Laserfiche WebLink
took from me. Perhaps the city should <br />for my labor. Better yet, Z feel <br />permit to regain what they lete the road improvements <br />supply the materials and paY comp <br />the city should, in all fairness, did from 41st to 96th. <br />along So. 3rd from 9bodyt�n5theirsright mind object to mY <br />how can amprovements - when compared to the spread <br />Further, onsible, <br />sanitary parking m neighbors irresp <br />� o they need a permit for that? Or <br />of mud and road dirt caused by Y ublic works (or other) <br />careless parking habits. D <br />d� they deserve a fine? I invite P on the Pedestrian <br />officials to compare tne proPerties at 4810 and 4816 So. 3r . <br />the 1983 Olds in front of my house, nored for <br />gy the way, has i9 <br />Path, is an abandoned vehicle which the city <br />nine months. ears <br />q, pn the subject of permits and city codes: For the 13 y <br />I have li�'ed here, myself, other nofgEbeLettntoVforcesthetclean <br />et the City h several <br />groups have tried tof9Wilbur Rule - 4810 So.3rd. Thoug my <br />up of the proPerty laced against them, <br />code violation judgments have been p <br />neig to <br />hborhood. Code <br />hbors continue to live in their self created pn igyl <br />told my hbor, <br />the detriment and devJimaHansonf recently ainst <br />Enforcement OfficeWhen she again raised a complaint a9 <br />Denise Collette, � esore ), that he'd be worried about raising <br />our neighborhood eY <br />„ erson <br />ersonally so afraid of this p <br />to much trouble for the Rules as the son-in-law Wcode?VeOvereL <br />is "crazy . Is Mr• Hanson p <br />that is a j <br />ustifiable reason not to enforce ci�ales of plans <br />the past 13 years I have heard from thoughano changes for the <br />to change and clean up their place, <br />better have ever lasted long. Even their latest feeble effor <br />has not se.t well with me. Their methods pose a serious health <br />risk not only to me and my family, but to them and their <br />children, as well <br />5, in October 1995 the City of Everett issued selumbing and <br />No permit for a rear deck. Also, no mention <br />construction permits to Wilbur Rule for Wlrremoval of asbestos <br />other repairs. recautions, Re: <br />on the permits of safety p I was/am <br />siding. As a building trades construction =enoving and <br />appalled to witness my neighbors blatantly kicked around <br />asbestos sid�ng, to being dropped, ulations <br />discarding stacked. I believe theLe are EPA ermit. �o <br />and eventually work p i,e. <br />to be followed with the issuance of a city eo le should <br />City of Everett oEficers of aubliceworks?arTheseSptaPkcame into <br />planning, code enforcement, P ermit, until they have <br />ne��er have been issued any kind of p _ Which they <br />compliance with the nuisance abatement code <br />violated since its enactment in 1989! this <br />6, Finally, this brings me to the reason for WrltWould need <br />total loss to ua�emytexpense. Why does the <br />letter. I am at a roperty <br />a permit to improve city P home not deserve the same <br />city proPerty in front of mY yven to much of the rest of <br />improvements as city works has g <br />