Laserfiche WebLink
calculatcd attempt to violatc thc masinxnn hcight rcyuircmcnts of 3(i'. Morc dctail on <br /> this dcccption is in our initial �vrittcn complaint that wc havc includcd. <br /> 'I�hc hcight of thc deck abovc thc gradc has bccn mcasurcd by a professional <br /> survcyor us exceedine 3G'(sce auachcd map by A.S.I'.I), while on the permit Mr. <br /> Rcincrtsen givcs thc numbcr as hcing bclow 3G". <br /> Mr. Rcincrtscn also brags thc numbcrs hc has supplicd your dcpartmcnt arc, "not <br /> cxact figures for mcasuring to or from"and arc just"...somcthing that thev belicvc <br /> sut7ices thcir building rcquiremcnf'. We arc yuitc sure Mr. Rcinertscn is ,lclighted he has <br /> goUcn your dcpartmcnt to "bclicvc"thesc inaccuratc numbcrs hc has�� pplicd you <br /> "sufficcs•" thc codc rcyuircmcnts. <br /> What is particularly galling is thc lact that thc violation of thc maximum height <br /> rcyuircmcnts is nut inadvcrtcnl, but ralhcr is a calculatcd plan dcviscd �nJ exccutcd by <br /> thc buildcr wilh intcntional cfforts to dcccivc your dcpartmcnL building a <br /> palcslal/stcp/Icrracc and backfilling thc wholc arca. <br /> Is this thc typc of hchavior you want your dcpartmcnt tu cncour.�gc'? <br /> Can I gct around :my hcight rcyuircmcnts of thc codc by supplying you with <br /> inaccuratc numbcrs lhat mcct thc codc. Ihcn building to othcr mcasurcmcnis, thcn <br /> building a tcrraccd pcdcstal, and thcn hackfilling around iC? <br /> tihould I Ict all builden be aware of this simple dcception techniyue and yaur <br /> dcpartmcnl's inability or rcfusal to scc through it'? <br /> �4c Rcincrlscn hus a hislory of builJing �rojccts(without obtaining any pemiits) <br /> ihal encroach upon his ncighhors. Such unrestricted .md uncheckeJ construction has Ied <br /> lo olhcr conllicts hclwccn lhc Rcincrtsens and thcir ncighbors, :+Iso involving lawycrs, <br /> and Mr. Rcincrtscn has admittcd this in opcn coitrt. <br /> Mr. Rcincrtscn has implicalcd your dcpartmcni i7 anproving such un-perniitteJ <br /> and conllict causing prqjects. In u�x:n court. Mr. Rcinertsen slated he cstendcd thc roof <br /> of his housc lo lurthcr int�ingc past thc property linc sharcd with his othcr ncighbor and <br /> thal thc maticr ���as only resolvcd "by finally gctting a lawycr to walk thc property, as <br /> �ecll ��s thc Cih� of N;vcrcll, to walk thc property, thc Citv of F.vcrett insacction <br /> Jcoartmcnt to w;ilk thc property. AnJ thcy madc a slatcmcnt bchvccn Ihc two of them: <br /> thc uvcrhang is.dl right."ticc attachcd pagc I SS-18G. <br /> Attached is a certilicd, complete list oPull pemiits in the inact�re tile for 3301 <br /> Shore Avcnuc prcparcd by '1'cim Mucn, Ucputy City Clcrk, and 16ere is no record ofany <br /> permit for, or approval of, the encroaching roof uvcrhang that causcd a con[lict between <br /> Mr. Rcincrtscn and his ncighbors along that linc. Oncc again, plcasc bc awarc that Mr. <br /> Keincrtscn is stating that it was your dep,�u-tmcnt who appro��ed the further extension of <br /> his roof ovcr a property linc. Wc do not doubt that Mr. Rcincrtsen was simply lying <br /> 3/� <br />