's Hearing Examiner to remove the illegally constructed residence above the
ffm�
Vi
garage only allowing a guesthouse conversion. Additionally, the County s enforcement
0
records show the required final approval that granted you the use of a guesthouse above
OR
C: 0)!
the garage. As you are aware, the City has received two complaints regarding the status
K W
rn 6
of your guesthouse and because you admitted to living in the now finished space above
the garage, a violation is confirmed that must be resolved.
z
According to Section 18.32.040 ofthe Snohomish County Code, a guesthouse was an
allowed use while your property was located under county jurisdiction, However,
(a,
according to Section 18.90.435 a guesthouse was defined as a structure with not more
z
than two bedrooms having no kitchen, and which shall be used or designed for use
primarily by guests or servants for sleeping quarters only. Because you've admitted to
0
m
me that this potentially legal nonconforming guesthouse is your pri mary residence and
not the sleeping quarters for either a guest or servant a violation exists that must be
resolved.
Incorporated August 11, 1890
91ste, Citv - Hekinin—Janan
City of Edmonds is willing to amend the date for compliance
Per your request, the
originally stated in the Order to Correct Violation, Also, this Order to Correct Violation
nconforming
has been altered after considering further evidence regarding the legal no
2002. Bv April
status of your potential guesthouse. The new deadline will be April 15
15, 2002 wu must com lete the following corrective measures:
e Permit ($185 permit fee) from the City's Building Division and
Obtain a Complianc
ction we will verify that
have the necessary inspection performed. During our inspe
s in fact not a residence but instead guest or servant
the area above the garage i e Snohomish County Code. Also, our Z
quarters as defined in Section 18.90.435 of th
mpletely removed including the
City inspection will verify that the kitchen is co
cabinet's, microwave, stove and the
refrigerator, sink, associated plumbing, counters m
220-power service.
You must also complete, notarize and return to the City for recording the enclosed n
in V
Legal Nonconforming Guesthouse Covenant. This signed statement of understanding 0
M
urrent owner, the City and any future owner(s) C
helps to clarify expectations for the c 0 1.11
in
0
of the property. 01
applyingfor a rezone of this C
e Planning Manager, Rob Chave, � C 1,
(After speaking with th lation. Infact, a
comply with this Order to Correct Ho in
property is not a solution to m
the property is inconsistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and
rezone of Z
therefore staff couldn't recommend approvaL)
to Correct Violation clarifying the new vi
I will repost your properly with a new Order "n La
required corrections and the new deadline for compliance. Again, you must complete the 0
corrective actions required identified in the Order to Correct Violation by ARE91§1M.
timeline then a Notice of Civil Violation m m
ly within this given
if you're unable to comp code. Ultimately, fines of $100 daily may vi
issued to assure compliance with the
must be rn
I this violation has been resolved. C (a
accrue unti C (A
In C)
me at (425) 771-
If you have any questions, comments or concerns then you may contact
0220. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Z
Y'
0)
Z
Jas on ell
C rcl.
e Enf. 'in 0
in
Duane Bowman, Development Services Director
CC:
Jeannine Graf, Building Official
Rob Chave, Planning Manager
Kathleen Taylor, City Planner
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 - STH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020
PLANNING DIVISION
ADVISORY REPORT
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
To:
McCo ell, Hcm�p�armner
z �2-
From:
-#,—
J on
as 7ourtellot
'pAEnforcement Officer
Date:
AUGUST 7,2002
File:
AP-02-130
MANTOOTH
Hearing Date, Time, And Place: August 15, 2002, At 9:30 AM,
Third Floor, Room 304
Edmonds City Hall, 121 - 5" Avenue N.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
1Y
INTRODUCTTON .............................................................................................. .............. 2
A. APPELIANTIAPPEALINFoRmArIoN ............................ ................................................................... 2
B. RecommemArIoNs .. . ................................................................................................................................ 2
11.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS ................................................................ 2
A.SrrEDEscRjPnoN .......................... ........................ 2
B. HISTORY ....................... - ................................................................................................................ ........... 2
C. APPEAL Issues ............................................. .............................................................................................. 4
111.
RECONSIDERATION AND APPEALS ..................................................................... 5
A. REQUESTFORRECONSIDERATION ............. ........................ ..................... ................. I ................................. 6
B. APPEALS .......... ..................................................................................... ; ................................................ 6
C. TIME Lurrs FOR REcoNSioERAnoN AND APPEALS .................................................................................... 6
IV.
NOTICE TO COUNTY ASSESSOR ............................................................................... 6
V.
APPENDICES .................................................................................................................... 6
VI.
PARTIES OF RECORD ................................................................................................... 7
Montooth Staff Report.doc August 8, 2002 Staff Report
0
M
rn
0
80
C
AT
0 -n
n
M M
0
o Fn
C co
C co
Q 0
Z
M
z
CA
0
q
0
M
Jenniler Mantooth
File No. AP-02-130
Pap2ol`7
INTRODUCTION
A. Appellant/Appeal Information
1. Annellants: Jennifer Mantooth. (see Attachment 2)
2. Site Location: 9601 — 2316Pl. SW (See Attachment 1)
3, Owner ofSubiect Prove Jennifer Mantooth.
4. Reque Appeal of'Notice ofCivfl Violation regarding an unpermitted dwelling unit.
S. Review Process: Hearing Examiner conducts a public hearing and makes the final decision.
6. Maior Code Issues:
a. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (FCDC) Chapter 20.110 Civil
Violation
b. Compliance with ECDC Section 20.21, Accessory Dwelling Units
B. Recommendations
Based on statements ofFact, Conclusions, and Attachments in this repor� we recommend
DENIAL ofthis appeal and upholding stafrs decision to remove the unpermitted dwelling unit
and return the subject property to the legally nonconforming use as a Guest House as originally
permitted while under the jurisdiction ofSnohomish County. Additionally, we request that $5,200,
the full amount offines allowed be assessed per Section 20.110.040(F) ofthe Edmonds
time and
Community Development Code, The purpose of fines would be to recooperate the City's
expense to enforce this issue which was previously addressed by Snohomish County in 1996. See
Attachment 20.
FINDINGS Or' FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
A Site Description
1. Site Development And Zoning:
a) Facts:
(1) ft: The subject property is approximately 10,019 square feet.
(2) Land Use: Ile subject property is a legal nonconforming duplex and detached
garage with legal nonconforming guest house.
Residential.
(3) Zoning: The subject property is zoned RS-8, Single-Farmly
2. Neighboring Development And Zoning:
ik) Fact: The neighboring properties are zoned single-family residential (RS-8), and are
primarily developed with single family residences and a legal nonconforming duplex.
B. Mstory
1. Chronology
a) November 5,1999: The City receives a formal citizen complaint. See Attachment 3.
The complaint concerned an illegal detached residence established by the Appellant
above the garage in question.
b) September 18, 2000: The City receives a second citizen complaint filed by different
citizen citing same code violations as previous citizen complaint. See Attachment 3
Mantaoth StaffReportdoc /August% 2002 StaffilWit
Z
M
C
M
0
0
r
M
M
0 -n
"n
M M
or-
0
M 0
Z r-
:,4
Z
Z
0
M
f
Jenniler Mmuioth
File No. AP-02-130
Page 3 .177
c) October 4, 2001: Tourtellot mails first enforcement letter to the property owner,
Ms.Mantooth. See Attachment 5.
d) March 1, 2002: Tourtellot posts and mails Order to Correct Violation to Mantooth
property. See Attachment 7.
e) March 1, 2002: Tourtellot receives phone call from Ms. Mantooth disputing Order to
Correct Violation stating that the guest house was allowed and permitted while under
jurisdiction ofSnohoniish County. Ms. Mantooth admits that the guest house in guestio
is her current residence and that vacating prernises was not an option. Ms. Mantooth
wanted to discuss her options, Tourtellot recommended that she discuss situation with
Planning Divison. See Attachment 8.
f) March 5, 2002: Ms. Mantooth visits Planning Divison and speaks with City Planner,
KathleenTaylor. Mrs. Taylor explained code requirements, discussed rezoning and the
comprehensive plan designation for property in question.
g) March 6, 2002: Tourtellot receives letter from Mantooth requesting non specific
extention ofdeadline to explore her alternatives. SceAttachment9.
h) March 8, 2002: Tourtellot posts and mails another Order to Correct Violation grouting
new deadline extension until Alaril 15, 2002 for compliance as requested. See
Attachment 10.
i) March 8, 2002: Tourtellot receives phone call from Ms. Mantooth. Ms. Mantooth again
states that she's not satisfied with her options listed in the Order to Correct Violation.
