11/12/1974 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

(0911) Council Bill No. 671 - Levying asses~ments for paving, sidew~lks, and sanit~ry , and storm sewers on Echo Hollow Road from Royal Avenue to . Barger Avenue (73-12), read the first time on October 29,1974 ~ and referred to Assessment Panel for hearing on November 4, 1974, was brought back ~ for consideration of 'Panel recommendations and read the second time by council bill number and title only, there being no council member present requesting that it be read in full. Mrs. Campbell moved seconded by Mr. Murray that the,bill b~ approved and given final passage. George H. Wilson, 1425 Echo Hollow Road, said that all property owners on Echo Hollow Road except four not contacted and three others who intended to pay the assessment off had indicated they would like to bond their assessments over a twenty-year period. Most were on social security or pensions, he said, and would probably be the first to be dropped if the recession now anticipateq occurred. Manager explained the difficulty of having marketable bond? if one project was bonded at a time. Accumulation of several projects for a 20-year period to at least $2.5 million would be desirable to gain a favorable interest rate. In reviewing the possibility of putting all Bancrofting on a 20-year schedule allowing people to select payment schedule of either 10 or 20 years, the number of projects over the past few years, and other factors, it was found that administrative cos'ts wOuld increase about 2%. Also, additional 'interest cost over a 20-year period on a typical assessment would be about twice that on a 10-year schedule. So it was felt preferable to expand the recently adopted hardship deferral program to help people under ~ this project or others who did not qualify under existing hardship qualifications. .~ Manager recommended, if the Council was seriously interested in going to a 20-year bond- ing program, that action on this assessment be delayed until there was opportunity to discuss the question in detail and get an, understanding of the problems involved. Or if the Council felt it appropriate, a liberalized hardship deferral process could be recommended in which case the assessment could be levied as proposed with assurance to the hardship cases on this project that action would be taken to make changes in the hardship deferral program that would make payments equal to what they_would be if a 20-year bonding program were in effect. All in all, he said, staff preferred not going to a 20-year Bancroft bonding program because of the creation of more costs to the prop- erty owner as well as -to' the city and 'might involve getting the statute changed raising the 7% interest rate limitation. (1018) G. B. Holverstott, 1470 Jay Street, read a letter received from the city with his assess- ment stating that assessment for abutting residential properties was based on 28-foot width, commercial property on 44-foot width. He asked that his assessment be changed to compensate for the bike path included in the project. He thought State money should be used to pay for that cost. Manager explained change in assessment policy in April 1974 to provide that residential properties on existing streets would be assessed on a 28-foot basis; in new subdivisions, on a 36-foot basis; and commercial properties as before, on a 44-foot basis. He said Mr. Holverstott's property was assessed-according to that policy. ~ Mr. Allen added that n~ State fu~ds were us~d for this project, t~at the entir~ cost other ~ than that assessed agalnst abuttlng propertles was from the bond lssue. He sald the last evaluation showed the formula for assessing streets fronting on commercial and industrial properties held true, and that regardless of the surface portion used, they were bene- fited more than residential properties, hence the full 44-foot width basis. He said the bike path was inside that 44 feet, not like Bailey Hill Road where the bike path was in addition to the 44 feet. The original design for Echo Hollow, he'$aid, would have been for a 40-foot street had the bike path not been included at the time of public hearing on bid award. However, city policy was to assess up to and including 44 feet for com- mercial and industrial properties because it was determined that arterials adjacent to those type properties should be 44 feet wide. (1131) Mr. Williams noted that regardless of inclusion of the bike path the surfaced area still could be used for access to Mr. Holverstott's property by either bikes or 'autos. In response to Councilwoman Beal, Manager explained that the portion of the street used for 'bike path was included in the assessment because it carne wi thin the 44-foot width .~; assessed to commercial properties. Residential properties were assessed only for 28~foot equivalent. Mr. Allen in further response to Councilwoman Beal explained the design of the street at various locations to accommodate parking, bikes, etc. (~5) John Peacher, 1050 Echo Hollow Road, asked for consideration of a 2Q-year Bancroft bonding ~ program or some other form of relief for hardship cases because of the people on fixed incomes faced with this assessment. He wondered if a portion of the assessment would be refunded if the bike path use was determined a hazard and discontinued. Manager said once the assessment was made it would stand regardless of any change in bike lanes. Mr. Peacher asked about anticipated change in Royal and Belt Line intersection which would change traffic patterns and make Echo Hollow more of a commercial street, to which Mr. Williams answered that it was considered a commercial street at this time, still resi- dential properties were assessed only for the 28-foot width. Mr. Williams added that there would be consideration of hardship cases on this project. 39+ 11/12/74 - 19