New Search
assessment deferral. These extensions apply for the term of the property owner's financial <br /> condition, with a periodic review by the Finance Division to determine continued eligibility; the <br /> term of financial hardship extensions expire when an owners financial condition improves or, in <br /> the River Road /Santa Clara mandated connection area no later than December 31, 1999. <br /> Currently 55 property owners have been granted financial hardship extensions. <br /> Administrative extensions are provided for short-term periods normally of three to six months <br /> when a proms ownerdemonstrates a physical or legal need to delay connectior1'Tbr a short <br /> period. Examples of conditions that may justify short-term extensions include: pending sale of a <br /> property where connection costs are covered in the closing; site conditions which limit the time - <br /> frame for construction; pending demolition or re- development of a property; and additional time <br /> requirements to make short-term financial arrangements to pay for connection costs. The <br /> concept behind allowances for short-term extensions is that if a property owner shows a <br /> willingness to comply but demonstrates a need for additional time, and postponing enforcement <br /> is likely to result in voluntary compliance, it is counter - productive to proceed with legal actions <br /> to enforce connection. Currently 63 property owners have been granted administrative <br /> extensions. <br /> While overall the connection compliance program has been very successful, some <br /> improvements to the timeliness of legal actions and follow -up for properties that have obtained <br /> extensions which have expired, are needed and are being implemented. However, given the <br /> relatively low number of properties which fall within these categories, connection program <br /> improvements will not result in full compliance with EPA grant conditions. On December 31, <br /> 1993, 4,852 developed properties had been served by sewers; in order to have met the EPA <br /> conditions for 60% of all 8,136 developed properties in the grant area to be connected by <br /> December 31, 1994, 4,881 would need to have connected to the public sewer; more properties <br /> than actually had sewers available for at least the preceding 12 -month period. <br /> Ultimately, the goals of the connection compliance program and the conditions of the EPA grant <br /> are compatible; both aim to have all developed properties connected to public sewer. However, <br /> the short-term objectives for attaining this goal seem to be in conflict, and as a result the time - <br /> frames for connection anticipated by the EPA grant are not being met. To reconcile these <br /> differences, one of, or a combination of three remedies could be pursued: work with the EPA to <br /> change the grant conditions or to recognize that we are meeting the overall objectives of the <br /> conditions; change the Eugene Code and operating policies and procedures of the connection <br /> compliance program to require all properties to connect within shorter time periods; and /or to <br /> more quickly serve a greater number of properties with sewers such that grant conditions can <br /> be met within current connection program parameters. <br /> I hope this memo helps in clarifying the status of the connection compliance program. Please <br /> let me know if you have questions or require further information in this matter. <br /> V cc: Johnny Medlin <br />