Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Schoening illustrated the results of each method for various types of properties within the West <br />University Neighborhood. He said that staff recommended amending the method of apportioning assess- <br />ments to a method based equally upon alley frontage and property area because land use could be transitory <br />in nature and change between the initiation of an LID and the final assessment. He said assessing all costs <br />associated with alley improvements was recommended because of the uniqueness of alleys. He said the <br />tentative working agenda had a public hearing scheduled for April 12, 2004, and council action on May 10, <br />2004. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner stated he agreed with the second recommendation to assess all costs. He noted that for many <br />years Public Works had maintained a position that the alley assessment methodology needed to be amended <br />and specifically emphasized that land use was a major factor. He said he did not understand the current <br />recommendation that excluded land use as a factor in the apportionment method and could not support that <br />part of Ms. Bettman's motion. He asked for an explanation in writing of why Public Work's position on a <br />land use factor had changed. <br /> <br />Ms. Solomon asked when the West University Neighborhood alley improvement project was planned. Mr. <br />Schoening said the project was scheduled for the summer of 2005. He said the sooner the council acted, the <br />sooner property owners could be given information on the anticipated cost. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor arrived at 6:10 p.m. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly complimented the clarity of the information provided in the agenda packet. He said that all five of <br />the methods satisfied State requirements on specific benefit and the issue for the council was equity. He <br />agreed with Mr. Meisner's comments and stated he could not support the staff recommendation regarding <br />the apportionment methodology. He suggested an amendment to the motion that would request a method <br />that would take into account differences between residential types. He said there needed to be more equity <br />between single- and multi-family residential uses. He indicated support for full cost assessment to property <br />owners and assessing across the LID, rather than by segment. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap~ agreed with Mr. Meisner and Mr. Kelly and said the methodology should factor in the impact of <br />different uses. He asked if there was an assumption that each square foot of alley would cost the same, <br />regardless of the location and if the costs varied, would there be adjustments. Mr. Schoening replied that <br />costs would likely vary within the LID; however, it would be extremely difficult to structure a construction <br />contract on an alley-by-alley basis. He said the alley improvements would be bid as one project. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap~ asked if properties that abutted an alley automatically had alley access if they had street access. <br />Mr. Schoening said property that extended from the street to the alley would have alley access. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap~ said that the apportionment methodology should include land use factors that were weighted based <br />on the impact of different uses. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman commented that people who lived on alleys and had no alley access should not have to pay an <br />assessment to upgrade the alley, particularly when there were mixed uses along the alley that included multi- <br />family and commercial. She said the proposed methodology put a burden on single-family homes in an area <br />where single-family home ownership should be encouraged. She said the existing method with modified land <br />use factors could be the fairest approach if the access issue was addressed. She asked if those properties <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council March 8, 2004 Page 4 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />