HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit Fence 1983-02-02" RESI*-I-NTlAL"
zzs ttot th rrr rl,rn"nAPPLrcATr,ll
/PERMrr
Springfield, 1regan 97477
Building Diuision
/ zb-,t / b6 Ya,n*P^,W
tE I Y,O
SPts'n8GFi€I..D
Recetct {
b Loecticn:
ssessors ]!ao I
iubd,irs"J s'r,cn:
dmer:
.lddtess:Phone:
JlC:Citg:
Desez.,'be ltork:
VaiueDate of AppL
ELectrtcaL
Ttnpr-
Genetal
o0
RenoCel
!!obi1.e ilcne
14echar:iecL
Sotitotg szaer cqced :t pz,cpetW Line
Septic totk p:,i:ned atd f"illad aith gra:;ai
llnal - t',*ten abcue 'Jtens ate ecnolecei
ar.d. xhen Tencl'Jiton is eomle=e cr s::-i3-
tuye noueC ari;rct'Jses clZaned u=.
icnes
?Lwnbin4 ccnneccicns -- sarer ei ucter
Electr)cal Ccztnection - BlcckituT, set-\i
and plwnbing conrteeticns m;st be d??rztea
befot, e request'-ng e7, ectyicaL i-nsp ee =ion
.lecessc!.! tsuildJrq
Fina.L - After, pcrckes, sk*ting, Cecks,
etc. ee ccnplelad.
tsLocking ad Sex-ug
-1-e - v: e
Constrtcticn Leruier
Ii is the responsibility of the permtt holder to see that aL! inspecttons Ge nade at )he proper tine, t!"a! ecch ad.fues; i-s teoicbl.e
j'ron the street, anC thdt thetEuildir.g Dittictot aotro"^ed p
card. ia Lccated at
26-376
SiE iilSPiC::)N: To be natie aJ'ter
ezcaoation, but prior tc se! up of
ANDERSLA.B -DLUI'IEI}IG, ZLIC?RICAL A
ECiil.;lICAi: lo be nacie cefore cnyffi[-li-i.seteC.
PC1tI:lG 1 ?)ailDAT:CN: ?o be rr*Ce
aft e t' tz. encG; a, ;-ee e qt at e d and
forns are ez,ectei, but pt'ior to
pouz4rq ccnc/e+,€.
ullDxRGzCU:lD ?tUMDr:ic, Sg',riP, il.1TlR.
DRAIIIAG|: Io be na.7e pz-.or co fil-Lir4 crenchee.
uil)EP! :C1P ?aL':.9 ilc 2, !4!C1.d.;'tI CAL :@oi
flooz' insulction or decking.
?OST A!'ID 3EA!,!:To be naCe prJot to
floor irstl,atl)a, otinstallatian cf
deekinq.
=itt.! .f?nrD7,t? arrMora!. I .r4sc1_l
).i1ff).1: )lo ;crk )s ic ae cou'ereiffilT-;hese ir,saec:iars'nr,;e beer
noie ar.d. cgptcued..
the ,czvnt of ti",.e proper'ty
You? City Desigra.ted Job Munber is:
i N s u L AT ! t N / v APO.? it.?.?-r:.? r lt s ? ! c ! I j Il :
reqaited oqor buvie?s @e in place
but before ary lath, W?flnl baatC cr
rnl7, couering is dpplied, crd. before
dlV ,:nsulAtion is concealeC.
)otrf,lAf r -rt<=ta7|ai. a^ '^^ ^^)-
after aLL <k-1uall is ,)n plaee,
but prioz' to any taping.
!,!A€C!B!: Steel Loection, bond\ffijg?auting or, ,re?ticd.Ls in
accotriorce ,')Lth U,ts,C, Section
tl))DS?a\E: After installation is
anpleted.
CUPB E .A?PRCACH APFQN: Ai-ter fotnsa,e ""e.tA-butTG to pa"a-."a
coflcz,ete.
