Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance No. 19831ORDINANCE NO. ~Cjg~, i AN ORDINANCE LEVYING ASSESSMENTS FOR EXISTING SANITARY SEWERS IN THE SANTA CLARA AREA; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. FINDINGS: In the exercise of its discretion to determine what is necessary or essential, the City Council has previously authorized the construction of a sanitary sewer system in the Santa Clara area. While the Council has always contemplated that the owners of abutting property would pay an equivalent assessment or receive a special benefit assessment based on the cost of an eight-inch sanitary sewer, prior to May 22, 1990, Council policy would not allow the abutting properties to connect to the constructed sanitary sewer without first agreeing to or annexing to the city. In Resolution No . ~-~~~ ado t ' p ed by the City Cauncll on March 2, 1992, the Council determined that certain real property in the Santa Clara area should be authorized to connect to existing sanitary sewers which had been constructed in anticipation of serving the abutting real property. Such property is generally described in that resolution and mare particularly described in Exhibit B attached hereto and by this reference incorporated therein. In 1991 the City Engineer received bids for the construction of other sanitary sewers in River Road area and based thereon has determined the cost to construct the equivalent of an eight-inch SCES oRDINANCE Page 1 sanitary sewer and accordin to the direction of Reso ~ g lution No . -~ ~~~ has ' proposed that the benef fitted property be assessed on the basis of such equivalency as provided in Section 7.174 of the Eugene Code, 1971 ~E.C.~ and E.C. 7.175~2~~b~5. The total City cost for the existing and planned sanitary sewers to serve Santa Clara area is projected to be $20 million of which $1,254,441.98 is to be assessed to and borne by the specially benef fitted property described in Exhibit B hereto. The costs for extra capacity of the River Road and Santa Clara areas Sanitary Sewers initially were paid for by federal grant and the City. The extra capacity constructed in existing sanitary sewer interceptor lines in the River Road and Santa Clara areas was done with the intention and determination that the City's costs of that extra capacity benefitted the property to be served by such interceptors and that the City's costs therefore would be equitably spread to all properties served within the River Road and Santa Clara areas. The $0.025 per square foot local Systems Development Charge ~SDC} included in the billing equitably spreads such extra capacity costs to all the properties in the River Road and Santa Clara areas. None of the revenue received from the $0.025 local SDC calculation will be used far projects to be constructed outside the River Road and Santa Clara areas nor to reimburse the City far projects it has constructed for other areas. The affected property is also obligated under E.C. 7.705 to pay a development charge for regional sewerage facilities prior to connection to the sanitary sewer ~regianal development charge, SCES ORDINANCE Page 2 Such charges may be paid in installments on the same basis as local improvement assessments. As a convenience to the owners of the affected property and as a means of avoiding multiple billings of accounts receivable to each affected property owner the notice of assessment and the obligations created by this Ordinance shall also include the local and regional development charge. A notice containing the information required by E.C. 7.185 has been posted on a bulletin board at City Hall and given by certified mail to the owners of the parcels of real property subject to the assessment at least ten days prior to the public hearing before the Hearings official. At the time and place specified therein, a Hearings Official received the report of the City Engineer and Finance Officer as required by E.C. 7.187~1~, heard all evidence and argument presented, fully considered the same and has reported his adopted findings to the City Council. In these proceedings far the formation of the local improvement district and the levying of special benefit assessments, the City has afforded the owners of the affected property the same notice, opportunity to be heard and all other rights and remedies which the owners of property within the city have under the Charter and ordinances of the city. The City Council has reviewed and considered the assessment report of the City Engineer and Finance Officer and the findings and summary of hearing prepared by the Hearings Official, and based thereon, SCES ORDINANCE Page 3 THE CITY of EUGENE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The summary of the hearing conducted by the Hearings official is hereby made a part of the Council's record in these proceedings, and the above f findings and the Hearings Official's findings, including those regarding compliance with E.C. 7.160 through 7.190, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference, are hereby adopted. Section 2. The eight-inch equivalent assessment for the existing sanitary sewer as declared in the Hearings Official's findings are hereby assessed against the parcels of land and lots hereinafter described in the amounts