Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNuisance (2) O CITY of pCORTA i W A S H 1 N G T O N U" S" A_ DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT from the desk of Sue Roberds August G, 2004 "I'O: Mayor Pfeadrick Rc: 1 320 East First Street 7 ann assuming you left the packet regarding Ms_ Freeman's concern on my desk yesterday it looked like your handwriting. I have attached my correspondence with the property owners, Lon Riggs and John Norton, and to make a long, long story short the shed has been removed. Ms. Freeman purchased the adjoining property not knowing that the neighbor's existing shed was on her property and had been in that location for at least 20 years" Upon surveying the property and finding that the shed and fence were encroaching, she took the neighbors to court and lost the encroachment area but continued to be concerned about the shed, probably due to her upset at losing the property_ The shed has been removed by the neighbors in the time line agreed to. I think everything is somewhat normal at this point except that she has still lost the property_ If you have any questions, please let me know" And, if you didn't put the material on my desk, I guess I need to know who did! e CITY of P ORTANGELES W A S H I N G T O N U.S.A. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT July 26, 2004 Mr. John Norton c/o 18222 NE 28` Street Redmond, WA 98052 Re: 1320 East First Street Dear John: I received your faxes regarding the shed removal at 1320 East First Street and later in the day performed a final site visit. You are correct, it's not great, but it'll work as it does confoiui_ to City Code. Please consider the case closed at this point, and thank you for your cooperation. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me at (360) 417 -4750. Sincerely, I P Sue Roberds Assistant Planner 321 EAST FIFTH STREET PO BOX 1 150 PORT ANGELES, WA 98362 -3206 PHONE: 360-417 -4750 FAX: 360-417-4711 TTY: 360 -417 -4645 E-MAIL: PLANNING @CI.PORT- ANGELES.WA. OR PERMITS @CI.PORT ANGELES.WA.US Home Telephone: 425 883.6369 Fax 425 869 -5559 John and Lynn Norton D Fa)( JUL 2 6 200 C ITY OF PORT ANGELES Dept. of Community Development To; Sue Roberds From: John Norton Fax: Pages: 3 Phone: Date: 7/25/04 Re: Shed at 1320 East First CC: Urgent For Review Please Comment Please Reply Please Recycle Comments: Hi Sue, We have removed the shed at 1320 east first street. We left the outside UL of the shed standing, in order to create a fence per 17.08.035 D of the Municipal Zoning Code of the City of Port Angeles Zoning code. The fence is less than six feet in height. While not particularly attractive, it does conform to the city code. The shelving which was attached to the garage remains as well, This now conforms as a part of a detached accessory building, with a 3 foot setback in the rear one -third of the lot. Attached is a picture of the finished work. Also following is a picture of the neighbor, video taping the process from the bushes next door. Thanks, o Norton Z0 6SSS698SZb 80 :ZZ b00Z /SZ /L0 CITY OF P ORTA N GELES 1 W A S H I N G T O N U.S.A. NMI DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT July 15, 2004 Mr. Ronald Lon Riggs 18222 NE 28 Street Redmond, WA 98052 RE: 1320 East First Street Dear Mr. Riggs: This letter is a follow up to our conversation in May, 2004, where you agreed to remove the shed located at the rear of 1320 East First Street upon vacation of the premises by your current tenant. The home is now vacant and is listed for sale. Can you please provide me with a time line for removal of the shed at this point. You earlier agreed to a July 30 deadline, which is still pending. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, Sue Roberds Assistant Planner 321 EAST FIFTH STREET PO BOX 1 150 PORT ANGELES, WA 96362-3206 PHONE: 360- 417 -4750 FAX: 360-417-4711 TTY: 360- 417 -4645 E- MAIL: PLANNING a@CI .PORT ANGELES.WA.US OR PERMITS a@CI.PORT- ANGELES.WA.US t CITY OF P ORTANGELE S j r r W A S H I N G T O N U.S.A. �aitim July 14, 2004 MEMO TO: Mike Quinn, City Manager DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY FROM: Sue Roberds, Assistant Planner DEVELOPMENT RE: 1320 East First Street Brad Collins Director 417 -4751 Mike, Sue Roberds In regard to your note asking what had been done in addressing Ms. Freeman's letter Assistant Planner as to why she has had no answer from the City in response to her inquiries regarding 417 -4750 the neighbor's property at 1320 