SIDEII;.LK & DRflTiAl{: ?or all ccn-
cr,"J; palr1ng-G;m st"eet right-
of-r,;cy, tc be ncde a|'taz, all- eccc-
tatLnc eanolete & fotn ,":ot,k 'i oub-
base naterial in place.
a
perrrit
!-cn sEL L
) state yout City Cesigrtted iob ru.nbet', iob a.C.iress,
Contractcrs or )umers rc:ne crd. plnne nunbct'. P.equests rece
aftar 7: 00 on urtll be maie the nest wrkinE da,y,
I
,I
I
,]
j*l
Ktion.
W!i!t: iArct be reouested afier
aporoual of rough plturbing, electi-cal & nechanical. AL! rcofiry
bracitg t chinmeys, etc. tasx be
. comoleted. llo :;crk is to be con-
- cealed until this insoecicn las
'beea nade cnC aporo"-ed.
.."_
ncEe?1-aLs
FIIIAL PLU:4BI:iG
FI:IAL ITECIIA:IICAL
|IIIAL ZLIC??ICAL
Pm-or to plceirg fcc"-ng
ar.d before frarir4 inspec- ,
!!NCZ:'a4ten conple'te -- Prouid.e
or nouable sectLons thz,ough
ALL projeet cor.ditions, such as the ins'callacicn cf s*,eet trees, :c:pletiot cf the
required ,o*ts6pir.g, ctc. , nilst be satt,sfieC before tl..e tsUiiDI:lG FIiiAL :cn be requested.
lIilAL tsAfLDMC: Tne F"JncL ButLdtng Inspection rwst bo- ?equested zi:er the ?ir"zl ?LurbirqElectrical, oti !,lechar.iccl inspectacns itate been nade and apprcozd.
,ALL !,IANHCLES AIID CLTA.IICUTS IIUST 3E.1CCES3:ts18, .4D,/UST:!!:]! lO 3i:,!,408 I.I !]O::ST ?C CTY
gate$
D tt ?
o
102_Cr )
of instec=icn
befcre 7:00 a:i
L be made the ?eoueats
tr
2
r--co C
JOB N
Ii 1or.e:
Lot Sq. Ftg.
z cf Lct Ca,serage _
! of Stoies
n^+ -7 u -; ^'-i
Tooocto'rg
State
!o+-al Clna"aeo
i?!!.t
Penttt iss-u.oee
Meci"anicsl Pen:rit
SOLAR A ESS REQ.-
_ Inte?icr
_ Cormer
_ Pcniuruile
Cul-de-sac
3eitcans:
ieet
Lace
-- F2es --
Building Vqlue & Permit
This pertnJt is gnanted on the erp?ess conditicn tlat the said eonetri.oitonslall, in aLL tesoects, confcrn to the )rdinance adocteC by the City cf
Spz,ztgfiei-d, incluiing the ionir.g Crdinatce, regulcting the ecrstr-titicn
anti.use of buil,i.tngs, an"d nau be susoetiei oy retckei et ctJ t--ae :.i:cn uic-lation of zny prctisions of saiC irdir,ances.
i
Signed:
Electricol Permit
Were State La requires tTnt the eleetrical uork be done bg an lLeetr-ieal
Contraetoz,, the electrtcal portion of thia permit shall not be ualiC untilthe Label has been signed by the Electz4cal- Contrdctor.