set opposite, respectively. Section 3. The City Council does hereby determine and assess each parcel of land and lot being within the described local improvement district as set forth on the assessment roll attached as Exhibit B hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Section 4. The City Council does hereby determine that each parcel of land or lot hereinabove described is specially benef fitted to the extent of the assessment set forth. The Finance officer shall give notice of the assessments to the owners of the assessed parcels and lots advising them the assessment may be paid in full, without interest, within ten days of the effective date of this ordinance. Assessments that remain unpaid after the ten day period are declared to be liens upon the respective lots or parcels of land against which said several amounts are assessed, and may be paid, with interest on the unpaid principal amount commencing ten days after the adoption of this ordinance: SCES ORDINANCE Page 4 4.1 in up to twenty semi-annual. installments, including principal and interest at the rate set by the City Manager as provided in E.C. 2.022 through 2.024; or 4.2 if the property owner so elects, in 120 monthly installments, including principal and interest at the rate set by the City Manager as provided in E.C. 2.022 through 2.024 lus a p service charge to be determined by the City Manger as provided in E.C. 2.020. Section 5. The parcels and lots herein assessed are also obligated to pay a development charge for local and regional sewerage facilities under E.C. 7.705. If the local and regional development charge is unpaid at the time the notice required by Section 4 of this Ordinance is sent, the local and regional development charge shall be included in the notice and shall be a lien against the property to be paid along with the assessment as provided in this Ordinance. Section 6. The City Recorder is directed to enter in the docket of City Liens a statement in connection with each unpaid assessment containing the fallowing: 6.1 A description of each lot, part of lot or acreage specially benefitted by the local improvement; 6.2 The name of the owner or reputed owner thereof or that the name of the owner is unknown; and 6.3 The sum assessed upon said property, the amount and date from which interest accrues, and the date of entering the same in the docket of City Liens. SCES ORDINANCE Page 5 The City Recorder is further directed to file with the county clerk a certified transcript of the assessments as required by ORS 224.090. Section 7. The assessments levied herein are characterized for purposes of the property tax limitation in section 11b, Art. XI of the Oregon Constitution as assessments for a local improvement not subject to the limitation of $10 per thousand of real market value. Section 8. Upon enactment of this ordinance, the Finance officer shall send notice of the assessments and local and regional development charges by first-class mail postage prepaid to the owners or reputed owner of the assessed parcels captaining the information required by. E.C. 7.190 and enclose therewith an application for paying the assessment in installments according to the terms set forth in Section 4 of this ordinance. The notice required herein shall also declare the Council's characterization of each assessment as a local improvement assessment under section 11b, Art. XI of the Oregon Constitution and advise that such characterization may only be challenged by the petition of ten interested taxpayers filed pursuant to ORS 305.583 within 60 days of the date of the notice sent. Such notice may also include information regarding programs that allow the deferral of payment of the assessments for qualified property owners. Section 9. The unpaid assessments and local and regional development charges and any assessment to be paid in installments that is in default shall be foreclosed as provided in E . C. 7.2 2 5 ~ 2 ~ SCES ORDINANCE Page 6 or collected as otherwise provided by law. Section 10. Proceeds from the payment or foreclosure of assessments levied by this Ordinance shall be deposited to the City funds as follows : 10.1 The determination to use a rate of $0.025/square foot of total lat for the local system development charge under E.C. 7.705 et seq is ratified and the proceeds therefrom shall be used to reimburse the City for the cost of the extra capacity required in the sewer interceptor to serve properties within the Santa Clara area; and 10.2 The proceeds from the regional development charge shall be deposited to the appropriate fund; and 10.3 The balance of the proceeds shall be deposited to the City funds which advanced the cost of the construction of the sanitary sewer system serving the properties assessed herein and may be used to reimburse the City for its costs in constructing said sanitary sewer system or to retire any indebtedness incurred by the City for that purpose. Section ll. The matters contained in this Ordinance affect the public health, safety and welfare concerning the City's ability to continue to finance the construction of sanitary sewers using its sewer utility funds. Therefore, an emergency is hereby declared to exist, and this Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage by the City Council and approval by the Mayor, retention by the Mayor for more than ten days, or readoption over a mayoral veto by two-thirds of all members of the SCES ORDINANCE Page 7 Council, Passed by the City Council this ~ day of , 1992 ~ /N ,~~% v City Recorder Approved by the Mayor this .