Agenda - Council Work Session - 02/14/2017

Home

the new parcel data based on the recent replat associated with their current building expansion project. All costs for this project are eligible for special assessments since the street is proposed to be reconstructed at its existing width, which meets current State Aid standards, and since the existing and proposed pavement sections both meet 10-ton design standards and are therefore equivalent sections. Staff recommends ordering a benefit appraisal consultation report for this project to verify that the proposed assessment amounts will not exceed the amount of benefit to any assessable properties. If the report concludes that the benefit to any property is less than the proposed assessment, Staff will propose to lower the assessment accordingly at the Assessment Hearing scheduled for October 10, 2017. However, if the benefit appraisal consultation report finds that the benefit exceeds the proposed assessment for any property, Staff will propose to adopt the final assessment using the assessment preliminarily proposed within the Feasibility Report. Attached to this case in a copy of the City's Special Assessments Policy adopted in December 2014 and amended January 2015. Based on input received from the frim that conducts our benefit appraisal consultations at the time the policy was developed, language was included in Section 6.10, "Benefit Appraisals", stating "As a general rule, benefit appraisal consultations may be ordered when the proposed assessment exceeds $5,000 for a standard city street reconstruction project on a residential lot, or $20,000 per acre for commercial or industrial property." Since none of the proposed assessments comes close to approaching $20,000 per acre, Staff is confident the benefit appraisal consultation report will find that the proposed assessments are defendable. Public Input At the time this case was published, Staff had met with owners of 5 of the 7 identified assessable properties. Below is a very general summary of comments received from these property owners. • Altron, Inc. — Does not generally oppose the proposed improvements or their proposed assessment based on the revised assessment roll, but supports postponing the public hearing to allow more time to review their proposed assessment with City staff before the public hearing. • B & F Fastener Supply — Does not generally oppose the proposed improvements or their proposed assessment based on the revised assessment roll, and they do not plan to attend the public hearing. • Class C Components — Does not generally oppose the proposed improvements but supports postponing the public hearing to allow more time to review their proposed assessment with City staff before the public hearing. • Connexus Energy — Does not generally oppose the proposed improvements but supports postponing the public hearing to allow more time to review their proposed assessment internally and with City staff before the public hearing. However, they question whether adjustments should be made to assessments based on whether a property is developed or undeveloped; in general they are asking whether their assessment should be reduced since it is an undeveloped parcel. • In'Tech, Industries — Does not generally oppose the proposed improvements or their proposed assessment based on the revised assessment roll, and does not object to postponing the public hearing. Staff was unable to meet with owners of the Anderson Dahlen and Vision Ease parcels before this case was published. If Staff meets with one or both of these property owners before the Council meeting, results of the meeting(s) will be presented to Council in summary format. Based upon the short amount of time that assessable property owners have had to consider the project and their proposed assessments, and considering that three of the assessable property owners requested or support postponing the public hearing to allow more time to discuss their assessments with City staff, staff recommends postponing the public hearing until February 28, 2017. This should allow staff enough time to make any necessary adjustments to the assessment map and roll based on specific Council direction, and to share new information with the assessable property owners. However, a two week delay should not negatively impact bids or prevent the project from being completed in 2017. Timeframe: