Ordinance No. 19960 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Exhibit A MINUTES Local Improvement District Assessment Sidewalks on Emerald Street Between 26th Avenue and 25th Avenue Job # 2544 Contract #93-a$} February 16, 1994 Public Hearing Hearings Official Michael Walch convened the hearing at 6:oo p.m, He described the nature of the hearing and the procedures which wauld be followed, and he summarized the information he had received prior to the hearing. After this introduction, he introduced City Engineer Les Lyle. Mr. Lyle began by introducing Paul Klope and Bob Terrel of the Eugene Public Works staff. He then stated that this project had involved much effort to comply with both its topographical constraints and the provisions of the Eugene Code. He indicated that this project was unique in its history. The first time that bids had been requested, the City staff felt that the amounts were high, and decided to re-bid the project later during a time of less construction activity, The second set of bids were almost identical to the first, so the City agreed to fund part of the project cost to make the project a reality, Mr. Lyle also stated that the topography and cost constraints resulted in same sidewalk being placed in the street, which is unusual for City projects. Mr. Lyle recounted that at the hearing on formation of the local improvement district, City staff had promised property owners that assessment amounts would not exceed $1$ per front foot. Due to circumstances encountered during construction, the cast of the project was higher than projected, but Mr. Lyle stated that the assessments to property owners would not exceed the $1$ per front foot as originally promised. Mr. Lyle described three contacts with property owners which occurred before the hearing. City staff had received a letter from Philip and Judith Gall, which questioned whether the project had received the support of owners who would pay a majority of the assessment. Mr. Lyle indicated that at the hearing on the formation of the LID, a petition objecting to design changes was submitted far the project. Because of these changes, property owners who had previously supported the improvement signed the petition; however, at the hearing they indicated that they might change their position on the LID formation and were contacted by City staff. Same of these owners did change their position, and the Hearings Official reviewed these changes and found that property owners who would pay 54 % of the project costs as ultimately designed supported the project, Mr. Lyle also summarized a letter received from Hannah Wilson, which stated that the project benefited a wider area and thus the City and owners of property not abutting the improvements should share in the project costs. In response to these matters, Mr. Lyle pointed 1