Laserfiche WebLink
y N <br /> b � <br /> b � <br /> C M <br /> Y N N <br /> H � H <br /> � H � <br /> � H b <br /> y N <br /> � H � <br /> � � � . the property and with out the need to pay taxes on his increased�roperty holdings. <br /> � � � We do not believe that this is proper stewardship of the public tn�st. <br /> y� y y Regan�iless of the ultimate findings of the Examiner as w the <br /> ?S r, m requirements of nonexclusive use,our primary concem is the actual propem/ limits <br /> � � ; onto which Mr. Stark intends to build his fence. Afcer review of the appmved <br /> � y Public Works Pemut Application submitted by Mr. Stark,we have noted some <br /> dimensional inconsistencies with the Plat Plans oa file with the Snohomish County <br /> Assessors Offiee. 'This in conjunetion with a highly suspect lnnd survey done for <br /> the previous owners of Ivfe. Starks property, worries us that the actual pmperty <br /> lines are not well defined. Wc, therefore, wholeheattedly support the appellants <br /> request in his lettet to the Examiner of June 17, 1992 that the city civil engineering <br /> ;taff and surveyots conf'um the survey of the property line of Mr. Stark and that <br /> chis be done at no cost to him or us. <br /> I(we) declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the state of <br /> Washington that the foregoing statements of 41 luies is true and correct and that <br /> ��� no pmmises or incentives have been made to me regarding my(our) statemenG <br /> � ���• <br /> �,�I <br /> I r� �/��� . � <br /> .Q:��,.� ,n� <br /> � � � �����_ . <br /> G <br /> fG:�S C'oLLC��� <br /> +11��� �vc2cYf G�++� <br /> I <br /> � <br /> I � ��1. <br /> \ <br />