New Search
My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
New Search
2008-00427 Ltrs
COE
>
PW
>
POS_PWM
>
Contracts
>
2011 Contracts scanned to Verify
>
2008-00427 Ltrs
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/29/2011 7:28:09 AM
Creation date
12/9/2010 10:54:18 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PW_Contract
COE_Contract_Number
2008-00427
PW_Document_Type_Contract
Correspondence
Organization
East Ridge Dev.
PW_Department
Public Works
Contract_Administrator
Aanderud
Contract_Manager
Kevin Leidall
Is Permanent?
Yes
External_View
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
r ~ <br />WEISS Cella M <br />From: <br />WEISS Cela M <br />Sent: <br />Wednesday, August 15, 2007 1:17 PM <br />To: <br />LEIDALL Kevin G; AANDERUD Kris <br />Cc: <br />RISDAL Lacey L; LEGAT Sandi E <br />Subject: <br />RE: Storm Drainage Maintenance Agreement <br />Kevin or Kris, before I research, can you enlighten me to your standard practice? THANKS guys! Cela <br />From: <br />RISDAL Lacey L <br />Sent: <br />Wednesday, August 15, 2007 1:03 PM <br />To: <br />WEISS Cela M <br />Cc: <br />LEGAT Sandi E <br />Subject: <br />FW: Storm Drainage Maintenance Agreement <br />Importance: <br />High <br />Cela-HELP! I really don't have any idea the history that Becky is referring to. Can you provide some guidance regarding <br />the process we want? <br />Lacey. <br />From: TAYLOR Becky G <br />Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 12:55 PM <br />To: RISDAL Lacey L; LEGAT Sandi E <br />Cc: HANEY Ed R; LEIDALL Kevin G <br />Subject: Storm Drainage Maintenance Agreement <br />Importance: High <br />Kevin delivered approved agreements to me and Ed for East Ridge and Greene Estates. Neither has the City Recorder's <br />Office pre-approval stamp and signature; however, since there is no conveyance to the City, it should not be required to <br />record with Lane County. I understand Maintenance wants a recorded copy, but to keep the original at City Recorder's <br />Office. <br />An alternative to CRO stamp, and I have done this in one case early on in our transition of this new process of concurrent <br />recording with the plat (and as far as I know it didn't create any issues), is to return the original to Maintenance after <br />recording (writing "After recording return to PW Maintenance, 1820 Roosevelt, Eugene, OR 97401" in the upper left corner <br />of the first page). When the original recorded document is returned to you, you could make a copy for your records and <br />send the original to CRO to retain. <br />The step of obtaining CRO signature in advance and then having CRO send a recorded copy seems to create more work <br />for others. I think the alternative is more efficient, but you may disagree. <br />Let us know which way you'd like to proceed on the contracts we just received. <br />Becky Taylor <br />Lond i sc Review Survcv, Technician <br />City of ['11gene <br />I'utdic V\Iorks End mTl rin~,- <br />541-682-6004 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.