11/10/1980 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

- There being no further testimony, public hearing was closed. . The City Council discussed when they would be taking action on items I.A and I.B of this evening's meeting. Council consensus was to hold a meeting in place of the previously canceled one at 11:30 a.m., November 12, 1980, to discuss these two items. Consensus was to hold this item over to November 12, 1980. C. Public Works Bid Awards (tabulations attached) v - Mr. Henry stated that these bids were opened November 4, 1980, and staff is recommending that bids be awarded for projects 1, 2, and 4, and that project 3 be held over. He introduced Don Allen, Public Works, to provide additional informat ion. Mr. Allen stated that they had received one letter of protest in regard to project 4--the storm sewer between Cal Young Road and Sharon Way from Woodside Drive to 810 feet east. The letter cites the reason for the protest, which is the method of assessment. The owners find it discriminatory. This is a 60-percent petition, but only 33 percent is being assessed due to subdivisions. The counteroffer in the letter was that no assessment be levied across the vacant property in exchange for the City receiving the necessary easement to put the sewer across their tax lot, but this would be against City policy. This assessment could be deferred until the property is developed. Mr. Allen stated . that project 1 is a combination petition and council-initiated project. Public hearing was opened. In regard to project 2, Allen Whittington, 585,Oakway, stated that this sanitary sewer is required by Public Works and he is in favor. He would suggest that the low bids be taken before the weather gets bad since it will be cheaper if it is done sooner. In regard to project 4, Iris Chapman, PO Box 336, Lowell, stated that they had submitted a letter with an offer of compromise to the City. People across the street from their property will have their assessment paid and she does not see why they have to pay for the one on their property. She has no objection to having the sewer, only to paying for it. There is now a ditch that drains their property. She feels this is unfair taxation and this is not the way that it should be done. She feels if there were a reason for it, the City would get around its rules and take care of it. There being no further testimony, public hearing was closed. Mr. Allen stated that the assessment regarding project 4 is in conformance with the City ordinance and policies. . MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 10, 1980 Page 14