Mechq nic<ll Permit
Dtffi i-M.edn
f HAW CA-REFULLY |XA!.IINED lhe eanroleted coplication fot permit, al. ao
herebg certiiy that aLL informattan heteon is ttue ar.C. cbrrec.-, otd f
fitlhet' cet'tif"- that ang cn4 aLL,;otk perforned shall be done in aceor,-
danee :,tith the 0rdinanees of the City cf Spdngfield, and. the Lc;s of theState of 0regon pez'i:ainina to th.e uork Cescibed herein, crd :ltzt :10 1CCLI-
P/.!|CI uill be na.de of cnV st"uctrn,e uithout permisaion of the 3uilding Di-uision. I futther :ertifi thzt onlg ccnt"aciot,s and ertplcgees ui.-o ,;rb in
ecnpl':.anee atth CRS 701.055 aiLL be used cn this arojeei
)*"t-fs
Lot ?eces '
CcrGce,r lause
3anItorth
|4est
r!!:t x VaLue
Ce:ce
?O!.11
"ALUS
s. D.c. 1.5 :
Plumbing Permit
Ng per.eon shall .consttwct, install., aLter or clange an! nea cr ecisting
qLzm2irq oz. drainage systan in uhoLe ot in patt, unlesi such pet:son ts the
Le_gal.posseasor of a ualid plunber,s Licensb, e.ce?t tl^.at a pZ:,san nay do
plwebing xork to plopett! uhich is otmed, Leased or operated by the ai:pli.-
cant.
iEi CIAEG!;
!i:tures
Resid.ertial (1 bath)
Seue"
PLunHng Perrit
State
:i0 CiI-7GZ
llau/Extend. Cireuits
Set uice
af;1 Da,f,?,
a-itua-- )Alll<
Ezhast llaoC
Vent Fot
'rtco<istoie
-- ilc?.cAC:;:.:!:!T --
Secaz-it11 Detceit
Stotaoe
!4ainter.ar"ce
Permtt
:OTA' A,IIOU\IT DUC:'o
Mobile ilone
Signe<i
fo),"
Date
t;ct
3ar:c?:
;,lctet
?ence 1x,
^
r)
a LectT'?-ca L Late L
D rt I 'l:l
JoB f 7hr)
COI,{PLAINT ADDRI]SS:
NATURE OF VIOLATION
RES ] I][N'f :
OIVNEiT:
SI,II I NGI:I EI,D (,OIrII,I,I\I N'r t:ol{t
5Y
D;\rE: _L:-b_l$6O_---
Cor\ll' t,r\ I.'ir\N'l' :
Atl[)Ri:SS:$b
PII0NE : -( 4 7- B3OZ.-
AIIvI SI:I)
PREV]OI,IS COI'IPI,i\II.I'I'S AT TIIIS ADDRESS?
Yt.;S NO
p
.= G.-I-v\
o€Pn# -l ?^G- SrzL zoirt
PII#.
INSPECTIONS:
-lt",r.- cur.rAr
ol^IA&
,,rnilA +ru-M
-$"a-JA.,
c-cr^,
fA'
4*A .]r"i
JflA-,
e.\-+ruA -tr.zri,..r- cr4^Ot
Jr^L trei-tu,,f" tJ.- alr.,.-cct Lr+:ltl.C cLlC .u_11 j.
A^dr cIb lilq- Gfusllt, AHr( -ac.,rJy {vu?*le
a-ir6lr,F
-i1^\-
t &_T
I
for office use orrly
1ST N01'ICE .^ND OliDI:P.:LI;'fl'l:ll I:li0;U C l'l Y ;\1"1'OIINI:\' 'S 0l:l: lCti
2ND NOTICE AND ORI)ER:
OIJT(]O)IE:
T.IIJNIC I P,\L COIIIII' CITA'I'ION
F-ellcertrravl( -
OA,
(',,
(l
CI:TTT OF SPR,I\TGFIEIJD
sPRINGFTELD. OREGON 97 477
Itlay I8 , 19I4 223 NORTH A STREET
SUITE D
7 46-9621
OFFICE OF THE
CITY ATTORNEY
Cla.rence and Doris Wolfe
^r;, .29fnorth 35th Street
Resident
290 North 35th Street
Springfield, OR 97478
Please find enclosed a copy of a letter that f wrote to I'1r. and
Mrs. Wo1fe on FebruarY 18, 1982.