~ day of , 1992 SCES ORDINANCE page g Exhibit A EXHIBIT A --ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET % interest an this assessment In the City ofEugene, lane County, Oregon, an ordinance levying assessments for; will begin Existing Sanitary Sewers in Santa Glare Area ITEM 1. Amount paid to Conlraclor; Contract # .. ~ ~ Job ' # 2~$l ~ „ ~ . Cap Proj. # - ~_....~~.,,,. Ordinance # ITEM 2. liquidated damages; ITEM 3, Other direct costs; '~ Due back `Ceardr # Date Descri Lion to Fund: r ..+......r.ww ~~ ~.._r r...~.y. ' ~ 8" a uivalent of trunk sewer ITEM 4. Subtotal; !tams 1 through 3 . ITEM 5. Basis for 6~ Finance Administration fee calculation, .~ Subtotal -Item 4; ~ ~~ Total nat subject to 6~ Finance Fae (Item 13c) <• $ ~~~,,.,,"_.~~~ s ITEM 5a. Finance costs subject la 6~ lea: _~~~. ~ . ,~3GGA~~,,~,Z,,~f~_ ITEM 5. Engineering charge; 21~ pf Item 4; (S" equivalent parlian is $ _ _ ~1°/a of 8" equivalent in item~3) $ _p_ $ _~_ .~ •+~.w.. ... --- .. ... r. ..~ww._ r . . n ..~.~w_~n.rn~..r.. , 8 . .~ ~ ..,,,~..~.... ITEM 7. 6°/a finance Administrative fee (fi°!o X Item 5a}; .' $ ITEM 8. interest onshort-term construction financing; $ -Q- ITEM 9. Other charges; ~ ~ $ ,. "'I",~~ - . ~ $ ITEM 10. Due to sewer fund for Local SDC: {Fund 532 } $ _. ~51,~3b1, 44 ITEM 11. MWMC Facility Equalization Fee ~ $ 72 824 40 ~ due to Fuld 332 } ~ Gi ty Admin. Fee; $3 X315.00} . ITEM 1Z. TpTAI A5SE5SMEIVT and SDC per ordinance $ 1 327 265.9$ ITEM 13. City's share of cost far completed contract Wark day ACK Direct Casts Eby Eng. Fee Interest Total ~cj ~dy taj f ~y $ $ $ $ ~$ $ $ $ Intarsactians $ $ ~ $ $ ` $ Total; Not subject to 6~ Finance Fee $ ~ $ $ $.,. " ~ """"'~"" $ ceordr # $ ITEM 14. Deferred Assessments included in Item 12, Eugene Code 7.197 , j . Advanced tram Fund ITEM 15. Costs not !;enable included in Item 12 - funded b Clt accounts. y y Extraterritorial ACK; ~ . Vacant auts)de Gity limits ACK; Bankrupt accounts ACK: ' NOTES; . ~R1SC -lip created prior to 111191 . ~ ~ 10191 FOl3M 11~74c. €xh~ibit ~ i` FINDINGS & RECD ATTGNS SUBJECT: EXISTING SANITARY SEWERS IN THE SANTA CLARA AREA; FORMATION OF THE EXISTING SEWER LOCAL IlVIPROVEMENT DISTRICT AND LEVYING FINAL ASSESSMENTS BACKGRGUND Dn March 2, 1992 City Council will consider formation ~f a Local Improvement District and the levying of the ~inaI assessment far the properties adjacent to existing sanitary sewers in the Santa Clara area. This district encompasses these parcels served by the existing interceptor and lateral sewers not previously assessed in the Santa Clara area, The properties taking sewer access from these facilities will be assessed for the equiva- lent of an S" sanitary sewer as per Eugene Code (EC} 7.055 and 7.175(2}(b}5, Also included in the billing with the assessments will be the local and re 'oval S terns l~ Ys Development Charges (SDC}. Prior to the February 12, 1992 hearing regarding the formation of the local improvement district and levying of assessments, praperiy owners who will bear the costs were notified by first-class mail on January 16, 1992. Also in January, Notice of Proposed Assessments were sent by certified mail. Dn February 4, a notice was placed in the local newspaper as per EC 7.165. Additionally, in August of 1991 a newsletter was sent to all pro erhies ,. P ~n Santa Clara expla~n~ng the upcoming LID formation and final assessments. In October 1991, property owners along the existing sewers in Santa Clara were invited to a public information session. Dn January 30,1992, another information session regardin g final assessments was held in Santa Clara. The existing sewers are projects constructed under several separate contracts; l B on Yr Street 90-d7, 2} Irving Road sewers (8$-a3} including various side streets in the area, and 3} Santa Clara interceptors 55-42. The "Byron" street system was initiated by the Ci Engineer on January 19, 1994. This project provided sewers on Byron Street south of Irvington Drive. The Irving Road project was initiated April 27,1987 by the City Engineer. The project consisted of sewers along Irving Road, Newcas#le Street, Santa Clara Avenue, Belmont Street and an easement area between Belmont Street and Santa Clara Avenue. The Santa Clara interceptor project was partially funded by an EPA grant and was initiated by City Council on January 24,1954. The interce for lines run p through Santa Clara along Greenwich Street; Canterbury Street; Irvington Drive; Wilkes Drive; northerly east of Honolulu Avenue; easterly south of Kingsbury Lane; and alon g Spring Creek Drxve. ASSF.,S.SMENTS Byron Street and Irving Raad projects serve properties within and outside the ci tY boundaries. Those properties served by the projects within City boundaries at the time of assessment were levied an assessment charge in accordance with existin Ci oli g tY P cY and Metro Plan requirements. All properties served by these systems were included in the unit cost calculation at the time of assessment. Assessments were not distributed