Tourtell cites Planning Manager's comments that a rezone could not be recommended
because inconsistent with City's comprehensive plan. Refer to Attachment 10.
j) AprH2,2002: Tourtellot receives letter from Ms. Mantooth. Letter cites her intentions
to amend the comprehensive plan and rezone the property mentions no specific thriefrarne
for compliance with Order to Correct Violation or dates to submit for comprehensive
plan amendment. See Attachment 11.
k) April 11, 2002: Tourtellot sends Ms. Mantooth a letter responding to her April 2, 2002
letter. The letter clarify's expectations outlined in Order to Correct Violation issued on
March 8,2002 and extends deadline until May 31,2002 See Attachment 12.
1) April 15, 2002: Tountellot receives phone call from Ms. Mantooth. Ms. Mantooth
wanted to clarify enforcement procedures regarding appeal.
in) Msyl.7,2002: Tourtellot receives a phone call from Ms. Mantooth. Ms.Mautooth
requested information regarding fee's for appeal, amending the comprehensive plan and
filing for rezone with City.
n) May 23, 2002: Ms. Mantooth visits City Hall to obtain a Compliance Permit and submits
the Nonconforming Guesthouse Covenant for recording with Snohomish County to
comply with Order to Correct Violation. Refer to Attachment 13.
o) May 24, 2002: Tourtellot and Building Inspector, Michael Snook inspect Mantooth
residence as requested by Ms. Mantooth to follow-up with the Compliance Permit. Staff
verified finictional kitchen, sleeping quarters, dining moin, living morn, bathroom and
office. Ms. Mantooth appeared to still reside in area above garage. See Attachment 14.
p) June 3, 2002: Tourtellot sends Ms. Mantooth a letter containing a response to previous
inspection on May 24, 2002. Letter clarified expectations and Wants Ms. Mantooth a new
deadline for compliance ofJune 23. 2002. See Attachment 15.
q) June 24, 2002. Tourtellot posts and mails a Notice of Civil Violation at Mantooth
residence. See Attachment 16.
r) June 25,2002: Ms. Monteath submits Appeal to Notice ofCivfl Violation. See
Attachment 2.
Mantooth Staff Pxportdoc / August 8, 2002 1 StaffReport
Z
M
M
M
0
80
C:
M m
C
0
rn M
0
0
0 Fn
C o)
K v)
M 0
Z r-
74 T
;U
-q
X
Z
Z
0
M
Jennifer Mantooth
File No. AP-02-130
Pug.4.f7
2. Past Precedent
Once the City's code enforcement staffreceives a complaint the City is then obligated to
investigate and enforce any noted violations. in this case, staff'posted property, contacted the
property owner, researched and documented the violation through Snohomish County Records
(Refer to Attachments 8 and 9) took photographs of'Appellarns residence (FLefer to
Attachment 4) and confirmed with the owner the status ofthe guest house as a permanent
residence and not the entitled legal nonconforming use as a guesthouse as defined by
Snohomish County Code (Refer to Attachment 8). The City followed the same procedures as
contained in ECDC 20.110, Civil Violation — Enforcement Procedures.
C. Appeal Issues
Z
1. Issues Raised by the Appellants. The appellants issue is contained in Attachment #
2. In summary, the issues are as follows:
a) The Order and Notice allege violation ofECDC 20.21. Ms. Mantooth disputes the
finding that the guest house has changed in use since approved by Snohomish County.
b) Complying with Corrective Action stated in the Order and Notice should be postponed
ra
M a � I
until the outcome of both a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and a Rezone allowing 3
0
0
dwelling units on the subject property.
C
MITI!
2. StaffResponse.
in
a) Issue: The guest house in question had not changed in use since originally approved
by Snohomish County.
(1) Facts
01
(a) Ms. Mantooth states that the guest house was approved by Snohon-dsh
County to accommodate an art studio and guest quarters. A guest house
m m
according to Smilionaish County was approved and is defined as "a structure
D—O)
with not more than two bedroom having no Idtchen and which shall be used
0 r-
or designed for use primarily by guests or servants for sleeping quarters
0 m
a ch
only". Refer to Attachment 8.
M (1) 1
M 0,
(b) According to City records the property in question was annexed into the
City of Edmonds on December 15, 1997,
X
(c) According to the official zoning map the property in question is zoned RS-8
-4
Residential Single Family 8,000. Refer to Attachment 1.
Z
(d) Prior to annexation into the City of Edmonds the property in question was
-4
3:
entitled to allow a duplex and a pest house according to Snohomish County
in
Code and proper permits were applied for and obtained by current property
Z
0
owner.
(c) Under Section 16.20 ofthe Edmonds Community Development Code, an
In
Accessory Dwelling Unit may only be allowed with an approved Permit
issued by the City. Refer to Attachment 18.
(f) Under Section 20.21 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, an
Accessory Dwelling Unit may not increase the overall density allowed in
relation to the single family residential neighborhood. In this case, the
accepted legal nonconforming duplex abready maximized the intent ofthe
code thereby not allowing an additional dwelling unit. Refer to Attachment
19.
(g) According to the Edmonds Comprehensive Plan this property is designated
as single family residential. See Attachment 17.
Mantooth Staff Report.doc August 8,2OD2 Staff Report
Jonifer Mantooth
Fit. No. AP-02-130
Page 5 of7
(h) On May 24, 2002, both the Code Enforcement Officer, Jason Tourtellot and
the Building inspector, Michael Snook for the City ofEdmonds visited the
Mantooth residence to perform a site inspection to address the compliance
permit noting the existence ofthe appellants residence and not a guest house
as defined per Snohomish County Code, Refer to Attachment 14.
(2) Conclusion
(a) Ms. Mantooth's statements and City inspection confirm the guest house as a
primary residence in contradiction to the Snohomish County Code's
definition of Guest house. See Attachment 6.
(b) To date, Ms. Mantooth has not satified all ofthe corrective actions required
by the Notice of'Civil Violation posted June 24, 2002, requiring written
evidence that the guest house is no longer a primary residence as well as
obtaining a demolition permit to allow die City a chance verify the removal
ofthe kitchen sink, related kitchen counters, the refrigerator, the range and
range hood, the dishwasher and the cabinets used for food storage. See
Attachment 16.
b) Issue: Compliance should be postponed until the property in question as well as
several adjacent properties may be rezoned to a zoning designation of RM-3
resolving the Issue and allowing the kieping of the detached. third residence.
(1) Facts
(a) The applicant was fast officially notified ofthe matter on March 1,2002.
Since that date several Orders to Correct Violation and a Notice of'Civil
Violation were issued to Ms. Mantooth outlining timelines and corrective
actions to comply with the existing code.
(b) The Notice ofCivil Violation issued on June 24, 2002 lists two
requirements to rectify the violation. Both requirements would establish the
allowed nonconforming use as a guest house under Snohomish County Code
but not as a primary residence in conflict with the previous Snohomish
County Code or the existing City offilmonds code. See Attachments 8 and
21.
(2) Conclusion
(a) The applicant has been granted ample tim to explore alternatives and
comply with the existing code pertaining to the subject property.
that in the future
(b) Postponing compliance to the code based on the possi
the property's designation may be officially altered to allow a third unit does
not officially satisfy the immediate direction given in previous orders
requiring compliance to the code; the appellant must first comply with the
previous Snohomish County Code and the existing City ofEdmouds code
then the appellant may attempt to officially alter the property's current
official zoning designation to potentially allow a third residence at a later
date.
RECONSIDERATION AND APPEALS
The following is a summary ofthe deadlines and procedures for filing reconsideratioWs and appeals. Any
person wishing to file or respond to a recommendation or appeal should contact the Plannin Department
for further procedural information.
