Laserfiche WebLink
4. The City of Eugene proposes to assess my property a paving assessment at the <br />commercial rate rather than at the residential rate which is it's current and historic use, <br />thus costing me several thousand dollars more because of my ability to re-develop the <br />property in the future as industrial land. <br /> <br />5. City of Eugene Public Works staff now acknowledges that ODOT has previously <br />discussed terminating the east end of River Avenue which would make this a big wide <br />road with lots of sidewalks that nobody is using. It simply does not make sense to create <br />so much impermeable surface when the need is non-existent, on a road that may in fact, <br />become a dead-end road to nowhere. <br /> <br />6. The design engineer has now re-vamped the original manhole cover location and <br />Stormwater Connection to my property because it was easier to coordinate (for the city) <br />with the other utility easements and improvements. Unfortunately, to facilitate this <br />"ease" for the city, I am now expected to pay for approximately 40 ft. worth of new <br />stormwater line, engineering etc. rather than what would have been approximately 5 ft. as <br />originally drawn. Something just seems inherently un-fair about the City assessing an <br />individual landowner for the sake of City convenience. <br /> <br />The solution to this dilemma is simple. The existing road bed should receive an asphalt <br />overlay, and if the City Council feels the "need" to include a bike lane on the south side <br />of the road they have adequate right of way to do it. This is the fiscally responsible thing <br />to do and it adequately meets the needs and capacity of the area and'free's up additional <br />road improvement dollars for area's that actually need and want new road projects. <br /> <br />Respectfully submitted, <br /> <br />Connie R. Howard <br /> <br /> River Avenue Exhibit C <br /> <br /> <br />