06/22/1977 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. Mr. Teitzel explained that this project was initiated by the City Council, originally in 1968, however the formal initiation for the.present project was in April of 1976 with an award of the bid in May of 1976. The contract price was $256,444.15 with an estimated assessment for 28-foot paving of $18.70 per front foot, 36-foot paving $22.83 per front foot, for one-half of the sidewalks $2.54 per front foot and for the whole sidewalk $5.22 per front foot, 5-inch concrete driveways $1.07 per square foot, asphaltic concrete driveways $.69 per square foot, total city cost $117,586.75. Mr. Haws asked why the contract price was higher than the estimated cost and yet the assessments had gone down. Mr. Teitzel stated that the majority of the extra cost was City cost. Jim Lemert of 10 East 40th Avenue spoke stating that he did call in to be placed on the agenda for the meeting, however, his name did not appear on the agenda. Mr. Lemert stated that he realized what he had to say would have little effect on the decision of the panel, but it needed to be said. 'He stated he felt the City's assessment procedures need to be made fairer and Willamette Street epitomizes this need. He stated that most of the people paying this assessment do not have direct access to the street, all it is to them is a very noisy nuisance. He further stated that the beneficiaries of the South Willamette paving are not the people paying for it but the developments to the south. Mr. Lemert stated that the street did need the improvement, however, those who benefit will not be paying. He stated that he felt the fair share of the burden should be placed on the people who created the burden. He further stated that the South Hills Association supports the proposed development charge soon to be before the Council. e John Miller spoke stating that his complaint was with regard to the loss of his survey stakes, and also that the sidewalk around 47th Avenue destroyed a number of his plants inside his property line. Mr. Miller stated that the street should have been put in when Breeden Bros. started developing the area because then the cost would have been charged to all lots in the area. He further stated he wanted an explanation as to why the City charges the property owner for the improvements instead of putting it on the tax rolls. Mrs. Joy S. Goolsby spoke with regard to information she had received in a call to the office before her assessment notice was received. She stated that she was told her sidewalk would cost $224 and when she received her statement for her assessment it was instead $278.24. Mrs. Goolsby further stated that she had written a lengthy letter to the Council on May 16 and felt the points in this letter should be considered. She stated that she understood the property owners are charged for the engineering and financing and she could not understand why this would be. She further could not understand why when the City had all of the extra costs for an arterial street the City came up with only 40 percent of the cost and the property owners pay 60 percent. Mrs. Goolsby further stated that her driveway had to be lowered for the benefit of the townhouses on the west side of Willamette Street. Mrs. Goolsby asked Mr. Teitzel why there was a descrepancy in the sidewalk cost from the telephone to. the assessment statement. Mr. Teitzel stated that he did not see anything in the file to indicate why this was so, however, that is the reason it is difficult to give an estimated cost. e Mrs. Goolsby stated she would like to propose that this assessment be delayed until the Assessment Study Committee has presented their findings and proposals to the Council. 6/20/77 - Page 3 503