East First Street, I have enclosed two letters for your Scott Johns information. I contacted Mr. Rigg, who owns the neighboring property, who asked Associate Planner that he not have to remove the shed until July 30, 2004, when the renter will be 417 -4752 moving as the renter's belongings are stored in the shed. Mr. Rigg noted that Ms. Freeman had lost the 3' to him in an Adverse Possession ruling in January, 2004 Jim Lierly during our conversation although we have not received any official notice of the Building Inspector 417 -4816 action. I then responded to Ms. Freeman when she asked if she now has a legal lot, a copy of that letter is attached. Roger Vess Permit Technician I will contact Ms. Freeman once more since she has once again written to make sure 417 -4712 she is aware that in a few weeks the shed will be removed. If you need to do something more, please let me know. 1 .,,,-,,IA, Sue Roberds, i stant Planner cc: Mayor Headrick Councilperson Rogers ''',7 AO 3 ,L____r) Wi .'.l CA--�wz u.!2� v y (ear _J 1 C--)-L-1--4---- ''''s c"--- C''---" _..--e-f C---L-A----' ,---L-t-4 Le 7 7,5 �i 1 ---ii- )<:3 e-- -e--r )0e---t-l__ 1 C.— 9 30 J d Jan Freeman 1316 E First Street Port Angeles, WA 98362 360- 452 -8396 (h) JUL 360 417 -5805 (w) City of Port Angeles 1%," 14 July 2004 The Honorable Richard Headrick V Mayor of Port Angeles C City Hall 321E 5 Street Port Angeles, WA 98362 ki9 et/ Dear Mayor Headrick, ef.e I have written to the city manager four times requesting an inquiry concerning the property located at 1320 E First Street, with regards to a violation of city code. I still have not received a reply or response to my inquiry. This property is now up for sale. I am writing to you and sending a copy of this package to the City Council in hopes someone will address this. I don't want to believe that the city of Port Angeles has "codes" that are either enforced arbitrarily or not at all. The owners of this property never got a permit to build this addition, yet when they did apply for and get a permit to build on to their house in 1989, the drawing states that the addition to the shed was pre existing. The inspector at that time should have questioned the position of the shed and if a permit had been obtained to build it. It is very obvious that all of the lots on my block were in conformance to city code at that time and the lots were laid out accordingly. If the inspector had addressed this violation back then I would not have this problem. The setback codes were written, I assume, to allow both parties room to have access to their fence(s), to maneuver around their property between buildings for mowing, and maintenance, and for service personnel to gain access to utilities etc. I am putting a fence on my property and their violation of the setback code makes their "addition" to their garage such that this will not be possible. I would very much appreciate a reply /response. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Freeman Copy: City Council Port Angeles CITY OF P ORTANGELES Ago, W A S H I N G T O N U.S.A. t r-- DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT June 4, 2004 Ms. J. Freeman 1316 East First Street Port Angeles, WA 98362 Re: 1320 East First Street Dear Ms. Freeman: I have been asked to respond to your letter dated May 24, 2004, where you asked if a lot that had been reduced by an Adverse Possession decision is legal. The answer is "yes" if such a decree is made by a judge and filed. In fact, this is the only manner that a lot can be reduced below the minimum lot size. You stated that your lot, which was originally 7,000 square feet in area, is now 6,650 square feet in area due to a legal judgment. The only difference in your future planning at this point is that your lot coverage may now be only 1,995 square feet rather than 2,100 square feet allowed for a 7,000 square foot lot (30% maximum coverage). Setbacks have not changed. I hope this information is helpful to you. If you have any further questions, please don't hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely, e Sue Roberds Assistant Planner 321 EAST FIFTH STREET PO BOX 1 150 PORT ANGELES, WA 98362-3206 PHONE: 360- 417 -4750 FAX: 360-417-4711 TTY: 360 -417 -4645 E -MAIL: PLANNING @CI.PORT -ANGELES.WA.US OR PERMITS @CI.PORT- ANGELES.WA.US R .En. D .JUN 0 1 2 t 1 Jan Freeman 1316 E First Street CITY OF CF1l�DT ANGELES Acv Der' r /Initybevelopment J Port Angeles, WA 98362 360- 452 -8396 24 May 2004 City of Port Angeles