Laserfiche WebLink
Acting City Engineer Jeff Lankston explained that the portion of tax lot 1302 that <br />was proposed for assessment was proposed because it was under common ownership with <br />tax lot 1300 and was within 160 feet of the newly constructed sewer. Mr. Lankston said <br />that the city would examine the agreement between the city and Mr. Roderick, and would <br />deliver a response to the Hearings Official. <br />Mr. Roderick also pointed out that the city had erred in the calculation of the area <br />of lot 1300, since they had deducted the area of lot 1302 being assessed from the area of <br />lot 1340. City staff member Michelle Cahill acknowledged the error, but explained that <br />the error had been discovered after the notice of the final assessment The cost of <br />correcting the error through renotification was greater than the cost of overlooking the <br />miscalculation. <br />The next member of the public to speak was Don Leslie. Mr. Leslie was <br />concerned because two of his neighbors have large rectangular lots that extend the entire <br />distance between two streets. A portion of both lots were assessed for previously <br />constructed sewers. The lots are now being assessed for the sewers constructed this year. <br />Mr. Lankston explained that different portions of the lots are being assessed. The <br />property owners could have divided the lots after the previous assessment if they wished, <br />which would have caused the city to defer the present assessment on the newly created <br />undeveloped lot. The property owners chose not to divide the property and therefore the <br />properties are subject to this second assessment. <br />No other attendees wished to address the hearing. Therefore, the hearing <br />concluded at 5:35 p.m. <br />Minutes -LID Finai Assessment Hearing Apri117,1996 Page 5 <br />