Maritooth Staff Reportdoc August 9, 2002 1 Staff Report
Z
0
a m
C
M
0
0
M m
0
M M
0
6 Fn
C 0)
M C)
Z r-
7`1
M
Z
Z
9
0
M
Janifer Mantooth
File No. AP-02-130
Page6of7
A. Request for Reconsideration
Section 20.100.010.G allows for the Hearing Examiner to reconsider his decision or
reconimendation ifa written request is filed within ten (10) working days ofthe date of the initial
decision by any person who attends the public hearing and signs the attendance register and/or
presents testimony or by any person holding an ownership interest in a tract ofland which is the
subject of such decision or recommendation. The reconsideration request must cite specific
references to the findings andtor the criteria contained in the ordinances governing the type of
application being reviewed.
B. Appeals
According to ECDC 20,110.040(D) action taken by the hearing examiner constitutes a final
decision and shall be appealable only to the Snohomish County Superior Court; provided that any
petition for review shall be filed no later than 10 working days after the service ofthe written order
ofthe hearing examiner.
C. Time Limits for Reconsideration and Appeals
The time limits for Reconsideration and Appeals run concurrently. Ifa request for reconsideration
is filed before the time lirmt for filing an appeal has expired, the time clock for filing an appeal is
stopped until a decision on the reconsideration request is completed. Once the Hearing Examiner
has issued his decision on the reconsideration request the time clock for filing an appeal continues
from the point it was stopped.
IV. NOTICE TO COUNTY ASSESSOR
The property owner may as a result ofthe decision rendered by the Hearing Examiner request a change in
the valuation ofthe property by the Snohomish County Assessor's Office
V. APPENDICES
Attachments I through 20:
1 . Vicinity and Zoning Map
2. Appeal Request
3. Citizen Complaints
4. Photographs
5. First Enforcement Letter sent October 4, 2001
6. Snohomish County Definitions of Guest house and Kitchen
7. Order to Correct Violation posted and mailed March 1, 20D2
8. City received phone call from Ms. Mantooth responding to OTC on March 1, 2002.
9. Letter received March 6, 2002 from Ms. Mantooth
10. City response letter including Order to Correct Violation posted and mailed March 8, 2002
11. Letter received April 3, 2002 from Ms. Mantooth
12. City response letter reconfirming OTC expectations and new deadline May 31, 2002
13. Ms. Mantooth submits Compliance Permit and Nonconforming Guesthouse Covenant May 23, 2002
14. Field notes from Inspection of Ms. Mantooth's residence regarding Compliance Permit
15, City response letter clafi6* field observations establishing compliance deadline June 23, 2002
16. Notice of Civil Violation posted and mailed June 24, 2002
17. Comprehensive Plan Map Designation
18. Section 16.20 of the Edmonds Community Development Code
19. Section 20.21 ofthe Edmonds Community Development Code
20. Previous Snohomish County Hearing Examiner decision regarding unpermitted residence.
Mantooth Staff Report.doe / August 8, 2002 Staff RAxft
z
0
0
m
m
0
80
C
m
m
10
I:
O"n
.n
m m
a
0
0 Fn
C (a
9 CA
M 0
Z
z
z
0
m
Jennifer Mantooth
File No. AP-02-130
Page 7 of7
VI. PARTIES OF RECORD
5'.
Jennifer Mantooth Building Division
Planning Division
P.O. Box 462
Edmonds WA 98020
IX,
z
Z:
0
0
M
n
tV
M,
-40
00
c
M
M
-N,
>
--j ,
0
MM
0
0
M 0,
V
Z,
0
M
Mantooth StaffRepomdoe August 8, 2002 1 StaffRePort
CITY OF EDMONDS GARY HAAKENSON
MAYOR
121 STH AIENUE NORTH Edmwds, WA 98020- (425) 771-0220- FAX (425) 771�0221
HEARING EXAMINER
RECE Iver)
AUG 2 7 2op
DEPARTM
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION BUCIUDY114COiF OM,,,,,ENr
S
OF THE HEARING EXAMINER
CITY OF EDMONDS
Z
APPELLANT: Jennifer Mantooth. (See Exhibit A, Attachment 2)
m
P
CASE NO.: AP-02-130
55
m
LOCATION: 9 601 — 23 1 Pl. S W (See Exhibit A, Attachment 1)
0
C
APPEAL: Appeal of Notice of Civil Violation regarding use of a legal
M
nonconforming guesthouse.
M z
z
REVIEW PROCESS: Hearing Examiner conducts a public hearing and makes the final
decision.
5i
MAJOR ISSUES:
0 -n
a. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code
mm
(ECDC) Chapter 20.110 Civil Violation
0 55,
b. Compliance with ECDC Section 20.2 1, Accessory Dwelling
0
0
H
Units
co
m
z
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION AND DECISION:
ri
Staff Recommendation: Deny the Appeal
Hearing Examiner Decision: Deny the Appeal
PUBLIC HEARING:
After reviewing the official file, which included the Planning Division Staff Advisory Report,
0
m
and after visiting the site. the Hearing Examiner conducted a public hearing on the appeal. The
hearing on the Mantooth appeal was opened at 9:30 a.m.. August 15, 2002, in the City Hall,
Edmonds, Washington, and closed at 10:03 a.m. participants at the public hearing and the
exhibits offered and entered are listed in this report. A verbatim recording of the hearing is
available in the planning Division.
Incorporated August 11, 1890
Sister City - Hekinan, Japan
Page 2
HEARING TESTIMONY:
The following is a summary of the testimony offered at the public hearing.
From the City:
Jason Tourtellot, Code Enforcement Officer, reviewed the staff advisory report and entered it
into the record as Exhibit A.
From the Applicant:
Jennifer Mantooth, Appellant, said in part:
Her property was annexed and it has a duplex it had a duplex and a guesthouse on it when
it was annexed.
She wants to build a new house in the City, but after four years of trying, still has not
received permits for it.
The main reason she appealed the Notice of Violation is because she doesn't want to
remove the kitchen counters and sink from the guesthouse.
She offered to move out of the guesthouse and remove the appliances. Shewouldthen
occupy one of her duplexes.
She objected to the photographs of her personal property that were included in the record,
and she would like to have all of the interior photographs (except for photographs of the
kitchen) returned to her.
She also feels she should not have had to pay a $95.00 inspection fee and would like that
refunded.
She offered a solution to the problem.
9 She would like to occupy the guesthouse periodically until her Meadowdale house has
been constructed and is ready for occupancy.
0 She would apply for a Comprehensive Plan amendment and a Rezone for her current
property to allow the three units to remain on her property.
* Nothing should be done to the property, such as removing kitchen cabinets, until after
the Comprehensive Plan/Rezone process is complete.
From the Community:
Norbert Nowak said in part:
* Ms. Mantooth told the neighbors that she wanted to build a studio, but she built a
dwelling unit instead.
* Now she wants to rezone the area and he is opposed to it.
Christopher Duncan said in part:
• She is doing the same thing that she has done repeatedly.
• She wants to live in the unit and not follow the requirements.
Response from the City:
Jason Tourtellot responded in part:
Snohomish County only allowed a guesthouse per SCC 18.90.435. Only sleeping
quarters are allowed and no kitchen is allowed per the County Code.
Hearing Examiner Decision
Case No. AP-02-130
Page 3
The photos were taken in the interior of the guesthouse to show whether or not
compliance had been achieved.
The City is trying to respect the Snohomish County Code and the City has granted
extensions to allow Ms. Mantooth to resolve this situation.
a She needs to meet the regulations. There is no guarantee of a Comprehensive Plan
amendment / Rezone for that property, and the process could take years.
9 The inspection fees she paid are all part of the compliance permit.
e He recommended that the Notice of Civil Violation be upheld.
Response from the Appellant:
m
Ms. Mantooth chose not to respond to the letters and testimony submitted at the hearing.
'4
CORRESPONDENCE / PETITION:
0 in
The following persons submitted correspondence regarding the appeal:
in
0
Wilma Rougny, Exhibit B, wrote in part:
m
It appears Ms. Mantooth is taking the game tact (deceit) in 2002 as she did in the 1990's.
'04
At that time she informed the neighborhood of her plans to build an art studio, but built
an apartment instead that she has been living in ever since.
65
She has progressed in our single residence zone from a single-family home to a duplex,
on
and then added an apartment that she now wants to sell as three rental units.
