My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
9506 7TH AVE SE 2018-01-02 MF Import
>
Address Records
>
7TH AVE SE
>
9506
>
9506 7TH AVE SE 2018-01-02 MF Import
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/3/2022 10:37:00 AM
Creation date
4/3/2017 1:17:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Address Document
Street Name
7TH AVE SE
Street Number
9506
Imported From Microfiche
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
159
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
Ken Callahan <br />Celia Strong <br />September. 7, 1978 <br />Page Two (Drainage Complaint) <br />that if there were any drainage plans, that perhaps he could obtain a copy from <br />the developer at 607 S. Broadway. It was further explained to Mr. Gill that <br />continued development at 607 S. Broadway was merely the completion of Phases 2 and <br />3 of the original development and because the development took place prior to the <br />adoption of the Ordinance, the Drainage Ordinance did not apply to the new <br />building permits. <br />Mr. Gill demanded to know why no drainage plans were required and insisted that <br />the Ordinance did require compliance. He further insisted that we should waive <br />compliance of the Northern property. <br />I explained to Mr. Gill that the issues were separate; that even if there was an <br />error made on the 607 S. Broadway property, the error would not remove the City's <br />responsibility to enforce the Ordinance on new developments. I explained that I <br />was satisfied that the 607 S. Broadway development was correctly processed; but, <br />if he wanted to pursue the issue, then he was encouraged to request, in writing, <br />that the developer at 607 S. Broadway be required to conform to the Drainage <br />Ordinance. <br />[4r. Gill repeatedly demanded to know why the plans were not required. <br />After I had explained the issues 3 separate times, and after spending an excess <br />of 35 minutes on the phone, I informed Mr. Gill that I had explained the procedure <br />Z <br />C <br />to him and if he had another question, I would gladly make an attempt at assisting <br />r <br />him, but that I would not pursue the same series of answers. <br />Mr. Gill wanted to know who else he could talk to. I encouraged him to talk to <br />the City Attorney, if to felt we were in violation of the Ordinance. <br />Mr. Gill stated that he •'.oes not intend to make a written request, but it is <br />H M <br />apparent that he will continue to pursue these issues.Ln <br />H <br />In an attempt to piece Mr. Gill's "obsession" together, I have learned that Mr. <br />"thorn". <br />Gill on at least two previous issues has been a chronic <br />There does not appear, at this time, to be any merit in any of the issues (of <br />public responsibility) brought up by Mr. Gill, and I don't believe there is <br />anything we can do to help Mr. Gill resolve the private drainage problems. <br />2 <br />CIS:is/S39 ��.�cii.�5�2�Kt�lc 4o 14. 2-27-7ii <br />.(;,,,Sh(.s <br />d '3-24-7$ <br />Pks--l7 <br />u <br />4J4o <br />cc: Laurel Barnes 4$z2.3 4,,v-78 A406k.'AW14 <br />00, <br />Fred Oehlert �PrA-,%n eO�cl�µa.tcc, S-ice%il <br />f <br />Lloyd Henning <br />1331 � 73 <br />51r ,t <br />Hugh warren <br />2 <br />4 4 fr <br />Brad Cattle <br />44ef <br />John O'Connor <br />474% 7-31-78 <br />SSn <br />u' <br />Bob Landles <br />Otk 2. $ �7-7 a <br />Plvb.b.n gj <br />4411 9-4-79 <br />C,m;=A,,.5 <br />4947 &-z2-77 <br />Q v ! <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.