Resolution No. 4488 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

would have been done if the private sewer had been constructed by the City and an assessment already paid. Ms. Thompson asked to add additional comments. Ms. Thompson reported that she was still disturbed by the miscommunication that she felt occurred. Ms. Thompson felt that the original explanation that properties connected to existing sewers were not specially benefited was the correct interpretation of the law. Ms. Thompson also questioned the validity of extending a public sewer down Green Lane. According to Ms. Thompson's understanding, the line was only being extended to serve a few properties at the end of Green Lane, which she believed could have been served from a different location, Ms. Thompson also felt that she and her neighbors were the only ones being asked to pay the cost even though they were not benefited. A discussion ensued concerning the property across Green Lane from the Thompson and Sailada property. Ms Thompson described this property as being owned by the school district, and as not being assessed because it was vacant. Ms. Cahill responded for the City, stating that she believed that the school property was being assessed. Ms Cahill stated that it has been the City's policy to assess school property, even if it were vacant, and that she was not aware of any change in the policy. Ms. Cahill also pointed out that notice of the proposed hearing had been published, as required. While the service station had not received the courtesy letter that is usually sent to property owners, notice has been given through publication in the newspapers. Ms. Thompson closed with a request that the engineering decisions leading up to the decision to place a line down Green Lane be revisited. Ms. Thompson felt that the necessary services could be provided with a different line. Acting City Engineer Jeff Lankston and other staff members examined the plans and reported that although the alternative alignment along River Road appears to be approximately the same length, there may not be sufficient depth in the line in Hunsaker (the only alternative street available) to serve property along River Road. Staff also noted that existing physical conditions along River Road could make construction costs higher. Staff concluded by promising that they would review alternative alignments. There being no further testimony, the hearing closed at 7:35, with a promise by Acting Chief Engineer Jeff Lankston to investigate and report to the hearings officer whether the school property across Green Lane was actually subject to assessment. Minutes, May 15, 1996 Public Hearing, River Road Sewer Basins U, X and S Page 4