Laserfiche WebLink
Mayor & City Council <br />March 5, 1999 <br />Page 2 <br />Given the way that we noticed these projects and the fact that we would be assessing for <br />concrete curb and gutter only, I believe we would have a difficult time showing benefits <br />received in those portions of the project where curb and gutter was not actually installed. <br />In using LaBore Road as an example, from Arcade to Co. Rd. D, no curb and gutter <br />would have been installed. Therefore, I think it would be difficult to assess the properties <br />in that stretch of the roadway for an improvement they did not receive. Please keep in <br />mind that I consider this different from a situation where curb and gutter is not installed <br />for a small segment of a project where that property owner still receives the benefit of <br />improved drainage resulting from the balance of the installation. If you concur with this <br />concept, I believe we should add a general statement in the policy that assessments are <br />generally levied to those properties directly benefiting from an installed improvement. In <br />the case where a large segment of a project has a portion of an improvement deleted to <br />comply with engineering standards, then the City will review the appropriateness of <br />assessing in those cases. <br />♦ Adjustment of the application of the approximately rectangular lot formula. Presently, <br />this method is used only where the divergence between the front and rear lot lines is five <br />feet or less. Given some equity issues that we experienced on LaBore Road, we believe <br />this divergence should be increased to ten feet to enhance the equity of this policy. <br />I am expecting representation from the Cobblestone Townhome Association to be present at this <br />workshop. If you have any comments or questions in the meantime regarding these issues, <br />please let me know. <br />JRH:kpp <br />Enclosures <br />