Laserfiche WebLink
City Engineer Westby stated that City Improvement Project No. 19-02 proposes to reconstruct <br />streets within the Brookview Estates neighborhood including 173rd Avenue and Germanium <br />Street. The streets total approximately 2,662 linear feet (0.50 miles) in length. The engineer's <br />opinion of probable costs for completing the proposed improvements is $502,555.46. Estimated <br />costs include 5-percent contingency costs plus 23-percent indirect costs for administrative, <br />engineering, finance and legal costs. Per the Feasibility Report, twenty-one (21) properties are <br />considered to benefit from the improvements and Staff recommended applying 25-percent of <br />eligible project costs equally across the 21 assessable properties using the "per lot" assessment <br />method. Eligible project costs include everything except subgrade corrections and guardrail <br />modification costs. This resulted in a proposed preliminary assessment rate of $4,418.30 per <br />assessable parcel. <br />City Engineer Westby stated that following the Public Hearing on November 13, the property <br />owner at 17230 Germanium Street requested a petition template to use in gathering signatures in <br />opposition to this Council initiated improvement project as provided by Section 8.4.5 of the City <br />Charter. On November 15, Staff provided a copy of the petition template to the property owner <br />with instructions to modify the top of the petition to define the project and to note what the <br />petition specifically opposes. This property owner did attend the neighborhood information <br />meeting held on November 8, 2018 where Staff explained the proposed improvements and <br />assessments in detail and gathered public input on the project. <br />City Engineer Westby stated that on December 3, the property owner delivered a petition with <br />fifteen signatures on it to City Staff but Staff rejected it noting that the top of the petition had no <br />clarifying language on it leading to concerns that the petitioners might not have understood what <br />they were signing. Based on comments Staff received from several property owners while the <br />petition was being circulated, Staff had concerns that this might indeed be the case. City Staff <br />then contacted the City Attorney to seek further direction on petition language and process <br />requirements. On December 4, Staff provided clarifying comments to the property owner <br />circulating the petition based on the City Attorney's comments. On December 10, the property <br />owner submitted a revised petition to City Staff. This petition had a page attached to it with <br />clarifying language noting that the property owners objected to the cost of the project. Staff has <br />since verified that all property owners who signed the petition are indeed benefiting property <br />owners per the preliminary assessment roll contained within the Feasibility Report. <br />City Engineer Westby stated that since that date, staff has spoken with property owners that may <br />not have exactly understood what they were signing. He stated that the City Attorney stated that <br />the Council could accept the petition if they believe the petitioners understood what they were <br />signing, but if the Council believes that there was ambiguity and people may not have <br />understood what they were signing, Council can direct staff to contact the property owners to <br />gather additional information. He stated that based on the conversations with the City Council <br />and the fact that at least one resident would like to retract their signature, staff would recommend <br />mailing letters to all benefiting property owners, to clearly define that the petition can kill the <br />project for one year or more if 60 percent or more of the benefiting properties sign the petition, <br />and to inform them of the option to withdraw their signature from the petition per City Charter <br />Section 8.4.6, including the deadline for doing so. <br />Public Works Committee / December 18, 2018 <br />Page 3 of 11 <br />