Ordinance No. 19757 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Page ~ Findings & Recommendations CURRENT ISSUES -Other 1. Tax lot 17-04-24-23-7200, owned by Steve and Roberta Thompson and Clyde B. & Beulah M. Webber has two separate dwelling units. Early in the project, staff indicated to the Thompsons that two service connection points would be installed so that the Thompsons could construct separate services to each building as is required by the current plumbing code and the Council of American Building Officials ~CABO} code. A "wye" was provided to their property and the proposed assessment includes two service line charges as per EC 7.175.5~b}. Mr. Thompson testified at the public hearing. He has also submitted additional information which is part of the attachments to these Findings and Recommendations. As noted in the Minutes, Mr. Thompsan's assertion about other, similar properties not having two sewer connections is correct. It is the recommendation of the Hearings Official that the Thompson property be assessed far only one service line. where it is now known to the City that some properties with two structures had only one connection, it is inappropriate to charge Mr. Thompson for two such connections. 2. Two properties adjacent to the existing sewer which was assessed last October are also adjacent to sewers built in 1990 along the back portion of their properties. Both Larry Lauderdale X17-04-14-32-700} and Alice Phillips (17-04-14-32-200} have expressed their opposition to the fact that they are now being assessed additional lateral costs for property that is within the 1G0 feet lateral area of the new construction but was beyond the 160 foot area for the existing sewer previously assessed. As Hated in the Minutes, the Lauderdale and Phillips properties face Bushnell. In response to inquiry from the Hearings Official, Michelle Cahill has reviewed the circumstances of these properties with other city officials. It appears that these properties are large enough that each could be subdivided, with access onto the Berwin cul-de- sac. Therefore, the Hearings Official recommends that these properties be assessed. 3. The Metropolitan Waste management Commission ~'.[WMC}Fee which is discussed later in this report is of concern to some property owners. This fee is Hat a portion of the assessment computation but we are using the assessment notification and collection process tv collect the fee for the MWMC. 4. One other item considered in the calculation of assessments was the proportion of the total lot to the levy area. In a few instances the lateral area and the levy area are the same because the size of the whole lot indicates it could be further developed and the remainder of the levy due charged at that time. Carol Zorn owns a panhandle lot on North Park X17-04-23-23-4101} which fits this criteria, Tom Zorn has indicated that lot 4101 would be joined with others for further development in the future. Even if this was not the case the