Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutUNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE ASPEN STATON - 34 91 - CORRESPONDENCE - LEGAL COMMUNICATION (4)Start of Item 7. Message. Subject: U.S.P.O. Sender: Paul ECKMAN / CFC/01 TO: Ted SHEPARD / CFC52/01 Part 1 FROM: Paul ECKMAN / CFC/01 TO: Ted SHEPARD / CFC52/01 Part 2. Dated: 12/03/90 at 1457. Contents: 2. I have received your electronic message dated 11/30/90 regarding fees which may be charged against the Postal Service for the construction of the new post office. Of the fees you listed, I believe that the water plant investment, water rights acquisition, sewer plant investment, storm drainage, electrical off -site and electric on -site fees may be charged against the Postal Service. I do not believe that the plan check fees or street oversizing fees may be charged against the Postal Service. I would recommend that you initially take the position that the Postal Service must pay the street oversizing fee to off -set their impact on the neighboring streets, but I would not recommend that you push it much further than that. If the Postal Service refuses to pay the fee, you would have no leverage to enforce the payment of the fee short of a lawsuit, which I do not believe the City would win. WPE:whm End of Item 7. Intray > U