The letter is self-explanatory. ft is my understanding that
difficulties have again arisen with respect to the Joint Use
Agreement for the easement for ingress and egress from your
respective properties. ' .
It is my understanding that lr1r. and !Irs. Wolfe are contemplating
or considering placing fencing within the easement. It is also
my understanding that the residents at 290 North 35th Street
have on occasion parked vehicles in the easement.
ft is my understanding that this problem continues
and be the source of argiument between ivlr. and }{rs.
residents at 290 North 35th Street.
to fester
Wolfe and the
The Joint Use Agreement is a private document between the
who executed the document and their successors in interest
to the property affected.
parties
If you are having disagreements over the use of the property
that is a private matter and each of you should contact an attorney
of your choice to determine if you have the basis for a lawsuit.
The City Attorneyts Office does not represent private partiesin arguments which they may have regarding Joint Use Agreementsproviding easements for access.
I can offer you a personal opinion, however, that I believe
that if either of you use the easement in such a manner (i.e.
construction of a fence or the parking of vehicles) which deprives
the other party of the right to fu1I enjolzment of that easement,
MaY 18, 1984
Page 2
youmaybeinvitingacivillavlsuitbytheotherpartytoremedy
the matter.
Itwouldbemysuggestionthatthetwoofyouworkthisoutit . fair and neighborlY manner'
If you are unable to reach agreement' ?t if either one or both
of you interreiEs with tr," iiii use and enjoyment of the easement
bytheother,Iwouldrecommendthateachofyoumaywishtoavail yourself with the services of a private attorney' consider
the Lane cor,iy"i"g"i aia seivice Gaz-6056) if you qualify'
or the Lane county senior iegal aid service, if you qualify.
The senior servicl meets s"i"ia"v mornings at the rvillamalane
Senior Center.
Thank you for your attention to this matter'
Sincerely,
HARI{S, HAROLD & LEAHY
\'ij > ii .r i-\)L t--i\\A,1
Joseph J
Office o
eahyity Attorney.Lfc
JJL:bkh
enc.
cc: Steve Burkett, City }{gr.
Sal1y Johnson, Public Works
Linda Christensen, Council member
nnEnfl@RAm!Dumf,CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
TO
May 15, 1984
Joe Leahy,
Assistant City Attorney
FROM:Sally Johnson,
Environmental Inspector
SUBJECT: Non-Compliance With The Following Cases
1096 N Street, Resident, violation of Section 5-1-1 (3) (d) of the City Code.
m-i;-ofEce required the resident to remove or screen used materials -- scrap
meta1, equipment parts and other niscellaneous debris. The deadline has passed
and the resident has not complied
2. 780 North 28th Street, Resident, violation of 5-1-1 (3)(j) of the City Code --
@. The resident has not removed or screened damaged or in-
operable stored vehicles as required by our March 12, 1984 letter.
3. 1145 Water Street, Lola Morgan, violation of 5-1-1 (3)(j) of the City Code, Lola
@hic1estoredinpub1icview.otrrMarch12,19841etterrequir-ing cornpliance by April L2, 1984 was ignored. Our records show that the resident
was notified of the same offense in January of L983 by your office and was sub-
sequently referred to Bruce Liebowitz in May, 1983. Bruce, at the time, stated
that he wasrruncomfortable prosecuting it." I recommend, however, that we go
through the usual abatement procedures to correct the violation.
Copies of correspondence related to the above cases are attached.
4. 585 North 26th Street, Charles Whipple, violation of 5-1-1 (3)(d) of the City
IE ve to us materials, equipment, appliances and miscellaneous debrisat
stored in public view. Mr. Whipple has removed his junk and the 2 inoperable
vehicles from the front yard and the mobile home; however, the rear yard (unfenced)
stil1 has scattered piles of tin, wrecked appliances and odd sizes of lumber.
Therefore, enclosed is the entire Whipple file to be referred for prosecution
in order to gain complete compliance. Please have John Fussner contact me for
details.
