03/10/1975 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e e e Don Reed, 1715 Bailey Hill Road, objected to assessment against property in his owner- ship also on the basis that a few people were paying for an improvement to serve other people who had the need for it. He said there was no parking on the street now ana it was his understanding that access to the street would be limited. Mr. Gilman said driveway access would have to be reviewed by the traffic engineer to provide the best possible location. Although the city would prefer to limit access as much as possible, he said, it could not deny access. Councilman Williams expressed concern about assessing industrial property on a 44-foot basis when that property was to be phased into residential zoning. He wondered about an assessment formula that would take into consideration 44-foot versus 28-foot (assessment for residential property) and tying in commercial and industrial use over the life of the paving - whether at the end of that time the extra assessment because of industrial use had in fact been used up. Mr. Gilman. said that from a design standpoint about 15 to 20 years use could be expected before major maintenance of street paving would be required. The extra assessment against industrial prop- erties paid not only for extra width but also for extra strength for heavier traffic anticipated, he said, and he felt that heavier use would have used up the life of the improvement for which the assessment was made. Robert Stanley, 1625 Bailey Hill Road, wondered why bike paths were provided in the project when there was only one bike owned on that street. He wondered too about the 20 feet on the west side of Bailey Hill that was on deeded land, and he asked for clarification of the "second" assessment. Mr. Gilman explained that the bike path was part of the Bikeway Master Plan recently adopted by the Council. It was a major link in the bike route to connect to one planned along the Amazon Channel. He said that the "deeded land" referred to by Mr. Stanley was typical of county records from years back. Property descriptions on deeds read "to the center line of a right-of-way, except that portion within" a county road. He said all of the road was publicly dedicated even though the deeds might read "to the centerline." with regard to the "second assessment," Mr. Gilman explained that Mr. Stanley's property was assessed on the basis of 28 feet. The difference between that amount and what would have been assessed on the basis of 36 feet was deferred, to be assessed only if and when the property was further developed in the future. Mr. Davis asked what assessment other properties on the street were paying, and Mr. Gilman presented a map on which all properties with respective assessments were shown. were friends of long- issue nor did he (Mr. Williams) Mr. Stanley said he was in a residential neigh- to be considered by the Councilman williams for the record said he and Mr. Stanley standing but there had been no prehearing contacts on this feel his judgment was impaired because of that friendship. trying to point out the disadvantage of an arterial street borhood, but Mr. williams responded that the only question panel was that of assessments. Judy Reed, 1715 Bailey Hill Road, said she thought the general city budget should include improvement and maintenance of streets. She said she realized also they would have to pay again when any further improvement was made to the street abut- ting their property. And she thought there should be some traffic control at the intersection of Bailey Hill and 11th Avenue because of the difficulty in getting onto 11th. Mr. Williams noted the substantial subsidy carried by general tax funds in picking up the difference between the 28-foot and 44-foot widths for residential properties. And he said that regardless of when additional work was done on the street, it would be at city expense, even though he recognized that sooner or later that policy would have to be re-examined. Mr. Haws added that to change the assessment policy at this time would not be fair to other citizens , who had already pa.id for street improvements abutting their properties. with re- 'gard to the traffic control at 11th and Bailey Hill, Mr. Gilman said a light would be installed at that intersection in conjunction with improvement of West 11th from Seneca to Bailey Hill. Recommendation: Levy assessments as proposed. 3/10/75 - 21 125