Item 2C: Res/LID-Debrick Road - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Exhibit A MINUTES Local Improvement District Formation Paving, Construction, Curbs, Gutters, Sidewalks and Stormwater Drainage on Debrick Road from Clinton Drive to Valley Butte Drive, and on Butte Lane from Clinton Drive to 700 Feet South. June 23, 2005 Public Hearing Hearings Official Milo Mecham convened the hearing at 6:02 P.m. He described the subject matter of the hearing and procedures to be followed at the hearing. Present at the hearing representing the City of Eugene was Project Manager Terry Colvin. Also present was Principal Engineer Paul Klope. Project Engineer Terry Colvin began the City's presentation by briefly describing the condition of the street. Debrick Lane is a series of dusty potholes, an unsurfaced lane with drainage problems. Owners of more than seventy percent of the assessable properties petitioned for the improvements to be made. Mr. Colvin described the proposed improvements. The portion of Butte Drive from Clinton to Debrick will be improved with a 21 foot paving width and have a raised crosswalk installed. The improvements on Debrick, and on the remainder of Butte Drive will include 28 foot wide paving. All of the project will include curbs, gutters, sidewalks and installation of a storm water drainage system. Mr. Colvin described the estimated proposed assessments. In accordance with existing Council policies, property owners will be assessed for a minimum of 50 feet of front footage, and a maximum of 100 feet. The proposed assessments will include only assessments for the street paving and the sidewalks. After Mr. Colvin had concluded his introduction, attending property owners were invited to ask questions. The first property owner to ask a question was Stephanie Cleveland. Ms. Cleveland inquired as to the comparative cost of this project and other, similar projects. Mr. Colvin responded that the price of the bid was comparable to other bids, that the City was very satisfied with the expected cost of the project. Mr. Colvin explained that the bid was similar to the estimated cost two years ago when the first estimates were done. Ms. Cleveland asked what the estimated assessments would be for her property. Mr. Colvin provided the assessments, including the portion that would be a delayed assessment. Ms. Cleveland asked what plans had been made for traffic flow during the project. Mr. Colvin responded that the contractor is required to maintain access to the properties while the work is being done. There maybe a temporary closure of up to four hours, but there should not be any long term problems. Mr. Klope added that the contractor may ask the property owners if special arrangements can be made, so that the