to unincorporated properties and the cost was paid by City funds; thus S-inch a uivalent . q charge recovers these funds, The extra-terntonal extension outside the Ci was funded tY by the City sewer fund. The Santa Clara interceptor project was partiall funded b an Y Y EPA grant and the costs not funded by the grant were funded b the Ci sewer fund. Y tY The owners of all developed properties within the boundaries of the ro osed local . P P improvement district who have not prenously paid for the sewers will be assessed. Vacant properties outside the City will not be assessed. Vacant ro ernes annexed and . P P w~th~n the local improvement dxstr~ct boundaries wrll be assessed. In accordance with section EC 7.1755), properties within the local im rovement district . P wrll be charged a fee equivalent to what ~t wauId cost to busld a com arable 8-inch P diameter lateral system. To meet the equivalency desctx~ed in the Code, the S-inch equivalent assessment casts were calculated using the costs far constructin the sewers in . g, the three 1991 sewer construction basins ~n the liver Road area. To establish assess- ment units, the total costs incurred to date and an estimate of the costs that will be incurred prior to levying assessments were spread against the benelitted assessable area within the local improvement district formed for the 1991 construction. The total casts assessed do not include costs far trench patch and any other street re air or rehabilita- . P trap that are completed or may take place with the 1991 pro`ects. Throu an inter ov- ~ ~ g ernmental agreement, Lane County has indicated that they will a these costs for the . , , PY 1991 construction basins, and the ex~st~ng sewer distract ro ernes thus will receive an PP equivalent reduction. Based on the 1991 assessment units, the assessment casts were calculated usin the . g fallowing figures: Sanitary sewer lateral: $ 0.2157/square foot of area w/in 160' Sanitary sewer service: $ 811.82/each Local SDC: $ 0.0250/square foot of total lot area Regional SDC (MWMC) $ 222.00/single family dwelling unit Prior to the opening of the bids for the 1991 sewer construction in River Road and the agreement with Lane County to pay for road work estimated assessments were based on the following: Sanitary sewer lateral: $ 0.391square foot of area w/in 160' Sanitary sewer service: $ 1060.0%ach service available _2_ Total lot assessment: $ 0.065/square foot of total lot The preliminary total lot assessment included an estimate of the costs for treatment plant reimbursement for the capital costs the City bnanced to provide necessary capacity to serve River RoadlSanta Clara. These costs were paid for through City property taxes for bonds that were issued to i~inance the plant improvement. A final determination of the reimbursement costs was established by the Metropolitan '~astewater Management Commission ~MwMC) as a regional SDC. The City Council adopted it in January 1991 and included it in the revised SDC, code section effective July 1991. ante the 199 bids were opened and the Intergovernmental agreement was in place and the local and M~VMC SDC charges were adopted, the estimates were based on the following casts: ' Sanitary sewer lateral: $ 0.233/square foot of area w/in 160' Sanitary sewer service: $ 860.0%ach Local SDC: $ 0.025/square foot of total lot Regional SDC: $ 222.00/single family dwelling FINANCING All properties to be assessed will be eligible for 10-year assessment financing. Low income deferral programs are also available for those property owners that qualify. qualification will be determined at the signing the financing application. CURRENT ISSUES AND PUBLIC G A public hearing regarding these assessments was held on February 12,1992, at 6:30 p.m., in the McNutt Room of the City Hall Complex. Hearings Qf~cial Jack A. Billings presided. Prior to the public hearing, the Hearings afbcial received from the City Engineer a Memorandum outlining the above information. Minutes from the public hearing are attached hereto as Exhibit "1". In addition to the Memorandum and the public hearing, the Hearings afhcial has also received responses to some particular questions on specific properties from Les Lyle, City Engineer. The Hearings Official also personally observed a couple of the properties which are disputed. 1. Vacant Properties. An issue for several properties is whether or not they are 'vacant". If the property _3_ is vacant and outside the city, assessment for the sewer improvements will not occur until development. A. Swenson Pro r . As noted in the City Engineer's Memorandum and the Minutes of the public hearing, this is a 4.8b acre parcel an Irvington Drive. This property was acquired by the parents of the current owners in 194. The current owners testified that they believe this property is essentially vacant because the house on the property has no indoor toilet facility, is quite small and probably cvuld not be rented in the future, 'When the Hearings Officer viewed this property it appeared to be a small, reasonably well maintained house. The Hearings Dfl~iicial has seen other houses in the River RoadlSanta Clara area which appear in much worse repair. This property may not have any toilet facilities, but it appears to have electricity and