Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Councilor Taylor hoped the council would approve the ordinance in accordance with the committee’s consensus recommendations. In regard to the item on which the committee did not reach consensus, she continued to prefer the area approach. Councilor Poling asked if a resident living on an unimproved street would be assessed less for a neighbor- hood collector than for a residential street. Mr. Schoening said the answer depended on the nature of the improvement. The theory behind the methodology was that everyone paid about the same. He acknowl- edged it was possible the assessment could be less because residents living on a collector would be assessed for ten feet and residents living on a local street would be assessed the full width, although the street width was likely to be 20 feet. Councilor Clark indicated his preference for the frontage approach. Councilors Ortiz, Pryor, and Zelenka indicated they had not yet reached a position on the issue of area versus frontage. Councilor Poling favored the half-frontage, half-area approach because it “struck a middle ground.” He referred to the examples provided by staff and pointed out there was not much difference in the cost of the assessment to the property owner. Regarding the issue of dead end streets and cul-de-sacs, Councilor Poling indicated he was willing to reduce the assessment but believed those property owners still benefited because they had to use other streets to reach their houses. He proposed they should be assessed 75 percent of the full assessment. Councilor Taylor believed the council should act before Councilor Solomon’s term ended, given all the work she had put into the issue. She agreed with Councilor Poling that residents living on cul-de-sacs and dead- ends benefited from road improvement projects and further did not have to put up with the construction involved. She supported charging those residents, and was willing to accept the combination frontage-area approach described in the agenda item summary. City Manager Ruiz indicated staff could return with three separate ordinances for the council to choose from on December 13. Councilor Clark was unable to support assessing residents who lived on already improved dead end streets and cul-de-sacs because those residents had already paid for the street in front of their house. Councilor Solomon indicated support for the combination frontage-area approach. She recalled the subcommittee was in unanimous agreement that those living on cul-de-sacs and dead-ends served by road that were to be improved should be assessed, and said she could support assessing those residents 75 percent of what residents directly benefitting would pay. Councilor Taylor did not think the assessment system would ever be totally fair. Referring to the Crest Drive improvement, she said many of those most insistent on improving the street did not live on it and did not have to pay anything. However, they had to use those streets to access their homes and benefitted as much as anyone. Councilor Pryor said he was tentatively inclined toward Ms. Solomon’s position regarding cul-de-sacs and dead-end streets. He asked how often there were improved cul-de-sacs served by unimproved streets. Mr. Schoening indicated that was a fairly common situation. MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 15, 2010 Page 3 Public Hearing