The following two cases are rather odd in comparison with our usual fare:
5. 286 North 35th Street, Clarence and Doris Wolfe, joint use agreement driveway.
Please refer to the enclose d copy of a February 18, 1982 Letter to the Wolfes
from you. If you renember, our conversation of last week, the Wolfefs want to
know E-they can erect a fence on their property line to the street which would
separate the 2 driveways. Our conclusion was that they could not, unless, the
Wolfes' and their neighborst (290 North 35th Street) mutually agreed to abolish
the joint use driveway agreement. Mr. Wolfe wishes to erect a fence because
he claims his neighbor, the resident of 290 North 35th Street (the owner lives
out of town), blocks his (Mr. Wolfe's) driveway with vehicles. It was your sug-
1
MEMO TO:
Joe Leahy
Non-Compliance
May 15, 1984
Page 2.
gestion to write to both parties -about the proposed fence and the appropriateuse of the joint driveway. our files show that we have dealt ,"periLdty withMr' wolfe since 1978 relative to.one or more aspects of the joint use drivewayagreement. Perhaps, you should indicate that the City wilt have no furtherinvolvement relative to the driveway? !
6. 355 North 22nd Street Robert E. Clark, violation of S.0S F.Zoning Code and5ructurale1ty and Fire and Life Safety Code.Mr. Clark built acarport / greenhouse wit hout securing a building permit and also in violationof the required 20' f rontyard setback for carports in Residential Districts.The carport is ab out 6t from the front property 1ine.
Mr. Clark had originally submitted plans for a permit, but the prans werestructurally inadequate and indicated the lack bf required setback for theproposed structure. David Puent, Plans Examiner, explained the necessity ofcomplete building plans and outlined the Board of Appeals procedures to dealwith the setback problem. Mr. C1ark, an,e1der1y man, was outwardly very angrywith the City's requirements and compared Mr. Puent's demeanor with those ofA1 capone and/ot Adolph Hitler. Mr. Clark returned approximately 2 weeks laterwith a different set of drawings for the construction,-that were stiI1 notadequate and also had completed the application form to be heard before theBoard-of Appea1s. Mr. clark stated tiit tre would not pay the application feefor the Board of Appeals unless his variance r^ras approved. The "tip off" wasthat Mr. clark latei revealed that he had erected iire structure without goingthrough.the appropriate procedures and without city sanction, when he came intoour office to pay his 'rfine't. Please send a letter from your office requiringremoval of the structure. r suppose hre should formally nttify trim or the Boardof Appealsi however, staff could not support a frontyard setback variance requestbecause,the specific property conditions, in our opinion,do not meet varianceapproval criteria as outlined in the Zoning Code.
Sally Johnson
Environnental fnspector
attachments
sJ/1h
t
CIEY OF SPH,I}iTGFT]EIJ]f
SPRINGFTELD. OREGON 97 474
OFFICE OF THE
CITY ATTORNEY February 18, L982
Clarence and Doris Wolfe
P. O. Box 1068
Springfield, OR 97477
Dear !tr. & Mrs. Wolfe:
This supplements my earlier letter to you dated February 2, 1982,
regarding the problem you are experiencing regarding theJoint Use Agreement on your panhandle Iot.
At your request, f have again reviewed this matter with GaryKarp, Engineer Technician fI, Department of Public Works,City of Springfield. At the time of the approval of the Partition
which created your lot, a condition of the Partition reguireda Joint Use Agreement for each of the panhandles to your lot
and panhandle lot of that of your neighbor. At the time ofthe Partition each panhandle of the adjacent panhandle lots
hras reguired to be 20 feet wide. There was no standard pavingwidth in effect at the time for double panhandles. rt hasbeen City policy that the driveway may be placed anywhere withinthe doubre panhandre area. Thus, since the ro foot easementis on one handle and a five foot easement is on the other, thereis no inconsistency with city poricy. The Joint use Agreementfor the easement is considered a private document by the cityand unless there is a request by the applicant, theie is no ieviewof this document. rt is reguired to be submitted to the cityonly after being recorded at the County.