a phone hook-up. This property has considerable frontage along Irvington Drive and was obviousl a homestead. This is Y evidenced by the many rhododendrons and other shrubs and a small garden, as well as irrigation equipment. The Hearings Official accepts the testimony of the current owners that there is no indoor plumbing facility. That is not to say, though, that a toilet could not be constructed inside the ,residence. There would be some expense in that improvement to the residence, but the owners face some expense in any event. If the owners decided not to maintain this residence, then they will face the expense of tearing it down and removing the debris. Therefore, it is the finding of the Hearings Dfbcial that this is a developed property far purposes of assessment. This property has been a family residence far nearly 50 years. The fact that it has same features which are undesirable, and which will probably need to be corrected before the property can be rented or sold, it might be true of many properties in the area. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the Hearings Off'icial that this property be treated as developed and assessed according to the staff recommen- dation. B. Thompson Proper~t . Again, as noted in the hearing memorandum and minutes, this is a lar er arcel of several acres in size. Mr. Thom son also sub ` g P p mgt ted written testimony and plans which are attached to the Minutes. This is a property which the Hearings Ofbcer also viewed personally. The Thom son . P residence ~s also located on Irvington Drive, on the front portion of the prapert~r. The property is relatively long and narrow and has a small barn and a couple of other structures toward the rear. There is a fenced area where a mule is kept. Byron Lane runs along the west side of the properfiy and turns toward the back portion of this property. Extending Byron Lane into this property as Mr. Thompson has proposed, would made development relatively easy. There is a house newly constructed across the -4~- street on Bryon and another just getting started. This is obviously an area which is experiencing same growth. As noted, Mr. Thompson's plan is to partition off the front portion of his property, with the residence, from the balance. Then, he could treat the remaining property as vacant and it would not be assessed until development might occur. Gtherwise, he believes the amount of assessment, given the size of his property, will require him to create a subdivi- sion. He believes this would be necessary in order to raise enough money to pay far the assessment of his property. The resolution of the City Council will establish the formation of the local improvement district, which included Mr. Thompson's property and provide that benefiting properties are parcels as they existed at the time of the adoption of the resolution. As of March 2, 1992, the likely date of adoption by the City Council, Mr. Thompson will have made little or no progress toward partition. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the Hearings Qfbcial that the Thompson property be assessed as recommended by staff. The Hearings Official certainly feels sympathy with the desire of Mr. Thompson to maintain the back portion his property far the benellt of his mule and recrearional opportunities for his grandchildren. However, if no brm date is established for determin- ing whether partition has occurred, then it would be essentially impossible for City Staff to determine the accessible area for projects of this size and assessment would either be delayed or difficult to determine. The Hearings Official will be recommending to the City Council with respect to the construction of sewers in Basins D, E, & F that the Council consider accepting the partition efforts of two property owners as sufl~cient. However, in both of those cases, the process of partition was commenced and the property owners had received prelimi- nary approval for partition prior to the notice of proposed assessment. Therefore, the Hearings official will be recommending to the City Council as to those specific proper- ties that partition be treated as complete for assessment purposes, 2. Cost of Assessment. Mr. Gary Hunter has raised the issue of whether Lane County should bear some responsibility for the fact that the ground water contamination problem in the Santa ClaralRiver Road area has occurred. Mr. Hunter's testimony suggested that he would be assessed approximately $3U,D~ for the four properties which he owns in the area. Therefore, he believes that the cost of the projects is simply too high for people to afford. However, according to information provided by the City Engineer, attached as Exha~bit "Z", it would appear that Mr. Hunter's testimony concerning the proposed assessment was partly based upon an earlier estimated cast of $4.39 per square foot. As noted above, _~_ the actual figure was $U.2157 per square foot. This would indicate that the probable assessment for Mr. Hunter's properties is about half of what he claimed. when this amount is factored over four properties, it does not appear unreasonable. Even if the assessment would seem high, Mr. Hunter does not point to any error of calculation by City Staff. Secondly, there is no mechanism whatsoever for the City of Eugene to obtain additional monies from Lane County on some theory of "negligence" or "moral responsibility". The Eugene Code and the agreements among the governmental units to require sewer hookup permits the city to assess these properties. The Cifiy has no standing whatsoever to bring any litigation against Lane County. whether individual property owners might have such standing or authority is debatable, but up to the property owners to determine. Therefore, it is the finding of the Hearings Ofhicial that the amounts levied in general and with regard to Mr. Hunter's properties specifically, have been conducted in accor- dance with the Eugene Cade. It is the recommendation of the Hearings Qflicial that the amounts be assessed as have been proposed by staff. 