Laserfiche WebLink
, .�f . - -- <br /> 4. A paied parking lot by itself is not a permitted use in ;�ie R-3, MulYi-Fsmily Lcw <br /> Density Residential zone. P, variance c.annot be issued for a non-aermitted usa. <br /> The established enforcement law in land use is that mer�failure to presently enforc� a <br /> zoning •egulation does not pravent a ,municipality from subsequently enforcing it (see <br /> Wallinqford vs. Roberts 142 A2d. 588; Citv of Rockford vs. Salee, 282 NE2d. 4E5). For <br /> further discussion of;his, also see Rohan:Zaninq and Land Use Controls, Saction 4804 <br /> (footnote 30 and 31). Applying this theory to the case at hand, the City of Everett's <br /> acquiescence or reluctance to enforce the R-3, Multi-Family Residential zoning code <br /> restriction of a parking lot independent of any structuras does not of itself prevent " a City <br /> from enforcing the violation in 1994. However, in order to enforce the zening code, the <br /> courts have indicated that there are specific issues that must be considered. <br /> In the case of tronq vs. Countv of Santa Gruz, 119 Cal. Rptr. 362, the Califomia Courts <br /> indicated that a municipality can be prevented from revoking a permit that was gr2nted, if <br /> there is a long period of acquiescence by the municipality, and the applicant has expended <br /> large sums of money in reiiance thereon. This California law appears to create an <br /> exception to the general held notien that the City can revoke a permit at any time. <br /> The Washington courts have not been asked to directly address the issue of acquiescence <br /> of the permit. However, in a case decided by the lNashington Supreme Court, Grant <br /> Countv vs. Bohne 89 Wn2d. 953, 577 P2d. 138, the facts are somewhat similar to the <br /> instant case. In the Bohne case, Grant County in 1970 issued a parmit for a mobile home <br /> to be plraced on a residential lot. 7he owner of the property did n, t place the mobile home <br /> on the lot until 1975. At that time, Grant County determined that tt,� variance was <br /> improperiy issued because it was a use variance and tried to enforce the denial of the use <br /> of the property for mobile homes. The Supreme Court of Washington indicated that when <br /> a permit is shown to be issued in violation of an ordinance, it confers no ri�ht on the <br /> holder. However, the County or ��ity has th� burden of showing that the iss�ance of the % <br /> permit was illegal. Thus the County or City has the burden of showing that when the ~': <br /> permit was issued, it was illegal, and it should have never been issued. <br /> In the instant case, +here has been no evidence submitted by the City to support this <br /> burden. The permit that was issued in 1979 was for the parking �ot and construction of the �.,�. <br /> building. The two together were allowed uses, and, in fact, the parking lot was a ?�: <br /> requirement for the development of the building. Because the Cit;�took no action to "�"' <br /> i'��: <br /> require that the building be constructed first, the owner of the propArty built the parking lot ;;,.�. <br /> with the valid permit. The City not only acquiesced to this process but gave its approval by «�'�� <br /> approving the construction of the parking lot prior to any construction of the building. The ��c"z�"'� <br /> City has provided no evidence to prove ihat the permit was illegal. 'fhe permit was legal, �;,,: " <br /> and it was accepted by the City as being legal. For 1he City to come in 15 years later and '"`=� <br /> question the validity of the permit which it issued and approved without a �howing of any ;���' <br /> evidence of illega!ity at tiie time nf issuance, is not supported by law,. �`�Mr` <br /> � �: <br /> P�c;ordingiy, the City's request for the Cease and Desist Order faiis. There is no Cease ���� <br /> ��� <br /> and Desist Qrder issued in ihis matter. <br /> 4 �.,; <br /> ��:.. <br /> 4, � <br /> "� t� <br /> �� <br />� �� <br />�D � <br />'�.�; <br />�Mva�/ --'+r..�..�_� � <br /> _,,, _` _ .��+��'.,� ,` ,�, r F , _ _ <br /> ,_ .:�--. = � _ <br /> � - <br /> � ` "` :: . _ . <br /> � �..V- <br /> _ _ �_�".'� ._ .�._a �a�:�.".�+!�'��. _r'__ .. .� t _ __ - — - -- ---- ---�... ._._ - _ ----- <br />