L.C. & Peggy Smyth, Exhibit C, wrote in part:
in in
We strongly object to Jennifer Mantooth's proposal to rezone her property to RM-3. The
00 Fn'
rezoning of herproperty would significantly and adversely affect the very nature of 231"
C: (a
Place neighborhood.
mo
It would legitimize her past illegal attempt to change the area for her own purposes.
Z
Christopher E. Duncan, Exhibit D, wrote in part:
He, lived in one of the duplexes on the property for 45 months and Ms. Mantooth lived in
the guesthouse 100% of the time.
Z
Ms. Mantooth knowingly reinstalled her refrigerator and stove (after they were ordered
out by Snohomish County). He helped carry them up the stairs.
Z
She told him not to let people know she was living there because of past code violations.
o Ms. Mantooth received her mail at a post office box to enhance the illusion that she was
m
not living on the property,
She installed black roll shades on every window so that at night people could not see the
light coming through any windows.
A petition, signed by 12 neighbors, was submitted in opposition to the appellant's proposal to
rezone her property to RM-3.
Note: This report will only address the issues raised in the letter of appeal. The issue of the
Appellant's desire to amend the comprehensive plan and rezone her property is a totally
separate issue and will not be addressed in the remainder of this report.
Hearing Examiner Decision
Case No. AP-02-130
Page 4
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS:
A. SITE DESCRIPTION
1. Site Development And Zoning:
a) Facts:
(1) Size: The subject property is approximately 10,019 square feet.
(2) leand Use: The subject property is a legal nonconforming duplex and detached
Z
garage with legal nonconforming guesthouse.
(3) &Bmg: The subject property is zoned RS-8, Single -Family Residential.
q:fi
2. Neighboring Development And Zoning:
Vi ;I
a) Fact: The neighboring properties are zoned single-family residential (RS-8), and are
0 in
C
M 0
primarily developed with single-family residences and a legal nonconforming duplex.
C
B. HISTORY
in
m Z
1. Chronology
jo-q
C 2
E:
a) November 5, 1999: The City received a formal citizen complaint. See Exhibit A,
�:�
Attachment 3. The complaint concerned an illegal detached residence established by
O'n
the Appellant above the garage in question.
n ;a
-4
b) September 18, 2000: The City received a second citizen complaint filed by different
X
in in
citizen citing same code violations as previous citizen complaint. See Exhibit A,
0
Attachment 3
0 F;
C 0
c) October 4,2001: The City's Code Enforcement Officer mailed the first enforcement
in O�
letter to the property owner, Ms. Mantooth. See Exhibit A, Attachment 5.
d) March 1, 2002: The City's Code Enforcement Officer posted and mailed an Order to
Correct Violation to Ms. Mantooth giving until March 15, 2002 to bring the property
Z
into compliance. See Exhibit A, Attachment 7.
e) March 1, 2002: The City's Code Enforcement Officer received a phone call from Ms.
Vi
Mantooth disputing the Order to Correct Violation, stating that the guesthouse was
Z
0
-4
allowed and permitted while under jurisdiction of Snohomish County. Ms. Mantooth
0
admitted that the guesthouse in question is her current residence and that vacating
in
premises was not an option. Ms. Mantooth wanted to discuss her options, and the
City's Code Enforcement Officer recommended that she discuss situation with
Planning Division. See Exhibit A, Attachment 8.
I) March 5, 2002: Ms. Mantooth visited the Planning Divisi n and spoke with City
10
Planner, Kathleen Taylor. Mrs. Taylor explained code requirements, discussed
rezoning and the comprehensive plan designation for property in question.
Hearing Examiner Decision
Case No. AP-02-130
Page 5
g) March6,2002: The City's Code Enforcement Officer received letter from Ms.
Mantooth requesting an unspecified extension ofthe deadline to correct the violation
to explore her alternatives. See ExhibitA, Attachment 9.
h) March 8, 2002: The City's Code Enforcement Officer posted and mailed another
Order to Correct Violation granting a new deadline of April 15, 2002 for compliance.
See Exhibit A, Attachment 10.
Q March 8, 2002: The City's Code Enforcement Officer received a phone call from
Z
0
Ms. Mantooth. Ms. Mantooth again stated that she's not satisfied with her options
0
listed in the Order to Correct Violation. The City's Code Enforcement Officer cites
the Planning Manager's comments that a rezone could not be recommended because
it would be inconsistent with City's comprehensive plan. Refer to Exhibit A,
Attachment 10.
a M R,
j) April 2,2002: The City's Code Enforcement Officer received letter from Ms.
m 0
0
Mantooth, which cites her intentions to amend the comprehensive plan and rezone the
C
property. The letter mentions no specific timeirames for compliance with the Order
-4 K
X in
to Correct Violation, or dates to submit for comprehensive plan amendment. See
m Z
10-1
Exhibit A, Attachment 11.
C:
k) April 11, 2002: The City's Code Enforcement Officer sent Ms. Mantooth a letter
55
responding to her April 2, 2002 letter. His letter clarified his expectations outlined in
0 -n
'n �Q
the Order to Correct Violation issued on March 8, 2002 and extended the deadline to
comply until May 31, 2002. See Exhibit A, Attachment 12.
m M
1) April 15,2002: The City's Code Enforcement Officer received phone call from Ms.
cl vi
0
0 R,
NI
Mantooth. Ms. Mantooth wanted to clarify enforcement procedures regarding appeal.
C: 0)
ni) May 17,2002: Tourtellot received a phone call from Ms. Mantooth. Ms. Mantooth
m 0
requested information regarding fees for appeal, amending the comprehensive plan
and filing for rezone with City.
n) May 23,2002: Ms. Mantooth visited City Hall to obtain a Compliance Permit and
submitted the Nonconforming Guesthouse Covenant for recording with Snohomish
County to comply with the Order to Correct Violation. Refer to Exhibit A,
(a
Attachment 13.
Z
a) May 24, 2002: The City's Code Enforcement Officer and Building Inspector,
0
Michael Snook inspected the Mantooth residence as requested by Ms. Mantooth to
m
i
follow-up with the Compliance Permit. Staff verified that a functional kitchen,
sleeping quarters, dining room, living room, bathroom and office exist in the subject
residence. At the time ofthe inspection, Ms. Mantooth appeared to still reside in the
subject residence above garage. See Exhibit A, Attachment 14.
P) June 3, 2002: The City's Code Enforcement Officer sent Ms. Mantooth a letter
following the inspection on May 24, 2002. Letter clarified expectations ofthe City
and granted Ms. Mantooth anew deadline for compliance of June 23, 2002. See
Exhibit A, Attachment 15.
Hearing Examiner Decision
Case No. AP-02-130
Page 6
q) June 24, 2002: The City's Code Enforcement Officer posted and mailed a Notice of
Civil Violation at Mantooth residence. See Exhibit A, Attachment 16.
r) June 25, 2002: Ms. Mantooth submitted an Appeal of the Notice of Civil Violation.
See Exhibit A, Attachment 2.
2. Past Precedent
Once the City's code enforcement staff receives a complaint the City is then obligated to
investigate and enforce any noted violations. In this case, staff posted property, contacted
the property owner, researched and documented the violation through Snohomish County
Records (Refer to Exhibit A, Attachments 8 and 9) took photographs of the Appellant's
residence (Refer to Exhibit A, Attachment 4) and confirmed that the legal nonconforming
guest house is used as a permanent residence and not as a guesthouse. City staff followed
the procedures contained in ECDC 20.110, Civil Violation — Enforcement Procedures.
C. APPEAL ISSUES
1. Issues Raised by the Appellants. The appellant's issue is contained in Exhibit A,
Attachment # 2. In summary, the issues are as follows:
a) The Order and Notice allege violation of ECDC 20.21. Ms. Mantooth disputes the
finding that the guesthouse has changed in use since approved by Snohomish County.
b) Complying with Corrective Action stated in the Order and Notice should be
postponed until the outcome of both a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and a
Rezone that would allow 3 dwelling units on the subject property.
2. Hearing Examiner Response.
a) Issue: The use of the guesthouse in question had not changed since it was
approved as a guesthouse by Snohomish County.