3. Others. em A. .F „ property. As noted in the Memorandum, Mr. Kempf owns two properties, one of which is vacant and not being assessed at this time. The proposed assessment includes the area of the developed lot within 160 feet of the sewer that is adjacent but not contiguous to the lot. Mr. Kempf states he gave the City an easement acquired on the vacant lot, in lieu of a sewer fee. There is an easement document which indicates no monetary compensation was paid far the property, nor does it indicate a waiver of fees. An estimate for the developed lot, indicates only that the farmer trunk sewer levy currently the local SDC) would be charged. The six-inch line along the vacant lot includes services far two properties. Therefore, staff believes that the six-inch line can serve the property and feels the proposed assessment is consistent with policy and practice. A letter received from Nlr. Kempf, which outlines his position is attached as Exhibit " 3". The Hearings Official has no information upon which to corroborate and confirm any agreement to waive fees in return for an easement. while Mr. Kempf may have sincerely concluded that such an agreement was reached, there is no documentation of any kind to support it. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the Hearings ~f~cial that the Kempf property be assessed as proposed. B. Tucker roe . Mr. Harald Tucker submitted a letter which was received after the public hearing and is attached as Exlu`bit "4". Mr. Tucker appears to be complaining that the amount of the assessment is high considering that the property only has a small living structure and some animals on it. There is also reference to the direction of drainage on the property. Attached as Exhibit "S" is a response to Mr. Tucker's comments from Les Lyle, City ng~neer. It would appear to the Hearings Qfhcial that Mr. Tucker's situation is very similar to the Swenson property, mentioned above. It is a several acre property with a very modest structure, which has been used in large part for agricultural purposes. Nevertheless, it is a developed property which now has sewer service. whether the amount of the current assessment prompts Mr. Tucker to develop the property remains to be seen. However, the fact that the property might "drain" in one direction or the other has na bearing on assessment. As with other properties, if other sewers are developed along the 'Dicker property, further assessment may occur. However, that is a matter that would be addressed at that time and does not bear on whether the current assessment is properly calculated. ' Therefore, it is the finding of the Hearings Df~cial that staff has properly assessed this property. The Hearings 4fhcial recommends that the City Council assess the property in accordance with staff recommendation. C. Bureker Pro e . As set forth in the Memorandum, the contention on behalf of Ms. Bureker is that this property is on the floodway map. Staff indicates that development can occur, so long as the finished floor elevation is greater than or equal to the 1 UO year flood elevations. The property owner's representative has indicated that this would require a substantial amount of ~ and that development will never occur. However, staff further paints out that other properties within the area and the city have been able to comply with flood plain requirements. Therefore, the Hearings Official cannot conclude that development is impossl~le. Therefore, it is the finding of the Hearings Official that this property is in the city and subject to assessment. The Hearings Cfflcial recommend that this grope be assessed . ~Y ~n accordance with staff recommendation. D. Other Pra ernes. The Hearings Dfhcial has considered the position of the following properties and recommends the adjustments as proposed by staff: Tharsby - No Assessment at this time Koziol - Na Assessment at this time Delcurta - Delete MWMC V~atson - Reduce the MwMC to $28.15 Fortner - Daly one service line charge _T_ RECO~IV~,~o~r It is the recommendation of the Hearings ~fhcial that the pity ~;ouncil consider the formation of a local improvement district and that it levy the final assessments for the properties within the district in accordance with the findings and recommendations set forth herein. Respectfully Submitted, J~~. p Jack A. Billings Hearings Official -S- FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL not attached; it rs on fide and available by written request to the City Recorder's Office.