Laserfiche WebLink
_ � <br /> �^-'� �f r (^ EAGHER & FR�CH <br /> 'y`�j / l] � U � � lS A WEIMOPC BL9DLY0 <br /> ur ortirns <br /> 10.SFA1 M9AGi fiVFA61T p06)75►7ffi <br /> QiANdS1.FliEVpf_ S �us�+one <br /> 1.BRADIEY�ffA R�l 1 ^ .1vti5lLL\GTOV 9Q01•qp ANACORlBS(MN E}Ol�l <br /> �JU Gt� - 5 ��9u <br /> ............................__ <br /> CITY OF EVERETT I�'ovember 27, 1996 <br /> Public Works Dept. <br /> Linda P. Gough �O <br /> Planning and Community Development /� n „ <br /> City of Everett u�—J � � <br /> 2930 Wetmore Avenue, Suite 100 U <br /> Everett, WA 982Q1 <br /> Re: Antoine Jarjour and Meray, Inc. <br /> Case \'o. 420-96 <br /> Building Permit No. B50977 ' <br /> Dear Linda: <br /> Please be advised I represent Nir. Jarjour and Meray, Inc. They have refeaed to me your <br /> letter dated October 18, 1996. <br /> As I understand the facts of this case, the following events preceded your letter. On February <br /> 18, 1996, Mike Murphy of Mile High Construcrion applied for a building permit on behalf of <br /> Mr. Jarjour. The pernilt was for conswcpon work proposed for the building at 4017 Colby, <br /> Everett, Washington. On February 27, 1996, a construction permit was issued. <br /> Pursuant to the permit that was issued, the proposed construcdon work was completed. <br /> Interim inspections occurred while the work was in pmgress. <br /> After the work was completed, Mr. Jarjour received a letter from Mr. Tyler that was <br /> inudvertently addressed ro the former owner and now a tenant of the building. This letter <br /> suggests two additional parking spaces would need to be somehow obtained before the space <br /> could be leg�lly occupied. This, of course, came as a surprise to Mr. Jarjour, as he had <br /> intended to actually use the improvements for which the permit was issued. Mr. Jarjour's <br /> preference would have been to be notified of the Ciry's posirion before the building pemvt <br /> was paid for and issued. Or, at least before the work was paid for and completed. <br /> Nonetheless, it appears to me there is no reason for you or NIr. Hanson to become involved in <br /> this case. Thst is, it appears to me that Mr. Tyler is nustaken in his view there has been a <br /> change in use of the building. <br /> The principal use of the building is, and has been for many years, that of a wazehouse. ' <br /> Under the present code, a warehouse is a building used to store merchandise, materials or <br />