(1) Ms. Mantooth states that the guesthouse was approved by Snohomish County to
accommodate an art studio and guest quarters.
(2) It is acknowledged by the Examiner that a guesthouse was approved by
Snohomish County. The term "guesthouse" is defined by SCC 18.90.435 as "a
structure with not more than two bedrooms having no kitchen and which shall be
used or designed for use primarily by guests or servants for sleeping quarters
only". Refer to Exhibit A, Attachment 20.
(3) SCC 18.90.507 defines "kitchen" as "any room or area used, or designed to be
used for the cooking or preparation of food which contains any two of the
following: a kitchen type sink, refrigerator, range, or 220 H2 outlet." Refer to
Exhibit A, Attachment 20.
(4) According to City records the property in question was annexed into the City of
Edmonds on December 15, 1997.
Z
J
C -4
OM
om
C
ma
0
80
MT
C: 2
<
0 -n
m M
0
0
0Fn,
C 0)
M 0
Z
co
Z
0
M
Hearing Examiner Decision
Case No. AP-02-130
Page 7
(5) According to the official zoning map the property in question is zoned RS-8
Residential Single Family 8,000. Refer to Exhibit A, Attachment 1.
(6) Prior to annexation into the City of Edmonds, a duplex and a guestliouse were
allowed on the property. Permits for those units were applied for and obtained
from Snohomish County by current property owner.
(7) Under Section 16.20 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, an
Accessory Dwelling Unit may only be allowed with an approved permit issued by
the City. Refer to Exhibit A, Attachment 18.
(8) Under Section 20.21 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, an
Accessory Dwelling Unit may not increase the overall density allowed in relation
to the single-family residential neighborhood. In this case, the legal
nonconforming duplex already maximized the intent of the code, and an accessory
dwelling unit would not be allowed. Refer to Exhibit A, Attachment 19.
(9) According to the Edmonds Comprehensive Plan this property is designated as
single family residential. See Exhibit A, Attachment 17.
(10) The City has acknowledged that the duplex and the guesthouse were approved
by Snohomish County and considers them to be legal nonconforming uses in the
City of Edmonds. Therefore the City of Edmonds would allow the
nonconforming structures to remain, however, they may not be changed or altered
in any manner that would increase the degree of nonconformity of the structures.
(11) According to Exhibit A, Attachment 20, the Appellant converted the second
story of the garage structure to a full time residence (without permits) to amortize
development expenses experienced in the construction of the structure. As the
result of a code enforcement action in the County, and an appeal to the County
Hearing Examiner, the Appellant was required to cease using the subject structure
as a residence and bring it into compliance with the code. The Snohomish County
Deputy Hearing Examiner wrote in part: "In particular, conversion of the space as
a "guesthouse", or any addition to one of the existing duplex dwelling units
onsite, or any other use, shall not be occupied as such until all necessary permits
and/or formal approvals have been obtained from the county." Refer to Exhibit A,
Attachment 20.
(12) According to Exhibit D, the refrigerator, range and 220 H2 service were
removed from the unit. Then the Appellant (with the assistance of the author of
Exhibit D) replaced all of those items after the County inspected the property.
The letter also indicated that the Appellant moved back into the unit and has been
there ever since, That means she has apparently been illegally occupying the
space in excess of six years. Refer to Exhibit D,
(13) On May 24, 2002, both the Code Enforcement Officer, Jason Tourtellot and the
Building Inspector, Michael Snook for the City of Edmonds visited the Mantooth
residence to perform a site inspection to address the compliance permit, They
Z
2
3:
a m
C
m
0
80
C
:0 K
!,'�
m m
'0
V)
0 -n
n;D
3:9
m M
0
0
0 m
C 0
K
0
Z
Z
?5
m
Hearing Examiner Decision
Case No. AP-02-130
Page 8
noted the existence ofthe appellant's full time residence during the inspection,
and determined that the unit was not being used as a guesthouse as defined per
Snohomish County Code. Refer to Exhibit A, Attachment 14.
(14) Ms. Mantooth's written and oral statements, the statements ifneighbors that
were not refuted by Ms. Mantooth, the City's inspection, and the photographs
taken by City staff during the inspection and submitted into the record, confirm
Z,
the guesthouse is used as a primary residence by Ms. Mantooth in violation of the
0
Snohomish County Code's definition of "guesthouse," and in violation ofthe
5
order of the Snohomish County Deputy Hearing Examiner. SeeExhibitA,
Attachments 4, 6 and 20.
(15) To date, Ms. Mantooth has not satisfied the corrective actions required by the
0 M
Notice of Civil Violation posted June 24, 2002, which required written evidence
C
rn
that the guest house is no longer a primary residence, and required the appellant to
-40
0
0 C
obtain a demolition permit to allow the City to verify the removal of the kitchen
sink, related kitchen counters, the refrigerator, the range and range hood, the
A
dishwasher and the cabinets used for food storage. See Exhibit A, Attachment 16.
b) Issue: Compliance should be postponed until the property in question as well as
several adjacent properties may be rezoned to a zoning designation of RM-3
vi
resolving the issue and allowing the keeping of the detached third residence.
0 -n
-n
(1) The City first officially notified the applicant of the matter on October 4, 2001.
rn In
Since that date several Orders to Correct Violation and a Notice of Civil Violation
0
were issued to Ms. Mantooth outlining timelines and corrective actions to comply
0
C:
with the code.
C CA
in
(2) The Notice of Civil Violation issued on June 24, 2002 lists two requirements to
Z
rectify the violation. Compliance with both requirements would allow the
M
continuance of a nonconforming use as a guesthouse under Snohomish County
Code. However, the guesthouse could not be used as a primary residence in
Z
violation of the Snohomish County Code or the existing City of Edmonds code.
See Exhibit A, Attachment 16.
(a
(3) The applicant has been granted ample time to explore alternatives and comply
Z
with the existing code pertaining to the subject property.
0
in
(4) Postponing compliance to the code based on the possibility that in the future the
property's designation may be officially altered to allow a third unit does not
satisfactorily address the existing code violation. The appellant may attempt to
officially alter the property's current official zoning designation to potentially
allow a third residence at a later date, but that process should not be used to allow
the continuance of an ongoing violation. The existing violation is due to actions
knowingly and deliberately taken by the appellant and should not be further
condoned.
kearing Examiner Decision
Case No. AP-02-130
Page 9
D. CONCLUSIONS OF THE EXAMINER:
I . The Examiner has the authority pursuant to ECDC 20.110.040 to hear and decide the
instant appeal.
f
2. The violations cited in the Notice and Order are found to exist and the Notice and Order
should be sustained.
3. The Appellant was property cited by the Notice and Order to perform the required
Z�
correction measures, since she is both directly responsible for the work performed in
0,
violation of the county code under which the work was done, and she is also in
0
M
possession of the property.
4. The correction period requested by the Appellant (to make no corrections until after her
-n
Vi -4
rop
p osed comprehensive plan amendment and rezone process is completed) is
C: In'
unreasonable and should not be authorized.
m 0
5. After reviewing the definitions of "guesthouse" and "kitchen" in the Snohomish County
0
C
Code, the Examiner concludes that the intent of those definitions was to allow sleeping
3: M
Z
quarters in the "guesthouse," but no "kitchen," which means more than just removing a
few appliances. This Examiner believes that the phrase "any room or area used, intended,
>
or designed to be used for cooking or vreparation of food" is as important as the
remainder of the definition, which refers to the appliances in the kitchen. Clearly, a
0 -n
kitchen without cabinets or counters would not meet the intent of the definition. The
cabinets and counters are designed to be used for cooking or preparation of food and are
�.p
C ��t
m m
integral to the function of a modem kitchen. Therefore, the corrective action to require
0 vi,
0
the removal of the cabinets and counters, as well as the appliances, would be necessary to
0
bring the guesthouse into compliance with the definition of the county code.
C Co
co
6. The Notice of Violation should be upheld and the appeal should be denied.
in 0
DECISION:
Based on the foregoing Findings and Conclusions, the appeal is DENIED and the Notice o f Civil
Z
Violation is UPHELD. Within 60 days of the date of this decision, the appellant shall return the
second story of the subject structure to the legal nonconforming use as a "guesthouse" as defined
Z
by Snohomish County Code. Additionally, $5,200 is assessed per Section 20.110.040(F) of the
Edmonds Community Development Code. The purpose of the fine is to reimburse the City for
0
the time and expense expended to enforce the violation.
in
Hearing Examiner Decision
Case No. AP-02-130
Page 10
Entered this 24th day of August 2002 pursuant to the authority granted the Hearings Examiner
under Chapter 20. 100 of the Community Development Code of the City of Edmonds.
