2000_0925_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 9/25/00 ITEM NO.: H- 1 Department Approval: Manager Reviewed: Agenda Section: 1 � Hearings Item Description: Continued public hearings for special assessments Background: On September 11, 2000, the City Council held public hearings to consider the assessmentrollsforeightpublicimprovementprojects. A copy of the project list is attached. At the public hearings, each individual assessment roll was presented and discussed. A separate hearing was held for each improvement, at which time testimony was taken from affected property owners. Following each hearing, the Council continued final action to the September 25, 2000 meeting. The following is a description of each of the objections raised on September 11, 2000 followed by a staff analysis and recommendation. This information is summarized in the attached table. 1. Written Objection: Betty Salmonson- Peterson, 195 Woodlynn Avenue PIN and Proposed Assessment: 01-29-23-11-0003 $3,462.25 Mrs. Salmonson- Peterson questioned the assessable footage of 220 feet, when her actual length of curb in front of her property is 205 feet. It is our policy to assess actual properiy frontage along right-of-way, not length of street. The property in question is 112,458 square feet (2.5 acres), and could easily be subdivided. Recommendation: No change in Assessment 2. Written Obj ection: M. Filister- Rosedale Estates Apartments, 2735, 2'155, 2855, & 2835 Rice Street . The first notice for this property's assessment was not calculated at the correct rate. We have revised the rolls and renoticed the properry owner reflecting the following: PIN and Proposed Assessment First notice (35%) Corrected Notice (100%) 01-29-23-41-0001 $17,736.16 $50,674.75 01-29-23-44-0001 $13,72b.25 539,217.85 The property does not access the newly reconstructed Woodbridge Street. In addition, previous Council action has limited the use of this frontage to buffer and open space. Unless permission is granted by the City Council the frontage along Woodbridge Street cannot be developed. The owner has requested that we defer the assessment because the properry does not receive a benefit from the improvement.