Building Permits 321 East 5 Street Port Angeles, WA 98362 Dear Sir or Madam, I recently lost approximately 350 sq feet of my city lot to an Adverse Possession case. My lot was 140' x 50 and is now approximately 140' x 47.5'. City code says that a city lot in my area has to be a minimum of 7000 sq feet. I now have approximately 6650 sq feet. I am planning on doing some major renovations and add -ons to the house in the future. Can someone in your office please tell me if the loss of this amount has any affect on what the city will approve or disapprove in the way of improvements to my property and /or if it affects any building permits I might want in the future? Your assistance is greatly appreciated. Thank you. Sincerely, J. Freeman CITY OF poRTANGELEs W A S H I N G T O N U.S.A. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT May 19, 2004 Mr. John Norton 18222 NE 28 Street Redmond, WA 98052 RE: Removal of shed at 1320 East First Street Dear Mr. Norton: Thank you for your prompt response to my letter and our telephone conversation regarding a shed at the rear of 1320 East First Street. The City is in agreement that the shed may remain until vacation of your current renters, on or before July 31, 2004, at which time the shed will be removed from its location on the site. As we discussed, you may place the shed elsewhere on the property as long as it observes a 3' side and 10' minimum setback. Your cooperation is greatly appreciated. If you have any questions regarding the issue, please don't hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely, Sue Roberds Assistant Planner cc: Mike Quinn, City Manager 321 EAST FIFTH STREET PO BOX 1 150 PORT ANGELES, WA 98362 -3206 PHONE: 360- 417 -4750 FAX: 360-417-4711 TTY: 360- 417 -4645 E -MAIL: PLANNING @CI.PORT ANGELES.WA.US OR PERMITS@CI.PORT- ANGELES.WA.US May 13, 2004 rE:,7 14 2 Sue Roberds, Assista nt Planner ORT A City of Port Angeles e. oqr D veopmen 321 East 5th Street Port Angeles, WA 98362 Subject: Removal of shed at 1320 East 1 Street. Dear Ms. Roberds, This document will serve as written confirmation that we agree to remove our shed at 1320 East 1 Street in response to your May 5, 2004 letter. As we discussed this week, our plan is to remove the shed no later than July 31, 2004. Our current tenants will be moving out shortly before then, so the extra time will eliminate any inconvenience for them. I appreciate the time both you and Brad Collins took to help me understand my options. Regards, Jo i nrton 1822 .1 E 28 Street esmond, WA 98052 May 5, 2004 Mr. and Mrs. Ronald Lon Riggs 18222 NE 28"' Street Redmond, WA 98052 RE: 1320 East First Street Dear Mr. and Mrs. Riggs: This letter is in regard to the shed that is attached to the carport located in the rear of property you own at 1320 East First Street, Port Angeles, Washington. As you know, the City was contacted in early 2003 by the neighboring property owner regarding the property line and shed location after her purchase of the adjoining property to the west. It was revealed that, although the carport/shed had been in place for some time, a building permit was not obtained nor is the required minimum setback observed for either structure, and it was difficult to determine how long the structures had been in place. We have no record on file that a variance was applied for to allow either structure but aerial photographs indicate the structures were not there in 1974. A copy of your recent motion for summary judgment filed on January 16, 2004, verified that the shed was erected in approximately 1979, which then verifies that the structure is an illegal use. Although the City has had zoning since 1947, the most recent established ordinance has been in place since January, 1971, which prescribes minimum setbacks for residential uses. Due to the information provided in your court documents, the shed structure is identified as being an illegal structure that must be removed or relocated at this time. The shed may be relocated elsewhere on your property, as long as a minimum 7 -foot setback is observed along the side yard and 20 feet from the front and rear yards. To allow the shed to remain in its current location is a violation of Section 17.96.180 PAMC, which is considered a misdemeanor offense. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact this office. Please remove or relocate the shed within 10 days of receipt of this letter or contact this Department with an alternate demolition plan no later than May 14, 2004. Sincerely, Sue Roberds Assistant Planner cc: Mike Quinn, Manager Jan Freeman //0/ v) 1 5 L___k___ i V (---(5- -k__ 5 e L a- v p A. Oiti Jan Freeman 1316 E First Street Port Angeles, WA 98362 360 452 -8396 (h) 360 417 -5805 (w) 24 March 2004 City Manager City Hall 321 E 5 Street Port Angeles, WA 98362 Dear City Manager, I have written to you three times requesting an inquiry concerning the property located at 1320 E First Street, with regards to a possible violation of city code. My last letter was dated 25 February, almost a month ago. I included copies of both of my previous letters and your written reply to my first letter, if for some reason you did not receive that correspondence please let me know and I will send another copy. Since I have not received a reply to my letter of 25 February, I was wondering what was being done. I would very much appreciate a reply. As you can tell by my repeated correspondence concerning this matter that it is something that I want taken care of by the owners of this property and the city. If nothing is done, then all I can assume is that this city does not enforce or care about city code. If this is the case then I know the residents who are law abiding and going through the proper channels and applying for permits would be very interested in knowing this. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, J. Freeman Jan Freeman 1316 E First Street Port Angeles, WA 98362 360 452 -8396 (h) 360 417 -5805 (w) 23 April 2003 City Manager City Hall 321 E 5 Street Port Angeles, WA 98362 Dear City Manager, I wrote to you requesting an inquiry concerning the property located at 1320 E First Street, with regards to a possible violation of city code. I received your reply, but quite frankly I'm confused. I don't believe this is a civil matter between the owners of that property and mine. What if I did not live next door to them? Now that this has been brought to your attention, I believe it is up to the city to ascertain if their property is compliance, burden of proof I believe is on the owner. No permit is on record for their addition to their garage and my legal survey is on record with the city showing they are approximately 2 feet over the property line, with the three foot set back that makes their addition approximately five feet off. If I am wrong would you please write again explaining, or with your findings. Thank you so much for your time and for helping me understand the laws here in Port Angeles. Sincerely, J. Freeman Enclosure 3 Jan Freeman 1316 E First Street Port Angeles, WA 98362 360 452 -8396 (h) 360 417 -5805 (w) 25 February 2004 City Manager City Hall 321 E 5 Street Port Angeles, WA 98362 Dear City Manager, I wrote to you twice requesting an inquiry concerning the property located at 1320 E First Street, with regards to a possible violation of city code. I have enclosed copies of both of my letters and your written reply to my first letter. I only received a phone call response to my second letter. I have new information on when the structure I am addressing was built. In a signed document that was recorded In The Superior Court of The State of Washington in And For The County of Clallam dated January 16, 2004, the owners of the property state the "shed" has been there since approximately 1979. As you can see by their admission this structure was built approximately a full eight years after the date 1971, which would now make it enforceable per your letter dated 9 April 2003. Since it was not built prior to 1971, I again want the city to take action to have the structure removed as it does not meet set back requirements of three feet from the property line per Port Angeles Municipal code 17.10.050.A.3 "Side, interior ...except 3 feet for detached accessory buildings in the rear one -third of the lot When this city block was laid out the lots were parceled meeting city /municipal code of 7000 square foot minimums, homes set back 7 feet from property lines and carports /garages set back 3 feet. This owner built an addition to their garage, which does not meet city /municipal code, without acquiring a permit and up to my property line. I will not approve a waiver and desire the unsightly structure to be removed. