Laserfiche WebLink
50 <br /> IFebruary 8,1989 <br /> the new own ership he had re-assessed <br /> each reducing parand e <br /> recommended <br /> adjustmentse to the parcels. He recommended ded v g a cel 4, <br /> Washington Services, to 82,020,764and increasing c ParParcel ld not to <br /> to <br /> e is not made <br /> proportionate49. ashis Parcell 4A would not be paying el <br /> their fair share.[ <br /> President Niva was uncomfortable that some of the assessments were <br /> based o a comp plan which was Just a guide <br /> line et <br /> f r at toning <br /> and until the property is actually rezoned, ia <br /> the property owner. <br /> President Siva then asked to have the first protest read into the <br /> record. <br /> 7.lbit 04t weultlt be f4 nEdbene PltCtomthe gcle liege stating that the <br /> pxovemen o o hoo <br /> Pttendance Titianoeskedi <br /> rp411andyene representing the college wee in <br /> Exhibit 05 a-Snohomish e County PUO protested that 7.5 acres of the <br /> 9.5 acres assessed Ls wetland and was assessed incorrectly. Ron <br /> 7.5riwetland resentiharea 9dthe <br /> been PUD, <br /> given reviewed <br /> the then City s of saying <br /> also <br /> inthe <br /> perpetual easement. o Everett a <br /> ' Exhibit Cu-Letter tram Dennie Derlckson of the Planning Department <br /> stating that the city could n t aopprove an[ development f that <br /> improvement was compPit property north P Pith 5 S.W. until this LID <br /> Exhibit 07-Washington Services, Inc., dba Seaway Center. Jahn <br /> Roberts, a representing Seaway Center which comprises Parcels 4 h 4A <br /> said they contain buildable and u builtlable lend. Parcel 4A was <br /> recently sold and he Pelt the assessments <br /> ssment of the two parcels were <br /> fundamentally unfair. He also oh',tadto the 5% surcharge and <br /> questioned the constitutionality of the legislation allowing the <br /> charge. <br /> Exhibit 08-Sabey Corporation. Richard Thaler reviewed the letter <br /> objecting to the assessments. <br /> Exhibit 09 - Merrill Creek Associates. Sheila Thorn and Jeff <br /> Rhodes,representing the company objected to the assessment as they <br /> felt the majority of their property wasnot buildable because of <br /> steep slopessoil oil condition. They did not protest the original <br /> assessment but after testing the soil,they are protesting the final. <br /> Exhibit 010-Paul Iv on 6 Associates, (city)appraisal of Parcel <br /> 06,Merrill Creek Assoc. He said his appraisal assessed this parcel <br /> higher than the Macaulay appraisal report. <br /> Brad Cattle, representing Bertha Dilpard, ownerof property in the <br /> LID said he wanted the record to show he w objecting because n <br /> access <br /> •. as made available to her l property. She had <br /> not been <br /> sssed but she would be glad to payassessment if aces s to <br /> Merrill Creek Parkway was made available.an <br />