04/12/1976 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e e e the property is annexed to the City collect an assessment equivalent to that of the property across the street as provided in Section 7.055 of the City Code, or (2) The property outside the City can be included in the assessment area now and the cost deferred until such time that the property is annexed to the City. Mr. Teitzel stated that the property was not included in the assessment due to the fact that staff was unsure of what the use of the property across the street would be and how much of it could be served by the sewer line because of the future use. Councilman Bradley inquired how much property within the County could be served by this sewer and have a deferred assessment and whether it was in the realm of probability that within the next ten years the property could be annexed. Mr. Teitzel replied that a strip approximately 100 feet wide could possibi1y be serviced by the sewer. This could reduce the assessment rate from B.6t per square foot to 7.4t per square foot. It is within the realm of probability that this property could be annexed. Councilman Bradley further inquired whether another line would be required on annexation to serve this property. Mr. Teitze1 replied a large portion of the property would require an additional sewer. Mr. Murray and Mr. Bradley stated they would like staff comment on the ramifications of this deferred assessment. This is to be supplied to the Committee of the Whole meeting on Wednesday, April 7, 1976. Mr. Bradley made a motion to include that area on the south side of Old Dillard ~oad in the assessm:nt and defer the collection until such time as the property lS annexed to the C1ty. Mr. Murray stated that he had reservations about the motion because of the financial aspects to the sewer utility fund and becaus~ of encouragement of outside development. The motion did not carry. Recommendation: Refer matter to City Council. . - Don Allen, Public Works Director, referred to Item 4 of the report, explaining it involved a sewer assessment in the Skyline Loop area annexed because of a heal th hazard. During the process, Public Works prepared est:imates and timetables on the sewer system. Those engineering decisions were prelimcinary and, in this particular case, major changes were made during the final design phase. A line was relocated in a street right-of-way that was a borderline street to the city and the property on the other side of the street was not annexed. The assesslfJent was based on properties which could use the system at this time, i.e. within the city limits. There is a possibility that a portion of the property outside the city could be serviced by the sewer system, depending upon what the owner Subsequently decides to do with the undeveloped property. City ordinances do allow deferral of assessments when in the best interests of the city. Rather than pay assessments for undeveloped property, deferral is recommended until such time as the property owner wishes to use the sewer system. The question, then is whether in this case the City wishes to be the "banker" in the interim for those who may wish to use the system at some future point. Mr. Allen cautioned there is some $380,000 invested at present in the deferred assessment program which goes into the sewer utility fund. He also explained there is a legal question involved - State law permits assessment: of property outside the city but city ordinances state that it is mandatory to annex before the sewer system can be used and property assessed. Assistant Manager explained that properties inside the city bear the full cost of the sewer. When others annex, they will be levied an equi valent am::>unt: or assessed for another sewer to serve them. If assessment is deferred, they would then pay the aID:;)unt of that deferred assessment:. If they are levied at: some future point in time, the current rate at that time can be charged. f"8 4/12/76 - 25