CC Minutes - 12/078/98 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ms. Taylor said that she was concerned about assessment issues raised about the project and suggested that approval to proceed with the project be postponed until the council dealt with changing City policies regarding assessments. Ms. Nathanson asked how the proposed motion differed from normal LID development processes because she hoped to avoid having the council hold a series of public hearings on the same topic. Mr. Lyle replied that he understood the motion to require that the council conduct a public hearing following completion of the design phase of the project to determine if it was satisfying concerns raised by property owners, and that the proposed work session was likely intended to consider the public feedback and assessment issues. He said that, according to the City Code, hearings regarding the formation of an LID were delegated to a Hearings Official. Ms. Nathanson said that it was her experience that hearings before a Hearings Official were useful and often resulted in modifications and conditions being imposed on proposed designs with a level of detail not generally possible by the City Council. Ms. Nathanson observed that the council normally was informed of how traffic and/or assessments affected residential properties, but that the current situation involved effects on income-producing, business property. Mr. Fart stated that he believed the council was at a critical juncture in the consideration of policies about improvement assessments. He suggested that the delay resulting from the proposed motion could allow time for the council to work on changing the policies. Mr. Meisner noted that minutes of the hearing before the Hearings Official regarding the project in question included testimony that a golf course should not be assessed for street improvements because the property was "not developable." He asked if such assessments were normally made. Mr. Lyle replied that the council had the ability to assess property similar to a golf course and that exemptions for them were not provided. Mr. Laue suggested that the council proceed cautiously in proposing that there be a wholesale review of assessment policies for street improvements. He said he did not believe it was fair to imply that there could be a radical change in the financing of how streets were built or improved, because most existing streets in the City had been created through assessments on abutting property and changes would involve equity issues for those who had already paid such assessments. Mr. Tollenaar said that he agreed with Mr. Laue. He pointed out that no residential property would be assessed for the street improvements in the project under consideration. He said he believed the project was badly needed and that it be completed. Mr. Fart said that he believed street improvements were more expensive than they had been in the past and that it was appropriate to evaluate current assessment policies. Mayor Torrey stated that he believed the council would need to consider assessment policies in the future and that paying for municipal infrastructure was a significant issue. He said he supported the motion under consideration. MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 7, 1998 Page 9 7:30 p.m.