Minutes 10/13/1953 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

62 OCTOBER D, 1953 TUESDAY 5. Later, in a conversation with an agent of the City, 1tr. Wells was asked specifically if the line extended to his property. He replied that the line did extend to his property and he was told that in that case, all he needed to do was to go by the treasl1rer's office and pay the usual connection fees and the tap would be made. f,tr. Wells paid for his water tap on August 14, 1953. 6. Between the time that Mr. Wells obtained his permission from the Chatham Hei~ts Corporation and the time he paid for his water tap, he had obligated himself approximately $7500. 7. In the meantime, Mr. Wells continued with the construction of his building, confident that the water tap would be made. 8. Within a few days (Au[ust 24, 1953) after the connection charge was paid, the City discovered that the water line actuall,y stopped some 150 feet from the lot on which the service station was being constructed. W.r. Wells was immediately informed of this development, however, he had spent an additional $1500 between the time tllat he paid his connection charge to the City and the City's refusal to supply water. 9. A petition was offered before Council on Au[,ust 25, 1953 and Mr. Wells himself appeared before Council on September 8, 1953 and was refused the water service on the grounds that no extensions were being allowed outside the corporate limits under any circumstances. 10. Sometime during the interim, Mr. Wells had negotiated a lease with an oil conpany which is at the present time, penalizing him due to the fact that there is no water in the station. We are of the oplnlon, after review:Lng the case, that, while :Mr. Wells has no legal claim to any water from the City, the City might have certain moral obligations in the matter, the whole decision hinging on two points: A. In Item 5 above, the word "property"< was used in good faith by the City and the City meant the actual lot on which the station was being built. The word lIproperty" as used by Hr. Wells was also in good faith, but he was referr5ng to his total front footage along Chatham Road - said front footage being divided into what appears to be three individual lots. The present water line does extend past the first lot line, but falls short of the service station by a distance of approximately 150 feet. B. The line, if extended 150 feet, would be extended to a natural stopping point from n~r on unless, of course, the corporate line is extended at a later date. This natural stopping point is the intersection of Chatham Hoad wi th Route 662 which ties the Chatham Road in with the Pumphouse Road on the north side. If, then, we consider that the City has a moral obligation, due to an honest misunderstanding, I would recOlmnend that Mr. Wells be allovred to extend the 6-inch line approximately 150 feet at his sole expense and the City make the necessary tap. In allowing this, hmvever, it should be made quite clear that Council is not relaxing its policy prohibiting the extension of water lines into the county, nor its policy against the extension of inadequate size lines, nor the extension of lines across private property.