rf you have any cause of action at arl, and r am not sure thatyou have one, that cause of action might be against the personwho sord you the property. on the basis of the facts thlt wehave been able_to turn up thus far, r am not sure what your causeof action would be.
rt is again suggested that you contact a private attorney todetermine if you have any basis for suing anyone. If yoi-r cannotafford a private attorney, you might wish to consider Lane CountyLegal Aid Service (342-6056) or Lane County Senior Legal Aidservice. The senior service meets saturday mornings it trreWillamalane Senior Center.
223 NORTH A STREET
sulTE o
746-9621
2-t? co
OB
February I8, 1982
Page 2
I am sorry that I cannot solve your problem.
Sincerely,
HARtllS, HAROLD & LEAHY
Joseph J. LeahY
JJL: bkh
cc: Steve Burkett' CitY lvlanager
GarY KarP
(,,\
CIIfTf OF SPF'IITGFIEI-If
SPRINGFIELD. OREGON 97 477
December lB, lgi8 346 MAlN rt,
726-3753 "BLIC WORKS
r. & Mrs. Clarence Wolfe
. 0. Box 57
ihurston,0R 97482
Subject:236,2goand2g4North35thStreetUseAgreement
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Wolfe:
Your letter to the CitY Manager
response. From your letter andjt is my understanding that you
the use of the 'joint' driveway
our involvement in thjs matter,
MAK: s k
cc: City Manager
dated December B, .1978 has been referred to me for
our telephone conversation on December
.I5, .I978,
have numerous quest jons and cornpl a'ints regarding
serving your property. So that you are aware of
the following facts are furnjshed:
l)\..[,,.( A .v*
l. A minor partition request was submitted 'in September, 1977 by Ted Morgan,
apparent owner of the subject property.
2. Minor Partition #5BB was cond'itionally approved jn October,1977 by the Land
Development Review Commjttee. The pertinent condit'ion of approval was that
a joint use access easement was required.
3. The minor partition was officially approved on October 20, l97B after satis-faction of all conditions including submittal of the joint access agreements.
According to our records,. property known as #294 has no innterest or right of accessover the joint driveway_serving your property, #2g6 North 35th Street,-and yourneighbor's property (290 North 35th Street) unless permission js obtained.
Since the City of Springfield does not know what understanding you had when theproperty was purchased nor do we know when the easement documEnts were actual 1ysigned in-comparison to Iand ownership transfer, we can make no judgment in tfiismatter. Therefore, it is our opinion that the problem'is a civii mitter.
Please advise if additional information is desired.
Very truly yours,
Mjchael A. Ke11y
Director of Publ ic t^Jo
A E hA^^6
S
Or.rnnr/t-ta,,a'l^n^- I o
.---.ITIIION,qPPLICATION
lrn
\
Zr L
e6.8 -
furcel
\,
c
1lu
l,
-, -.i-1, -- -3" s--,
a),+
E
' 2+ 't )8.
C S:
,+ l;.-1Tr a -fil?
at1t38.
I
N
i ro(o
(f
@
*rtrujt- l-l!4",,H
b
343 7
64
f3a
I
I
I.-
x+i5+-
<. -|75 6
tt 3 a'8
( 475 5
- *i t
4?4O S P
6"
,':?'5 J I
I
I
o+75 E.lfi.Ey
1-a*,I4f-
i17 6
.174
:l
o
!-
3 -1,-
7 ?u.E.,
rnq
lr)t
aB
IV'
3in
.frr !
;/'"t I
--a-at- -
q
-13-o
*32.2
M4AE34' FL 4/.2?. C?.o)_
,,,,ht
)
tr
TJ
El
=i-.
