[Grovenet] question

[David Morelli]

Usually there must be some sort of connection between the fee and the  
use of the improvement.  So, if the sewer improvement was replacement  
of a functioning 12" line with a 24" line to provide additional  
capacity that was necessary to support development of vacant  
property, then the owner of the vacant property would need to pay for  
their share of the expansion even though the pipe is not on their  
property.

David

On Mar 6, 2009, at 5:34 PM, Jeff Cooper wrote:

> ...
> One thing I'd like to add to this story is it seems strange to me  
> that landowners are on the hook for sewer improvements near their  
> properties in Cornelius.  I'm glad that here in Forest Grove we're  
> not charged above and beyond our monthly bill for sewer (uh... or  
> *are* we!?).
> ...
> Regards,
>
> Jeff