Laserfiche WebLink
� <br />T�MOIMY BRApBURY <br />H,r+[ Ba.oi.[r <br />N�iwr A.COCNAwH <br />Sr�rr.cr� G Ews <br />Nhw.w R. Nicnr+�N <br />Vnwu.� L. Ho�DEA <br />HUGN A. McCwaE <br />Ror J. MoccA� <br />D. BauC[ MoacwH <br />RONa.o J. P[n[r <br />ROB[PT C. RCRCE-DiCKERSON <br />J�H W. R,wniN, Jp, <br />Riw,wo C. R[m <br />DCNNIS SMITti . <br />ROGER L.SiOU�ER <br />JCRFY E. THONN <br />Gur L 7ow�E <br />JONN D. .dL ON. JR. <br />February 28, 1978 <br />REED MCCLURE MOCERI & THONN, P. S. <br />A PROFESSIONAL SEFVICES CORPORATION <br />ATTORNEYS AT LAW <br />1701 BANK OF CAIIFORNIA C[NTER <br />900 FOURTH AVENUE <br />SEA'f7LE�WASHINGTON H8164 <br />, � <br />. ; <br />�. L..�t; , <br />SEATTLE <br />(206) 292-4900 <br />TACOMA <br />(206) 92�-SBBB <br />Cne�c R2MT SEATTLE <br />� �✓': <br />/ i., /'r��'�n.� <br />: <br />��� , � C: ' ��i��... ' /'���n <br />���� • jl'� ('� OUR FlLE NO. R TO <br />f��I'1 � ♦;.,y '� <br />�� ,:�, �.:: g <br />Lloyd E. Henning, P.E. <br />City Engineer, City of Everett <br />City Hall <br />Everett, WA 98201 <br />Re: McCormack v. City of Everett <br />Dear Mr. Henning: <br />_ _��' � _,. _;-�� <br />- : JC� <br />...��DG <br />� �� e��� �� �. <br />��� � •.�..r j . � �u�� <br />a.ia�,,,..e--�,:.� '�°"" ",`�"�."�, <br />� ��� <br />Following receipt of the letter dated December 9, 1977, signed by <br />Mr. O�Conner of your office, i spent some time reviewinq the <br />situation and reviewing the property involved with Mr. McCormack. <br />As you will recall, Mr. :;cCormack's property lies between two <br />parcels of property owned by Hillis Homes, Inc. The Hillis <br />properties have been filled to a substantial height above <br />Mr. McCormack's property and the situation has completely altered <br />the drainage pattern in the area to the point where the rear <br />portion of Mr. McCormack's property has become a swamp. <br />In Mr. 0'Conner's letter of December 9, he indicated that the <br />City of Everett was completely free from any liabilit� in this <br />matter. Nothing could be further from the truth. The City has <br />an obligation with respect to drainage in issuing fill permits <br />and is liable for not assessing the situation and for allowing <br />Mr. Hillis to continue filling, despite warning, without a <br />permit. The fills which you have allowed in the area have <br />increased the heights of Mr. Hillis' property from three to ten <br />feet or more by my observation. It is incredible to me that the <br />City can believe that the official responsible for the issuance <br />of permits could not have felt that a drainage problem.would <br />result in the area if land was filled to that height. <br />Mr. McCormack will have no alternative but to institute litigation <br />against the City unless some means can be found to alleviate the <br />situation as it affects his property. After discussion with <br />Mr. McCormack, I am prepared to offer to withdraw any claims <br />against the City if the City will prepare fill plans for <br />Mr. McCormack's property which will fit in with the new configura- <br />tion of the Hillis property and will issue Mr. McCormack a permit <br />