472 4 ))
7B.L
2 65.l 'o
lo'Oroinage
Eosem e,nt
'Q,,goo P.')r.--lloll.o(vlii
tq
to
a
o.l(9l' Itt'
"' ll
-*--r4'll
t:
,\
79./t+t 7
?
'r?'fa /+Q (l
I 474?
x 475.0
I
{1
--'1
X{
r-j +zs
o
n.b3P!
tr i__l
I
'1, :"7 4 7
n t- a r. a )
2)
t
q
I
;
J
( 475.3 , -'
gt66
3197
/174/9€42FZ4G9-92
I,
E I
.8
l
!
1)
+ 15.^{i '.
, r 11.
;:. _l I \ { 475.8
OP CHAR D
^r.4
TL]I5 DRA\^,/IKJG DC)E3. LIO'T (PN]5'TI-TL]TE A
B'-L]T-JDAZY =l.JP},/EY A|tlD \' AJaJEC'T TC)
AN\,', ll.-LAc.CLlEzac]E-= A 5L.la*-.Qt-lE|-J-T
6c;a1E:<:*={_-f2) I ()
3,-t
:,O^
No REVISION (DESCRIPTION)DATE = loo,SCALE: I CITY OF SPRINGFIELD. OREGON
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENTo^rE: q-21- 77
DRAwN:R.6, S.
I I
tlP * s88
[ulorqa rLCHECKEDE!NI T I /o/rnh'sI-ITTllI DRAWING NOFILE NOPROJECT NO.
----I
A
V-E
B
rl
NO
Arcet2
-- -
/ltb/:
*
I
(
--t
::- J--t
--t
i
I
I
,
{
I
.:
.i i
q
:
i
li
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
l
*r a.
Springfield CitY Pro
3lrl+ North A street
Spnirngflelde 0regon PJ )t77
I am stiII in rheel chair so someonewill have to come here if yor jntend
to look into this" That trai.]-er could. have
Dear Sirl
This is to inforrn yotr as of tifls date we have mai]e* copies of.all trans-
""tiorr" regareini pgrchase of 286 North 35th street in Springfleld to
Fed,eral JuIge of"Wlsfurn Division in Fed.eral Brrtrdjlg i:r liuskogee, Okla-
homa. Yor lcnon that anytims that a city has access to an easement for
"tifity or drainagq it i"ases to be a private property easement but is
a pgbtic easementf The city is callini tfi.s a private property easement
and ref\rses to do anythi.:ag for us about ito
ilr-cdr4 bl
B- *js,
fu*. Piutswit
fru
secutor
Ju-1y 10, 1PB0
Respectf\r-llu,
P 0 Box 1068;
o
Springfleld, Oreo STWT
fu,'l*<--C-,-'
There shorld have been NOTHIBG placed on ttri.s property AFIER builderp
insLsted we sign a proraissary note August 21 , L979--the same day we took
pose*esLon and gave thero keyi to A1len Avenue property 'in f\r}} paymen!
bf egO North 35f,h street. the easement :as added later and we did NoT
sign same.
A trailer (vacation 16 foot) has been parked on sane for more than a week--
not near fence on North side but right next to stlr property where everyone
frorn 29O has to drive rlght on us to get aroutd the trailer. The car ':
Ilcense pglling trailer is Utah IE 1055 to the best of orr larowledge and
the trailer license is d.efi:ri-tely Utah Tl+o99L.