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, J. Freeman Encl: (1) My ltr dtd 3 April 2003 (2) Your ltr dtd 9 April 2003 (3) My ltr dtd 23 April 2003 (4) Plaintiffs' Memorandum in Support of Motion for Summary Judgement, Cause No. 03 -2- 00359 -2 dtd 16 Jan 04 1 Cr) 2 ing —141 41111 3 da JAN 16 2v3.1 4 THE LAW Z PLATT IRIMN FIRM TAYLOR OF Z s 6 7 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON 8 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLALLAM 9 JOHN F. NORTON, JR. and LYNN C. NORTON, husband and wife, and No.: 03 -2- 00359 -2 10 RONALD LON RIGGS AND LISA A. RIGGS, 11 husband and wife, PLAINTIFFS' MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Plaintiffs, 12 vs. 13 JAN FREEMAN and JOHN DOE FREEMAN, 14 wife and husband, and COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS, INC., a foreign corporation 15 16 Defendants. 17 COME NOW the Plaintiffs and respectfully submit this memorandum, pursuant to CR 56, for the 18 consideration of the court: 19 I. SUMMARY JUDGMENT 20 As the court is familiar with the rules regarding motions for summary judgment, only the basic thrust 21 of the rules will be summarized here. 22 A court may grant summary judgment only "when the pleadings, affidavits, depositions and admissions 23 on file demonstrate that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that the moving party is entitled to 24 judgment as a matter of law." CR 56(c); Lauritzen v. Lauritzen, 74 Wn. App. 432, 437, 874 P.2d 861 (1994), rev. 25 den. 125 Wn.2d 1006 (1994). 26 27 28 PLAINTIFFS' MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT GRANT S. M EINER OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 1 ATTORNEY AT LAW 405 S. PEABODY ST., SUITE D PORT ANGELES, WA 98362 (360) 417 -1655 FAX (360) 452 -6970 Enclosure 1 In addition, the trial court must: 2 view the evidence and all reasonable inferences therefrom in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. In determining whether the movant has satisfied his burden of excluding any 3 real doubt as to the existence of any genuine issue of material fact, the movant's papers must be closely scrutinized, while those of the nonmovant should be treated with indulgence. Finally, 4 summary judgment will be denied if there appears to be any reasonable hypothesis under which the nonmoving party may be entitled to the relief sought. 5 Adamski v. Tacoma Gen'l Hosp., 20 Wn. App. 98, 104, 579 P.2d 970 (1978). 6 The moving party, the Plaintiffs, respectfully submit that they have submitted evidence that there is no 7 genuine issue of material fact in this case and that they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. 8 II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 9 The facts submitted by the Plaintiffs in support of their motion show that they and their family have 10 owned a residence on a city lot at 1320 East First Street in Port Angeles since 1965. A fence between that 11 property and the property immediately to the west has been present on a portion of the boundary between the two 12 parcels since before 1965 and that the Plaintiffs and their predecessors have used the property up to the fence 13 as their own since 1965. 14 The fence does not extend the entire length of the boundary to the north of the residence on Plaintiffs' 15 property, but the evidence presented reveals that the Plaintiffs, their predecessors and their employee gardener 16 cared for the lawn and mowed the grass up to a line extended to the north from the fence line from 1965 to the 17 present. 18 The fence extends along the boundary of the Plaintiffs' and defendant's parcels southward almost to the 19 alleyway. Between the garage on Plaintiffs' property and the fence has been erected a shed that is attached to 20 the garage and extends to the fence. That shed has been there since approximately 1979. 21 To the south of the garage and shed, the Plaintiffs and their predecessors parked automobiles, placed their 22 garbage cans, and trimmed the grass in that area up to a line extended from the fence since 1965. Mr. Childress 23 also placed a concrete pad and burn barrel in the disputed area, and those items were there for at least 10 years 24 before 1979, when Mr. Childress moved away from the property. The concrete pad is still in the ground in the 25 disputed area. 26 27 28 PLAINTIFFS' MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT GRANT S. M E I N E R OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 2 ATTORNEY AT L A \V 405 S. PEABODY ST., SUITE D PORT ANGELES, WA 98362 (360) 417 -1655 FAX (360) 452 -6970 1 III. ADVERSE POSSESSION 2 A treatise on adverse possession contained in Washington Practice states: 3 Following are activities that have been held to