FLOOD03407 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

i il I I I 'I I II I I I I I I il I I I I ~I Today, municipalities in most places find the "special district" method of financing difficult to implement. Refusal of property owners to cooperate, or court actions, can delay or prevent the successful establishment of special im- provement districts. This is unfortunate as the method is looked upon with favor by purchasers of special assessment bonds because the assessments are levied against property rather than persons or organizations. A legal basis is needed to assess charges against real property in a more rea- listic manner, according to benefits received. This requires new definition by state legislatures regarding "what constitutes benefits". A unique definition of benefits is an aid to Colorado communities in special assessment financing. In 1975, the Colorado General Assembly passed a "Benefits Assessment Act" (Senate Bill No. 52) which has facilitated application of the special assessments method. The bill defines "benefits" as the term applies to assessing property within public improvement districts--and conservancy districts established for provision of sur- face drainage and flood control works, and regulation of stream flows. This new definition of benefits made possible a broader allocation of property assessments. It is now possible to assess Colorado properties located on the hills and ridges, even though such properties may not be in floodplains or flood prone locations. The Act provides for assessing benefits to any properties where the proposed improvements can be shown to provide: increase in convenience, including access and travel over streets; recreational improvements; reduction in costs of main- taining the property; alleviation of health and sanitation hazards; adaptability of the property to a superior or more profitable use; increases in market value; or capacities for discharging increased surface water flows (produced by increases in impervious areas) from higher-lying properties onto lower-lying properties. Even though opportunities for applying the special assessments method in Colorado have been enhanced greatly by the 1975 Act, there yet remains the difficult problems of determining, equitably, the dollar value of the benefits to particular properties. Such problems have been compounded in Colorado by including as benefits: recreation, convenience, reduction of hazards, etc. Planning In 1965, a survey made by the American Public Works Association,(3) revealed that only 46 percent of the 627 communities responding had a comprehensive drainage plan. Even today, the majority of urban and metropolitan areas in the United States have not developed masterplans for stormwater management. A philosophy, policy, work plan and criteria for stormwater control is also lacking in most urban communities. Without these guidelines for action, little can be accomplished in solving stormwater-related problems as measured in terms of meeting areawide goals and providing long-term benefits. Such guidelines and masterplans are needed to facilitate the development of alternative solutions--and selection of the most cost- effective approaches feasible--within realistic financing opportunities and limits. Before preparing preliminary stormwater plans or masterplans, thorough field inventories and studies should be made of existing physical problems and their im- pacts. This should be followed-up by identification and evaluation of the "conse- quences" anticipated. Unfortunately, many plans for stormwater systems are pre- pared without having first made such investigations. In many growth areas, it appears that land developers are actually making many of the decisions and plans for urban drainage. This should be an exclusive function of the local governments and public agencies having jurisdiction. 13