Laserfiche WebLink
<br />APPENDIX B <br /> <br />Street MnintenancePrognun Assessment Practices <br /> <br />1. Projects m'o identit1ed by indivich.lul subdivision, or by grouping of subdivision and lots <br />having similar pavement histories and conditions and similm' pavement areas per benetitcd <br />unit. <br /> <br />2. An assessment share will be calculated by determining the total assessable cost of the <br />project and dividing by the number ofbenetited units. <br /> <br />3. Where an individual lot bas more than one frontage and not all frontages arc scheduled to <br />receive an improvement or the same type of improvements, the lot will be considr;:rccl <br />benetited and be assessed a full shi.lrc for the improvement which is conducted along the <br />frontage of the lot that contains the main driveway opening. <br /> <br />4. For overlays the amollnt assesse;.:d to bcnetLted property owner is 501~/1l of the tOtll1 project <br />cost including overhei.ld C()S~s. (1991). <br /> <br />5. For se;alcoats the tlssessment to bcnetlted property owner shall be 43% of the toti.ll project <br />cost including overhead costs in program year 2008, .and shi.dl be reduced by 7% in each <br />succes::live year until reduced to an 8% nSSCS::lment in progmm year 2013. after the 2013 <br />program there shall be no aSSl;:ssment for sealcouts. . (2007). <br /> <br />6. Projects involving streets which have:.: had previous proposed maintenance projects defeated <br />by petition shall be ineligible to receive the City's 50% contribution, if.the project requires a <br />more expensive maintenance. (I.e. streets proposed for sealcoating project which was <br />defeated by citizen petition now are proposed for a bituminous overlay) (1993) <br /> <br />7. Where the rule of dividing the assessable project cost by the number of benefited units (no. 2 <br />above) would result in an assessable share which is grossly out of proportions to the <br />assessable share being charged to similar I()ts receiving similar in:1provements, the City <br />Council tni.lY elect to assess such lots the average assessable shm'c heing mach\: to lots <br />receiving similar improvements for that project year. (t 9(6) <br /> <br />8, Where u bcnetited arC~l contains commercial lots huving \videly vllryin~ sizes, the <br />assessment shall be made based on area of the lot. (200]) <br /> <br />9. Where an individllullot has m.ore than onetl"Ont,lge including a driveway ti'ontuge on a state <br />or county road, and a n()n~driveway frontage on a NISA or city street, one~half assessment <br />share will be made for an improvement to the MSA or City street (1995) <br /> <br />11 <br />