establish actual possession of city lots or similarly occupied land: erecting a fence •or wall, and maintaining a lawn and shrubbery 4 in relation to the fence or wall; maintaining a line fence, hedge, or wall along all or part of the disputed land and doing certain acts in relation to it, such as grading the land, maintaining 5 trees or other vegetation, maintaining a rockery, or mowing the grass 6 17 Wash. Prac., Real Estate: Property Law 8.10 (2004). Some general observations that are based upon the 7 cases cited in that section are recited: 8 First, in boundary- dispute cases, which are the large majority of adverse possession cases, it is important that the acts of adverse possession be carried out with reference to a line. Second, 9 while it is very helpful to the adverse claimant to have maintained a fence, wall, or hedge, for at least part of the distance claimed, this is not necessarily required. Third, the activities 10 or objects that constitute possession need not all be carried on or maintained at all points along a line claimed, as long as they together bear reference to a line. As previously noted, courts will 11 project boundary lines between objects on the ground when it is logical to do so. 12 Id. In the case at bar, the Plaintiffs and their predecessors maintained a lawn up to an existing fence, or erected 13 and maintained a shed up to the fence, over a portion of the boundary between the Plaintiffs' parcel and 14 Defendant's parcel. Along the rest of the boundary, the Plaintiffs and their predecessors maintained the lawn, 15 mowed the grass, parked cars, placed garbage cans, and used a burn barrel up to and along a line extended from 16 the fence. All of those activities and objects existed for more than ten years. 17 IV. CONCLUSION 18 Plaintiffs respectfully suggest that they have established adverse possession of the property up to the 19 fence and a line extended from the fence line, and that they, therefore, are entitled to a summary judtn,Ient 20 quieting title in them to the disputed area and ejecting Defendant from that area. 21 Respectfully submitted this W day of January, 2004. 22 23 G 6-t GRANT S. MEINER, WSBA 277 24 Attorney for Plaintiffs 25 26 27 28 PLAINTIFFS' MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT G RANT S. M E I N E R OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 3 ATTORNEY AT LAW 405 S. PEABODY ST., SUITE D PORT ANGELES, WA 98362 (360) 417 -1655 FAX (360) 452 -6970 CITY of poRTANGELES W A S H I N G T O N G T O N, U.S.A. CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE April 9, 2003 Ms. Jan Freeman 1316 East First.Street Port Angeles, WA 98362 RE: 1316 East First Street Dear Ms. Freeman: This letter is in response to your letter of April 3, 2003, in which you described a minor encroachment onto your property of a neighbor's carport. In reviewing your letter, it appears that the encroachment is a civil matter between you and your neighbor. Because the carport does not encroach into the City's right -of -way, the City has no authority to cause the carport to be moved unless it could be proved that it was illegally constructed. As the map accompanying a building permit on May 31, 1989, indicates an existing "storage carport" on the neighboring property, no record exists as to when the carport was built. Since a building perrnit was not issued for the construction, it is not possible to firmly determine when the carport was built. If the structure existed prior to 1971, it would be considered to be in a nonconforming location which is not an enforcement situation but one which cannot be further enlarged upon. It is always wise to have property surveyed to determine legal boundaries. It appears that you have tried to contact the property, owners to suggest an amicable solution to the encroachment problem, however, it does not appear that they are willing to remove or modify the carport. At this point, we can provide you with information contained in your file and that of 1320 East First Street, but we cannot enforce a demolition action without knowing when the carport was established. I know this information is not what you were hoping for and apologize for not being able to assist you further. Department of Community Development staff will be able to assist you in compiling whatever information you feel is helpful to you in subsequent action that you may be considering. Sincerely, Michael Quinn 321 EAST FIFTH STREET P. 0. BOX 1 150 PORT ANGELES, WA 