Laserfiche WebLink
these matters were addressed in this case. Doris Maddox asked about the amount of <br />frontage assessed for her two narrow lots, and was advised that they were being <br />assessed as a single flag lot with the minimum ~~ feet of frontage. Dora! King and <br />Idabelle Goode both stated that residents should not be assessed a second time for paving <br />the same street, but staff explained that the city had never assessed property owners for <br />improvements on these streets; staff had no information regarding how the existing <br />asphalt mat was paid far. Other questions regarding particular parcels and the deferral <br />and financing programs available were answered by staff to the satisfaction of the <br />citizens present. <br />The statements by the members of the public present at the hearing were generally <br />favorable. Concerns were expressed about the project cast, but in this case the project <br />costs are comparable to those estimated at the previous hearing, and are similar to or <br />Tower than the costs of similarly-sized projects. No other objections to the proposed <br />assessment were voiced at the public hearing. <br />The Hearings Official finds that notice of the public hearing was provided and the public <br />hearing conducted in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Eugene Code. The <br />Hearings Official further finds that the proposed assessments are calculated in accordance <br />with the Eugene Code, and are comparable to the estimates of assessments given at the <br />previous public hearing. <br />The Hearings Official also finds that the project is one for which the assessments are for <br />a local improvement as set forth in ORS 31 x.41 Q because: <br />{ 1 ~ The assessments do not exceed actual costs; <br />{2~ The assessments are imposed for a capital construction project which <br />provides a specific benefit for a specific property or rectifies the problem <br />caused by a specific property; <br />{3~ The assessments are imposed in a single assessment upon completion of <br />the project; and <br />{4~ The assessments allow the property owners to elect to pay the assessment <br />with interest over at least ten {10y years. <br />Therefore, the Hearings Official recommends that the City Council adopt an ordinance for <br />assessment as set forth by the City Engineer. <br />Respectfully submitted, <br />' ~ . ~"+ <br />Michael C. tNalch <br />Hearings Official <br />Findings and Recommendations - 3 <br />