Ron McConnell, FAICP
Hearing Examiner
Z
.0
RECONSIDERATION AND APPEAL:
The following is a summary of the deadlines and procedures for filing reconsideration and
appeal. Any person wishing to file or respond to a recommendation or appeal should contact
0 m
C
the Planning Department for further procedural information.
in 0
—40
0
REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION:
in
Section 20.100.010.G allows for the Heari ng Examiner to reconsider his decision or
recommendation if a written request is filed within ten (10) working days of the date of the
initial decision by any person who attends the public hearing and signs the attendance register
and/or presents testimony or by any person holding an ownership interest in a tract of land
0
which is the subject of such decision or recommendation. The reconsideration request must
-n
cite specific references to the findings and/or the criteria contained in the ordinances
:d
m M,
governing the type of application being reviewed.
a —W
APPEAL:
0
0 r
in
CW
A cording to ECDC 20.110.040(D) action taken by the, hearing examiner constitutes a final
c
K co
mo�
decision and shall be appealable only to the Snohomish County Superior Court; provided that
any petition for review shall be filed no later than 10 working days after the service of the
W:
written order of the hearing examiner.
TIME LIMITS FOR RECONSIDERATION AND APPEAL:
Z'
The time limits for Reconsideration and Appeals run concurrently. If a request for
reconsideration is filed before the time limit for filing an appeal has expired, the time clock
z
for filing an appeal is stopped until a decision on the reconsideration request is completed.
Once the Hearing Examiner has issued his decision on the reconsideration request, the time
0
M
clock for filing an appeal continues from the point it was stopped.
NOTICE TO COUNTY ASSESSOR:
The property owner may as a result of the decision rendered by the Hearing Examiner request
a change in the valuation of the property by the Snohomish County Assessors Office.
Hearing Examiner Decision
Case No. AP-02-130
Page 11
EXHIBITS:
The following exhibits were offered and entered into the record.
A. Planning Division Advisory Report, with 20 attachments
2
B. Letter from Wilma Rougny, dated 8/9/02
C. Memo from L C and Peggy Smyth, dated 8/14/02
0
D. Letter from Christopher Duncan, dated 8/15/02
E. Petition signed by 12 neighbors
M:
PARTIES OF RECORD:
m
�ca
m 0:
Jennifer Mantooth Wilma Rougny
00
960123 I't Pl. SW 9532 23 I't Pl. SW
-4
M M_
PO Box 462 Edmonds, WA 98020
gl
Edmonds, WA 98020
10
>
L. C. and Peggy Smyth Christopher E. Duncan
9504 23 1 " Pl. SW 108025 47" Ave. W
0
Edmonds, WA 98020 Mukilteo, WA 98275
Norbert Nowak Jacqueline Barnes
m m
0
9514 23 1 " P1. SW 9520 23 1 " Pl. SW
m
C cq�
Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020
M (a,
mo�
Michael Kubecka Tim Doyle
9604 23 1 " Pl. SW 9529 23 1 " Pl. SW
Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020
z
Edmonds Building Division
Edmonds Planning Division
z
0
0
m
Attachment 15
GARY HAAKENSON
CITY OF EDMONDS MAYOR
'(425)771 FAX (425) 771-M21
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 9802D 4M
Website: �,dedrnondsma,us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
s9z Planning Building - Engineering
June 3, 2002
Jennifer Mantooth
PO BOX 462
Edmonds, WA 98020
Dear Ms. Mantootb:
The purpose of this letter is to respond to the last inspection performed at your prope
9a�
on May 24,2002 by Inspector Snook and myself. After performing our inspection we
consulted the Building Official, Jeannine Graf This letter should serve as a correction
listing the City's expectations in order to consider this issue resolved.
The City ofEdinonds must verify that you no longer reside in the space above the
garage and that this spaea may only be used as a guest house defined under the
i d.
Snohomish County Code Section 18.90.435 under which it was orig nally approve
Section 18.90.435 states that a guesthouse was defined as a structure with not more
than two bedrooms having no kitchen, and which shall he used or designedfor use
primarily by guests or servantsfor sleeping quarters only.
To obtain final approval with the City's Compliance Permit you must complete the
following by June 23, 2002
Provide written evidence that you no longer reside in guesthouse.
Allow City inspectors to reinspect and verify that the kitchen is completely removed
including refrigerator, cupboards, counters, sinks, etc...
If you have any questions, comments or concerns over the City's expectations then YOU
may contact me at (425) 771-0220. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
cerely,
y
Jas ourtellot
C E
e Enforcement Officer
Incorporated August 11. 1890
z
m
Om
C f�
ma
0
-40
C
!I K, , ,
m m
Cft
0
mT
0 re
0
0
H
K11 I.
To� 1��
—i Fn
CITY OF EDMONDS Attachrrient 16
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTWONT
121 5th Avenue Nortk Edmonds, WA 98020
(425) 7710220
NOTICE OF CIVIL VIOLATION
Location of Violation: (Address, Snohomish County property tax number and/or legal description):
9601 - 23 1 Pl. SW., Edmonds, Washington 98020 Tax Account Parcel #00 4345 000 015 02
Issued To Jennifer Mantooth
Address of Person Notice is Issued To: P.O. Box 462, Edmonds, WA 98020-0462
Code Section Violated: Section 26.21 of the Edmondsfommunity Development Code
Description of Violation: Installed illegal Accessory Dwgftg Unit above gar -age
without vermits:
Correction Actions Required:
I . Obtain a demolition Rennit from the Building Division in order to verify the removal of Id
sink and related Idtchen counum refrigerator. range- and Em&e hood. dishwasher and cabinets us
for food storage. AND
2. Submit in writing a,lefter of understanding stating that ygu_ no longer live in home and that you wi
no longer allow this area above the garage- to be used as a sgRarate dwelling by any Ramn in the
future -
Be advised, the persou(s) to whom this Notice is issued is being assessed $100.00 per day, or portion
of a day, during which the violation continues. The imposed monetary penalties are immediately
due and payable to the City of Edmonds at 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, WA 98020 during
normal City business boom. Fines shall continue -to accrue at the rate of $100.00 per da-V until th
matter is resLived to the satisfaction of the C ty.
L
Further, if correction is not made by 5:QQpm e) July 16. 2002 (date) an
abatement notice may be issued warning of impending City abatement of the violation. Any and an costs,
including incidental costs, will be added to the monetary penalties assessed against the person(s) to whom
the Notice is issued.
Note, this decision is appealable to the City of Edmonds Hearing Examiner by filing a complete
appeal application including a written notice of appeal, adjacent property owners list and Mug fee
with the Development Services Director no later than 11hL16 002 at 5:00 m. The appeal I
p�
fee Is $500.00.
Date Posted-- June 2-4 2002 Date Mailed:- June24.2002
=Par
.r
�In Tou�rle�';Ie,�e �1�3nlbrcem�e�ntfficer��
QL
z
9
0
C M
M
0
80
a
rn
M z
0 -n
n
r T
3 Co
0
01
91
C
C m
Q 0
Z
M
z
z
M
CITY OF EDMONDS
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
121 5th Ave. N., Edmonds, WA 98020
ORDER TO CORRECT VIOLATION
z
Location of Violation (Address and/or description of location):
3
9601 — 23 1 a Pl. SW. Edmonds, WA 98020 Tax #00 4345 000 015 02
M
issued To: Jennifer Mantooth
vi
Address Of Person This Order Is Issued To: P.O. Box 462 Edmonds, WA 98020-0462
a M
M 0
Code SectionsViolated: 20.21 of the Edmonds Community Development Code.
80
Description of Violation: Installed Wegal Accessory Dwelling Unit above garap-e without Permits.
M
M
Z'
Corrective Action Required:
x
I Complete..notarize and returb to the City for recording the enclosed Nonconforming Guesffious
0 -n
Covenant.