98362-0217 PHONE: 360- 417 -4500 FAX: 360- 417 -4509 TTY: 360- 417 E -MAIL: CITYMGR @CI.PORT ANGELES.WA.US Jan Freeman 1316 E First Street Port Angeles, WA 98362 360- 452 -8396 (h) 360- 417 -5805 (w) 3 April 2003 City Manager City Hall 321 E 5 Street Port Angeles, PA 98362 Dear City Manager, I live at 1316 E. First Street. I purchased my home in January of 2002. Unfortunately I purchased without a survey and there were no disclosures at sale of any disputes with my property lines. I am trying to improve my property and putting in a fence is one of the ways I plan to do that. I decided to get a survey done before I put in my fence to insure that I was not putting it on my neighbor's property. From the survey it was discovered that the property at 1320 E. First Street built a fence and an "addition" to their garage partially on my property. I wrote a letter to the owners telling them of my plans and Lynn Norton, one of the owners, called me to discuss my letter. She refused to move her fence or the addition and asked me, "...what was my problem that they had never had a problem about this before. I explained to her that I had just bought the property, had just had a survey done, I am paying taxes on the property and I would like the use of my property. I asked her to put in writing her refusal and she said she would not put it in writing. I am trying every legal avenue available to me to get my property back and was hoping the city could help me. Through researching I found that the owners never got a permit to build their "addition" and since it is over on my property by approximately two -three feet, that they did not even set back three feet on their own property, per code. They have never paid taxes on this property of mine nor have they done anything legal to get possession of it. The owners live in Redmond, WA and the home is being leased to the Coast Guard at this time. I am asking the city to please make right, something that is illegal from what I can discern from city code, now that it has been brought to your attention. Would you please let me know if there is anything the city can do, so I can avoid taking this to the courts? Sincerely, J. Freeman Encl: (1) Survey of property at 1316 E First (2) My ltr to owners of property at 1320 E First (3) Permit issued to owners of 1320 E First (4) Tax records for 1320 E First (5) Tax records for 1316 E First Jan Freeman 1316 E First Street Port Angeles, WA 98362 360 417 -5805 (w) 360-452-8396 (h) J r l l 2003. Lynn Norton and Lisa Riggs -Etux 18222 NE 28 Street Redmond, WA 98052 Dear Ms. Norton and Ms. Riggs -Etux, I own the home at 1316 E First Street, to the west of the home you are leasing to the Coast Guard, at 1320 E First Street, in Port Angeles. You might remember that I called several months back saying that I was going to be putting a fence around my property, well as you can see 1 haven't done it yet. I started thinking about it and decided I should have a survey done first, to make absolutely sure that I was putting my fence up in the right place. I contracted with Wengler surveying here in town and had a survey done costing me $1500. I believe it was worth it, now knowing exactly where my property lines run. From the survey it was determined that your fence to the West and the "addition" to your garage is approximately two feet over on my property. The survey with their findings has been recorded with the city. I will gladly provide you a copy. I would like to work out an amicable solution to allow you to remove the fence and "addition so that I may put up my fence, with the least amount of disruption to your tenants. I have a couple of solutions in mind and was hoping we could discuss which would be best for us. My desire is to start digging my postholes in April and put the fence up in May. I don't want to disrupt the Ray's security for their dog and children that the present fence provides. 1 think we can work around the present fence to have my postholes dug. However, the present fence ends at your "addition" and that would have to be removed to complete the postholes on that line of the property. Then in May after my new fence is in you could have your old one removed, thereby never leaving the Ray's without a fence. I hope you can accommodate me and see that all though this probably isn't something you wanted to hear that you too are benefiting from my having the survey done and new fence put in. Please contact me at your convience. Sincerely, J. Freeman