Ordinance No. 19932 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

EXHIBIT B FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS SUBJECT: PAVING, CURBS, SIDEWALKS AND STORM DRAIN ON MARSHALL AVENUE FROM 204 FEET EAST OF HUGHES STREET T4 ECHO HOLLOW ROAD, AND ON TANSY STREET FROM MARSHALL AVENUE TU 254-FEET SOUTH OF MARSHALL AVENUE 4CONTRACT #92-27~ {JOB #2763y BACKGROUND Design and bidding authority for this project was initiated by Council Motion January 13, 1992. The formation of the Local Improvement District and adoption of the hearings official, minutes, findings and recommendations was approved by the City Council an July 27, 1992 in Council Resolution #4338. The project construction has been .completed, and all contract payments have been made. The project costs have been assimilated and distributed in accordance with Chapter 7 of the Eugene Code. Property owners within the LID will bear 48.9 percent of the cast for the local improvement district tLID~. The property owners were notified of the final assessment hearing ten X10} days prior to the hearing. PROJECT The project included 4,100-lineal feet of 36-foot wide paving on Marshall Avenue, curb and gutters, and sidewalks, with short segments of 28-foot wide paving on the non- collector designated street segments of Marshall Avenue and Taney Street. The City is funding the non-assessable width and depth, all major storm drains, and the cost of the intersections. ASSESSMENT Under City of Eugene assessment policy, 48.9 percent of the improvement costs will be distributed to the abutting property owners. Below are the final unit assessable costs. 20-foot paving 28-foot paving 36-foot paving 7" thick driveway apron 5" thick driveway apron 5-foot sidewalk $ 39.641front foot $ 60.761front foot $ 50.461front foot $ 12.151front foot $ 12.151E ro nt foot $ 12.151front foot Front foot cost for 36-foot paving is less than the 28-foot paving because there are only two lots being assessed at the 36-foot rate. One of the lots is a panhandle lot with only 15-foot of frontage. Using 60-feet as the minimum assessable frontage for this parcel, as required by the Eugene Code, and the fiull frontage for the other parcel, the total assessable frontage is greater than the actual number of front feet. Accordingly, the resultant cost per front foot is less for the 36 foot paving than for the 28~foot paving. Those properties fronting the 28-foot paving all have frontages greater than 60-feet, thus the resultant frontage has less effect on the cost per front foot. The cast distribution is in accordance with Eugene Code 7.175~2~~b}1.b.~1 ~ and {2). F~nd~ngs and Recommendations - f