2. Obtain a Building C=yliance Pennit from the Building Division and call for required inspection
M M
so that we may verify that the svace above P—Make is a gUesthouse as defined in Snohomish
0
Code Section 18.90.435.
0)
Correction is Required no later than:— 5:00 p.m. ril 5- 2007 (date)
M 0
z
If correction is not made by the date and time specified in the Order, a Notice of
z
Civil Violation will be issued. Upon issuance the Notice of Civil Violation will assess
fines of $100.00 per d or portion of a day, during which the violation continues.
z
Date Mailed:, ---M.Dh 8 . 2002 Date Po
0
Iss,&g P j Tourtellat—f Tipe Co e Enforcement
T-1 -
Signawre
Attachment 10
CITY OF EDMONDS GARY HAAKENSON
21 STH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, INA 98020 (425) 771-0220 FAX 1 425)771�0221 MAYOR
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
WIS
z Planning Building - Engineering
14 c
March 8, 2002
Jennifer Mantooth
PO BOX 462
0
Edmonds, WA 98020
Dear Ms. Mantooth:
The purpose ofthis letter is to respond to your letter received March 6, 2002. In your
A
IT!
0
letter, you state that the Order to Correct Violation was issued without consideration of
80
C
Snohomish County Codes and that you need a more reasonable timeline to comply with
-4 K
X in
the City's requirements.
M Z
0-4
C
> Z
In this case, the City ofEdmonds had researched official Snohomish County records that
Vi
indicate your garage was originally constructed and granted final approval with the space
above the garage left as unfinish storage space. I am also aware ofyour involvement
0 " -n
with the County's code enforcement efforts and the official determination made by the
rn rR
County's Hearing Examiner to remove the illegally constnicted residence above the
0
garage only allowing a guesthouse conversion. Additionally, the County's enforcement
0 M
records show the required final approval that granted you the use of a guesthouse above
C
the garage. As you are aware, the City has received two complaints regarding the status
M
z
of your guesthouse and because you adnitifted to living in the now finished space above
the garage, a violation is confirmed that must be resolved.
;U,
z
According to Section 18.32.040 of the Snohomish County Code, a guesthouse was an
allowed use while your property was located under countyjurisdiction. However,
according to Section 18.90.435 a guesthouse was defined as a structure with not more
z
than two bedrooms having no Iritchen, and which shall be used or designed for use
primarily by guests or servants for sleeping quarters only. Because you've admitted to
M
me that this potentially legal nonconforming guesthouse is your primary residence and
not the sleeping quarters for eithera guest or servant a violation exists that must be
resolved.
Incorporated August 11, 1890
Sister Citu - Hekinan. Jaoan
01
Per your request, the City of Edmonds is willing to amend the date for compliance
originally stated in the Order to Correct Violation. Also, this Order to Correct Violation
has been altered after considering further evidence regarding the legal nonconforming
status of your potential guesthouse. The new deadline will be April 15, 2002. By April
15, 2002 on must complete the followine corre measures:
obtain a Compliance Permit ($185 permit fee) from the City's Building Division and
have the necessary inspection performed. During our inspection we will verify that
the area above the garage is in fact not a residence but instead guest or servant
quarters as defined in Section 18.90.435 of the Snohomish County Code. Also, our
City inspection will verify that the kitchen is completely removed including the
refrigerator, sink, associated plumbing, counters, cabinet's, microwave. stove and the
220-power service.
You must also complete, notarize and return to the City for recording the enclosed
Legal Nonconforming Guesthouse Covenant, This signed statement of understanding
helps to clarify expectations for the current owner, the City and any future owner(s)
of the property�
(After speaking with the Planning Manager, Bob Chave, applyingfor a rezone of this
property is not a solution to comply with this Order to Correct Pioladon. In fact, a
rezone of thepropen), is inconsistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and
therefore staff couldn It recommend ap
proval.)
I Will repost your property with a new Order to Correct Violation clarifying the new
required corrections and the new deadline for compliance. Again, you must complete the
corrective actions required identified in the Order to Correct Violation by Agril 15, 2002.
if you're unable to comply within this given timeline then a Notice of Civil Violation
must be issued to assure compliance with the code. Ultimately, fines of $100 daily may
accrue until this violation has been resolved.
if you have any questions, comments or concerns then you may contact me at (425) 771-
0220. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
t
S
C;. E r.--
CC: Duane Bowman, Development Services Director
Jeannine Grg Building Official
Rob Chave, Planning Manager
Kathleen Taylor, City Planner
M0
80
C
X M
Inz
C-
>
0 -n
n
`p,
m M
a
0
0
Q 0,
ZI Fn'
Z
Z
0
m
CITY OF EDMONDS.
CONUqUMW SERVICES DEPARTAMNT
121 5th Ave. N., Edmonds, WA 98020
ORDER TO CORRECT VIOLATION
Location of Violation (Address and/or description of location):
9601 - 23 1 d Pl. SW, Edmonds, WA 98020 Tax #00 4345 000 015 02
Issued To: Jennifer Mantooth
Address Of Person This Order Is Issued To: P.O. Box 4L2 Edmonds, WA 98020-0462
Code SectiousViolated: 20.21 of the Edmonds Community Develooment Code.
Description of Violation: Installed illesW Accessory Dwe-H—ing Unit above garague without pmn Lts.
Corrective Action Required:
I . Complete notarize and return to the City for recording the enclosed Nonconforming
Covenant
2. Obtain a Building Coronliance Permit from the Building Division and call for reouired jn�
so ffiat we may verify thar the space above F-a-rame is a guesthouse as defined in Snohomish Qqu
--n�
Code Section 18.90.435.
Correction is Required no later then: 5:00 vm. e 15-2002 (date)
If correction is not made by the date and time specified in the Order, a Notice of
Civil Violation will be issuedL Upon issuance the Notice of Civil Violation will assess
fines of $100.00 per d or portion of a day, during which the violation continues.
Date Mailed: ---M" 8. 2002 Date Posted March 8, 2002
Issuing Party. j 1Mq;j!!5 i�fl Code Efrcement Wgpdol
Signature
z
0
0
rn
0
80
C
x M
M
CE
>
An
0�
':
m m
0
Fn
M 0
z
C4
z
0.
i
0
M
Attachment 11
April 2,2002
Jennifer Marttooth
PO.Box 46�
Edmonds, WA 98020 ADA
AM J -
Jason Tourtellot
Code Inforcement Mspector
City of Edmonds
Z
5th Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 98020
0
M
Dear Mr. Tourtellot,
After reviewing the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan, ordinances related to
M
rezoning and consulting with my attoney and a land use consultant it seems the
M 0
pursuit of a Comprehensive Plan amendment and concurrent rezone to a mult-
0
family zone is the only remedy that will make my situation whole. I intend to
M
pursue the possiblity of an amendment to the Comprensive Plan for myself and,
M
'o
other property owners in the area. I recognize that proposing an amendment to the
comprehensive plan is lengthy and requires research to put together a viable
proposal that will satisfy all parties. In that regard I request additional time to
0
prepare the amendment proposal and request that the City stay any further action to
the notice of order to correct until the Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezone
consideration has taken place.
M M
0
Sincerely yours,
�mfer �th
M 0
Z
Mant�
Z
Z
0,
M
Attachment 12
CITY OF EDMONDS. GARY HAAKENSON
121 STH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 (425) 771-0220 FAX (425) 7714)221 MAYOR
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Planning Building Engineering
April 11, 2002
Jennifer Mantooth
PO Box 462
Edmonds, WA 98020
Dear Ms. Manlooth:
The purpose ofthis letter is to officially respond to your April 2, 2002 letter. Your letter states
that you've utilized professional resources and have decided to keep the unpermitted dwelling
unit above the garage and in the near future make applications for a comprehensive plan
amendment and rezone to comply with the code. You also ask that the City ofEdmonds not take
enforcement action until these applications may be processed and approved. The following is
intended to represent the City's official response to your letter and provide another outline of
expectations and timelines to correct the violation on your property.
The Order to Correct Violation originally posted on March 8, 2002 shall continue to provide an
accurate outline for compliance. To prevent the posting ofa Notice of Civil Violation thereby
accruing fines of $100 daily you must follow the corrective measures outlined in the Order to
Correct Violation by May 31, 2002., Ifyour intention is to appeal, then you may only appeal
within 14 calendar days ofthe date that the Notice ofCivil Violation is posted on your property.
