My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Ordinance No. 19757
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Ordinances
>
1990s No. 19660-20183
>
Ordinance No. 19757
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/10/2010 3:46:37 PM
Creation date
1/29/2009 2:11:41 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Council Ordinances
CMO_Document_Number
19757
Document_Title
An ordinance levying assessments for sanitary sewers in the River Road area for Basins "A," "B," and "C"; and declaring an emergency.
Adopted_Date
3/4/1991
Approved Date
3/4/1991
CMO_Effective_Date
3/4/1991
Signer
Jeffrey R. Miller
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
65
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
- Roberta contacted the office and talked to i~ichel le the week of <br />January 28th. The issue of wrether the property could be sub- <br />divided was discussed. ~~ichelle would research it and get back <br />to us. <br />~- Roberta contacted Michelle again February 5 rh . She stated that <br />noW the issue is who requester the Y at the service line. She <br />will discuss the matter with rer supervisor. <br />We would like it to be understaoa that in the beginning we were <br />ignorant of ~he ordinances and guidelines held by the city. We knew <br />nothing abau~ sewers and therefore were not in a position to insist <br />that we have 2 service lines . Rather, ire were told, both verbally <br />and in writing, that this was the required procedure. It is not <br />even logi.ca~l to think that we ~~oLld want or request 2 sewer hook <br />ups. we were told from the beginning that we Mould be charged for 2. <br />Why would we have asked to be charged and extra X750? Far us this <br />is a large amount of money and trot is ~rhy we have pursued the <br />matter. <br />The fault lies with the assumption that since ~he lot contains 2 <br />whouses, then 2 service lines ~ are required. No research was done <br />initially as to the ability to subdivide. Na one identified this as <br />being the real issue. It wasn't until We pressed the matter further <br />and finally ~alked ~~ith Michelle that we discovered that two service <br />lines are nog necessary. <br />We do not feel that the city has "complied with the Municipal code" <br />concerning the written directives issued for our property's sewer <br />access , we realize that the city is in the first phase of the hook <br />up process and that disputes of this nature are bound to arise. We <br />hope that as this matter is settled, it will serve to identify lots <br />with potential problem areas and allow for smoother transitions. <br />Depending upon Michelle's decision on the 6th of February, we wil l <br />appear before the hearing official on the 18th to testify on our outn <br />behalf . <br />Thank you for your time and consideration . <br />Sincerely, <br />`~ c~y,,~ s <br />d ~_ <br />Steve and Roberta. Thompson <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.