06/08/1981 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. e e is an embankment of approximately 35 to 50 feet; therefore, they are asking that these four lots be eliminated from the proposed assessment district. They feel that these four lots should not be assessed and if the council does make an assessment, it would not stand up against judicial determination. He noted that he only found out about this hearing seven or eight days ago. Carl Raynor, 2169 Stonecrest, stated that he had filed a remonstrance letter to the council regarding this improvement project. He indicated that he had received a letter from the Public Works Department stating that all owners of property within the proposed assessment district were being notified for the award of the contract and that the cost of the improvement would be paid by an assessment of the property owners benefited within the assessment district. He feels that any legal assessments from the Goodpasture Island Road improvements that might be made against those accumulative back line lot distances of those four properties should be prorated between the total 25 lots that are commonly influenced, not benefited by said assessments. Stonecrest Drive development has its own paving, storm sewer, curbs, gutters, and sidewalks where it is developed and it was paid for by the developer and the property owners. He indicated that he had distributed a letter to the council previously. There being no further testimony, public hearing was closed. Mr. Obie asked for a legal response to the comments. Mr. Sercombe stated that there would be some benefits such as improved access, dust control, etc., which could be seen as special benefit. Mr. Obie stated the decision on the assess- ment would be made by the assessment panel. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to award the bids as outlined by staff to the low bidders. Ms. Wooten asked if these would be unretractable at a later date. Mr. Gleason responded that the assessments can be considered at the time the assessments are being levied. If, however, there was to be a change in the code, they would need to wait six months before these projects could be reconsidered. Mr. Sercombe stated that Section 37 of the City Charter states that changes in the assessment procedures would not become effective for six months and after that time, the new process would begin. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. II. ORDINANCES FOR FIRST READING First reading of ordinances levying assessments and referral to Hearings Panel to be held June 15, 1981. CB 2311--An ordinance levying assessments for sanitary sewer to serve properties on Jefferson Street between Cheshire Avenue and River Street (80-19). MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 8, 1981 Page 14