01/24/1983 Meeting (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e e e Mr. Gleason introduced Bert Teitzel, City Engineer. Mr. Teitzel used visual materials to explain the assessments. He said that the council had previously voted to take additional public testimony before the final reading of this ordinance. He reviewed the history of the improvements, noting that the council had voted on May 11, 1981, to authorize construction of the project and that the council had held a public hearing at the time of the contract award on June 8, 1981. Mr. Teitzel said at that hearing the council had discussed the lack of benefit to some lots from the improvements. The council did determine at that time that all lots were to be included in the assessment district. He stated that the Council Hearing Panel had held a hearing on the assessments on October 18, 1982; had discussed the lack of benefit to several lots; and had referred the matter to the City Attorney's Office. Mr. Teitzel said that on October 25, 1982, the City Attorney's Office had recommended that four lots on the top of a rock cliff above the improved roadway be deleted from the assessment, due to lack of benefit. He noted that the City Attorney's opinion stated that the rest of the parcels included in the assessment did benefit from the assessment. Mr. Teitzel said that action had been delayed on the assessments for the Flintridge Village portion of the project, until the November 18, 1982, Hearings Panel hearing, since residents of Flintridge Village had received inadequate notice of the hearing. Mr. Teitzel listed the benefits generally provided by street improvements: access to a paved street, pedestrian and bicycle safety, drainage control, noise abatement, and dust control. He noted that the matter before the council included assessments for double-frontage lots and noted that the City histor- ically has assessed these lots and recent assessments approved by the council for improvements on Bailey Hill Road and Crescent Avenue had also included double-frontage assessments. Mr. Teitzel said that the cost of the improvements was $196,712.82, of which the cost to the City was $93,538.97 and the cost to be assessed was $103,173.85. Councilors Ball and Hansen disqualified themselves from discussion or voting on this matter due to possible conflicts of interest. Both councilors temporarily left the meeting. Public hearing was opened. There was no testimony in favor of levying the assessments. The following testified in opposition to the levy. Harold Greer, 2250 Tabor Street, represented property he owned at 1260 Good- pasture lsland Road. He referred to a letter he had submitted to the City Council on January 21, 1983, and noted that councilors should have received copies of the letter. He said that he was willing to pay his fair share of improvements but that he felt the proposed assessment was more than a fair share. He said there had not been dust or drainage problems before the improve- ments. He noted that the City had not provided a wide enough apron for his driveway, so that he did not have proper access to pavement. He said that noise levels had not dropped as a result of the improvements and that, if anything, cars went faster. He said that the fill for sidewalks that had been installed was already eroding. He noted that a large fir tree had been cut. He said that a bus turnout had been installed as part of the improvements but that the bus no longer ran on Goodpasture Island Road. Mr. Greer said he was charged the full commerical rate for improvements, despite the fact that he could not sell the property as commercial. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 24, 1983 Page 6