r.{e pay glrr taxes and try to good Iaw-abiding citizens**monitoring channel
9 on-citizens band rad:io in conjunction with 0nEGOlI STA$ POIJCE, IANE
CoUNIY SHERIFF, EUGm{E and SPFINGrTELD PoIJCE DEPARB'1m{TS. We paid for
o6r fencjng pelrdt (onl;f $e.OO1 that ls tnre but neigbbors af 2lO do not
have to have -one and posts ar.e B and 9 ft j-nstead of requ:ired 6 ft"
Onr blacktop has been darnaged by Reids at 29O for almost 16 months--since
VIay, 1979, and the Reids have no lntentj-on of repai.ring sameo
f was born and raised in 0lc1ahoma but we have lived in Eugene-Springfield
si-nce 19ll and nonhere jn these United States except right here have citizens
been forced to endure the harrassment we have endured 2 yearso We tried
to keep th-is Local to no avail so now we are asking for outside as^ilstanceo
Un1ess this situatj.on is revieroed and the illega1 easement done away with,
we vote N0 on EVERY baIlot measure comi-ng up and I am qirite sure we can
guarantee 6 N0 votes each election. {trts means ,2 IES votes are need.edto courteract otrr votes, The s,-.ringfierd News ptrblished. a telephone
ntrnber one courld call if neighbors grass, weeds, and trees were interfering
and those same neighbors i^rouId have to pay for it. ' tbees are leaning
over our garden area almost B feet and U:nbs and weeds are crowdlng ana
overrtrnning our zj-rurias and dwarf frult trees wbich cost S-! and $20 eachoJust wanted to $Fse {_ou w9 typed letters and are sen<Ling pictures, etc.and package wilr be maj-Led to Muskogee about alccr- Fyiday, august r, r98o,urrless we hear 'fron you on Thrrrsdayn,July lI, 1980, Yotr r^riII have to
see this situation fi.rst trand to believe it.
been put on east side of Reids sarase.
BHt *Y{,YsE"Ik"tu"ffi.$,38*ghg{ pr,e a'se
Phone 7
%*sf"
lrl a-"
I
N €9" 4g,a
,Oo.OO.
:
!
I
I
I
,
!
I
I
:
I
I
I
:
Pqrc. e.I s'"-
+ tt6
hlol rrr-
b
o
da
'v
'r^1
l
it
.!
,lI
f
j
:.t,-t
. .{*-t
-:a1r !:l'!
..f
lf
i.
\q
oa
I
t
J
0n
lltt.
,i..\-\^a_ \
C:.PTGOI.J
at,d +r, t.Ar,
l4.?2,.z.t.tc
->*--!\c*+-ra_h
#. 214 J
;
?
o
J
\
t
q
0
?
nr\'1.
-Dnqir1 q
!'2,, J. t,ec
)e e4-S<s .-a:_
5', r,ar,ZOo .o
It(
\\_
tIt
a
\
:-. , --. r*J
C!(-
s gg. 45' w u
"l
t
z 3.,o . l1,r',na = 5/A- r. (o.o s€r
scate l". ZD,
A PPRCV E D..3 PRtN(,F1E1p PL ANAiI^/G C OVV I SS ION
---
.- -'*.N
I
I
I
J
I.t
:'_ .- ' -a'' .'" '.Lr *:..f
\r
5
n
q 9 4
OO
__*
o'_:f c g{ z t
#21o
Qerg
,
bo
o.l
t\
0?r
I
,0oN
el.6rslt
PEQ;;15;
!11.[Jl\ Srje
rt0
or.rAL
VEYCE
D
. lt'*
t\
HcwA R'd' ;i.n ixirr, r.,
oj.;-:;;
l
,.loO. OOt
'..t
\
a
\
)
Pa...e-t t
\
DEPARTMENT OF
PUBLIC WORKS
CITY OF SPH,I\TG}T-IEIJD
SPRINGFIELD, OREGON E7 477
September 15, 19E0
346 MAIN STREET
726-3753
l'4s. Bonnie Reid
290 l,lorth 35th Street
Springfield, Oregon 97477
SIIBJECT: Fence At 136 .lcrth 35th Street
Dear lls . Rei d :
0n September 9, 1980, I inspected the above referenced fence and found
no violat'ion of City Code.
If you have any further questions, p'lease contact the Sprinqfield Bu'ild-
ing Division at 726-3753.
SincerelY,
:14flr)
Tom Sheirbon
Buildino Inspector
TS/cp