CC MIN 1969 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

2 '5 `- estimate of benefit to the properties in relation to neighboring property as reported by the Director of Public Works ; that it was quite possible for a property owner to be doubly assessed if property benefited on frontages ex- tending into two different assessment districts . He further detailed the procedures of the 1911 Act under which this proposed assessment district is being formed , and that ultimately , after improvements installed , the Council will sit in effect as a Board to determine if assessments are fair . He also indicated improvements of a different nature for Jefferson Avenue might be proposed , which might possibly require some participation of this same property for benefits derived , but again stressed point that Council ultimately deter- mined the benefit and share of costs . In reply to questions as to other benefits to be derived from proposed improve- ments , besides access , Director of Public Works advised of the street work , curbs , gutters ( no sidewalks ) storm drainage work , catch basin, fire hydrant , etc . He also felt it would be possible to obtain the non-access strip from property owners having frontages on Jefferson Avenue if Council so desired , He also informed Council that , after termination of the first proposed Improve - ment District , property owners had been encouraged to proceed with their own improvements , but not all had agreed . Mr . Frank , being asked whether he would object to his full share of costs of improvements on Bel Air Way, if he were assured of being precluded from any other as - sessments for Jefferson , Avenue , advised he would not object . He outlined , however , that other property owners owned 50T -60T frontages on Bel Air Way while he only had entry access besides having to maintain a 150 , driveway , Councilman Henderson questioned effect of taking evidence in this hearing , if Council granted a continuance as requested by one of the property owners unable to attend this hearing . Director of Public Works stated Mr . Harder had indicated to him personally that he favored proceeding with this District . Russell A . Torrey , 14 Bel Air Way , owner of Lot 4i , in identical circumstance as that of Mr . Frank as to ac - cess on Bel Air Way , stated his having no objection to paying a full share of improvements on Bel Air Way , but had been fearful of having to also participate in future improvements on Jefferson Avenue , and stated he would be willing to give a deed for a non-access strip . City Manager advised that access to these two lots from Jefferson Avenue would not only not be economically practical , but also not feasible in interest of public safety , because roadway at this point is twisting and narrow , and that assessment proposed for each of these lots certainly less expensive than that of having to provide for access onto Jefferson , Mr . Frank commented on previous proposed spread of as- sessments . Director of Public Works outlined the reasoning used in arriving at the individ- ual assessments ; total construction costs now estimated at $ 9 , 400 . Questioned as to how non-access provision could be incorporated into action on these proceedings , City Attorney explained this would be a separate matter outside nu 10 .6.9