Agenda - Council - 03/11/2003 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I I I I I I I I I I I I I.- I I I' I I I PW .CASE CONSIDER CHANGES TO CITY'S STREET A[SSESSMENT POLICY iBy: Steve Jankowski~ City Engineer Background: At the January Public Works Committee, the 2003 program was presented. At that meeting a listing of the City's assessment policy was .presented, and there was some desire on the part 0f the Committee tO cbnsider changes, to several of the' assessment 'methods: A copy:of the assessment current practices is attached to .this case. As can be seen' from that attachment, several of these policies have evolved ·over times, including last month's Committee decision to assess commercial lots based-upon area-(item 7), .- Specifically, 'the Committee questioned how isolated parcels ha.viiag frontage Significantly. 'larger than the average within a 'particular project-might be fairly assessed. Below are several options for addressing this concern: Current Practice: Each lot of record witkin a project is ·considered as one benefited unit within the project group. -(The only exceptions a~e wetland outlots which would.have a great Likelihood of going tax forfeit if assessed). Alternative A: Where a benefited property exceeds the average frontage .witkin a project,-the property shall be assessed multiple shares determined by dividing its total project .frontage by the average frontage within .the project. The number of assessed shares shall be rounded down to .the lowest whole nUmber, but not less than one unit. The: average width shall be determined by dividing the total project centerline mileage times' two by the total number .of benefited properties. Alternative B: Base entire assessment solely on total frorlt frontage (some special_ -consideration might be-given to comer 'lots, such as, use longest side or average of all sides).' Below are three .examples of how each Of the above assessment procedures would affect' individual assessment, or selected lots. The examples selected are-from project 02-11, an overlay project from last year's program. Example-l: Property .has'930 feet of'fr0ntage along 149'h Avenue: Current Practice:. Assess one"'share $772, since-there is .one lot Of record. Total assessed project cost.= $i10,396; Total assessed units = 143- Assessed. cost per unit =.$1.10,396 + 143 units= $77-2 unit' Alzernative A: Assessed three shares $2,316 Total project frontage = 3.98 mi x 5280 ft/mi, x 2 sides .= 42;049 ft. Average lot frontage = 42,029 ft + 143 un/ts = 294 ft/unit Subject lot has 930 ft + 294 units = 3..16 unit, rounded by 3 units -27~