We understand your interest in remaining the resident of the unpermitted thard unit. However, we
are obligated to enforce the Edmonds Community Development Code which does not allow your
third unit to remain legally without a change in both die Comprehensive Plan and a Rezone ofthe
property. As a result, to comply with the code, you must vacate the unperrinitted dwelling and
follow the corrective actions outlined in the enclosed March 8, 2002 Order to Correct Violation
byMay3l.2002. In the future, ifyour propertyis granted anew zoning designation that allows
3 dwellings on your property then you may consider the option of legally providing a dwelling
above your garage.
Ifyou have any questions, comments or concerns then please contact me at (425) 771-0220.
Tbw* you for your cooperation in this matter.
S. ly,
ii,,llct
Jamon flot
t
ent Officer
orceme
Incorporated August 11, 1890
Skt— 4171h, - 114.1c;... J.—
Z
0
0
—n
m
M
0
C
m m
0.n
M m
0
0
C
0
Z
Z
0
ITT
A j-L
GARY HAAKENSON
CITY OF EDMONDS MAYOR
1215M AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA98M - (425) 771-02M FAX (496) 771-Ml
Website.'�d.edmndsma�u$
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Planning Building Engineering
October4,2001
Jennefer Mantooth
15621 48h Pl. W
Edmonds, WA 98026
RE: Citizens' Complaint
Dear Ms. Jennefer Mantooth;
The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the City has received a citizens complaint
at 960123 1" Pl. SW,
regarding a possible illegal Accessory Dwelling Unit on your property
Edmonds, WA. This Citizen complaint has been assigned to enforcement case file number ZE-
99-122.
Section 20.21 of the Edmonds Community Development Code requires permit approval for
second units installed in single funily residences. I have included a copy of the Code for your
information as well as the public handout outlining the permit requirements.
If you do not have a second unit Accessory Dwelling Unit, Mother-in-law Apartmenl� etc., you.
must provide written response. Your response Will be held on file.
If you, have a second unit or type of unit that requires an Accessory Dwelling Unit as defined in
Edmonds Community Development Code we request that you make a complete application for
all required permits by November 15, 2001.
All required permits may include building permits. If construction work was conducted that
required a building permit in order to accommodate the unit, then at minimum a building permit
and possibly remodeling permit would be required.
Ifit is verified that an illegal unit has been created without first obtaining City approvals, double,
filing fees shall be required. Note, the filing of fees and applications does not guarantee ultimate
City approval. Compliance to all codes must be met before approvals can be granted.
If you have any questions please feel free to contact me by November le by calling 425-771-
0220. if you wish to meet in person, please call in advance for an appointment.
S;inc,L Io- �1�
Jaso Zoutllet
Toutellot
Enforcement LiVector
Incorporated August 11, 1890
Sister Cltv - Hekinan. Jaoan
Z
0
M
C
00
An
In M
10
-4
0
--I
m M
0
rr;
0
C u)
M 0
Z
74
;Ql
Z
0)
m
Snohomish County Code
Section _18.90.435. Guest House
"Guest House" means a structure with not more than two bedrooms having no kitchen,
and which shall be used or designed for use primarily by guests or servants for sleeping
quarters only.
Section 18.90.507. I(itchen
"I(itcheh" means any room or area used, intended, or designed to be used for thecooking
or preparation of food which contains any two of the following: a kitchen type sink,
refrigerator, range, or 220 H2 outlet.
Attachment 7
CITY OF EDMONDS
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
121 5th Ave. N., Edmonds, WA 98020
Location of Violation (Address and/or description of location):
9601 — 23 1 " P1. SW, Edmonds, WA 98020 Tax #00 4345 000 015 02
Issued To: Jennifer Mantooth
Address Of Person This Order Is Issued To: P.O. Box 462 Edmonds, WA 98020-0462
Code SectionsViolated: 20.210 the Edmonds CommunityDevelopment Code.
Description of Violation: Installed illegal Accessory Dwelling Unit above garage without Rermits.
Corrective Action Required:
I . Remove all evidence that an illegal dwelling unit exists above the garage including kitchen
accomodations and both the water and power meters connected to the unit.
2. Obtain a Building Conufflance Permit from the Building Division and call for required insuection
so that the City may verify that the floor above the garage is used for storage RWoses only and
not habitable §Race.
Correction is Required no later than: 5:00 p.m. —(time) arch 15. 2002 (date)
If correction is not made by the date and time specified in the Order, a Notice of
Civil Violation will be issued. Upon issuance the Notice of Civil Violation will assess
fines of �100.00 per day, or portion of a day, during which the violation continues.
Date Mailed: --M--alh 1. 2002 D e Posted March 1. 2002
Issuing Party— Ja/.. 1.191'.t PtI7 Code Enforcement Insvector
Signature
z
0,
M
0
M M
0 � i��
C> 2
0 n 0
.n
C !F
M M
0
0 Fn
C 0)
9 0)
M 0
z
:0
0)
z
0
M
Attachment 2
June24,20M
Jennifer MantDoth
Y" PO, Box 462
EdrnondsWA98020
Rob Chave
PlanningManager
CityofEdmonds
Z,
121 M. Avenue N.
EdmondsWA98020
Dear hfr. Chave.
goes
Consider this letter appeal to the notice of Civil Violation posted on my art studio/ t
h, ouse at 9601-231st Pl. SIN, Eandmonds, WAL on June 24, 2007.
Mw reason for this appeal Is Out the notice of Civil Violation is In -correct in its assumptions
M
0
that
1. the building currertfly being called a guest house Is in fact a gnaw/an studio space that was
upgraded to include guest quarters.
X M
7he original permit application purpose stated "wraw/ workroom (studior. At no time was M
the original purposeo that of art studio and storage space every Abandonded in theory or In practice.
school and have done so for
And let me state for the record that I am an art teacher in a public high
over 25 yens and teach art at the community college as well.
2. the storage cupboards, counter space, sink and so forth were placed in the art shidio/guest
house after the last Inspection by the inspector at Snahomish County. 0 -n
They are permitted and have been Inspected and I have the permits to prove it and a letter
stating such, Both of which should be on file at Snohomish County Budding Deparbrient. C
M M
In addition, let me say that I offered you and Mr. Tourtellot a comproudse to this Order to
a Vi
Correct Violation, requesting that a moratorium be placed on this while I filed an amendment to the 0
0
Comprehensive Plan, allowing me the opportunity to rezone the area that includes my duplex and C
-guest house and 5 other adjacent duplexes and one small business to RM-3. N successful, the budding
would ffien be in compliance and there would be no need to commit the waste of time and money
proposed by the Order to Correct It would have cost the city virtually nothing to all(yw me to do this,
instead time and money have alreacly been wasted by pursuing this approach to problem solving By
allowing the rezone the city would gain additional revenue from tax dollars band on assessed
valued" and increased affordable housing, both go& of the Comprehensive Plan. Z
I took forward to the Hearing.
Z
Sin -rely,
0
m
LJ
er th
RECEIVED
JUN 2 5 20112
PERMIT COUNTER
RECORD OF INSPECTIONS
INSPECTOR DATE APPROVED
SETBACKS .....................
FOUNDATION:
Footing ......................
wait ...........
Pier/Porch ................
Retaining Wall
Slab Insulation ..........
PLUMBING:
Underground .............
Rough -in ...................
Commercial Final
HEATING:
GasTest ....................
Gas Piping .................
Equipment .................
Commercial Final
EXTERIOR SHEATHING
NAILING .......... ...........
FRAMING ...........
FIRST FLOOR FRAMING
INSULATION . ..................
Floor Insulation
Wall Insulation
Ceiling Insulation
SHEETROCK NAILING
SPECIAL INSPECTION
MISCELLANEOUS ..........
/A
FINAL APPROVAL FOR 5r
,/z, gh) 425 rvuo.7�vo
.................. I
NKV�V6E�,
Z-0 '2A*% :i�
qww 6461M� ) P;_:4i
917-6fl&V .51m,
4��*r_r t ;WX��W.
T�NM�, 7V