Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10- Development Services CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION From: MICHAEL E. HAYS, Director Subject: Resolution of Intention–Palm and Washington Landscape Maintenance Dept: Development Services Assessment District--- Tract No. 15743 Date: December 21, 1999 0 LI LI (AD 1025). File 11Jo.14.40-117 Synopsis of Previous Council Action: MCC Date: 01-24-2000 05-17-99 -- Tract No. 15743 was approved. 07-06-99 –Authorization to proceed with the formation of a landscape maintenance assessment district in the Palm and Washington area was granted. Recommended Motion: ADOPT RESOLUTION ` G Micha . Hays Contact person: LASZLO "Les"FOGASSY 5026 Phone: Supporting data attached: Staff Report, Maps, 5 ngmeer s ep., es_— Ward: FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: $4,000 (Processing fee paid by applicant) Source: (Acct. No.) 254-000-2301-6015 (Acct. Description) Assessment District Deposits Council Notes: OAgenda Item No. 1� CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO — REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Staff Report SUBJECT: Resolution of Intention—Palm and Washington Landscape Maintenance Assessment District-- Tract No. 15743 (AD 1025). BACKGROUND: On May 17, 1999, Tract No. 15743 was approved. One of the conditions of approval is the formation of an Assessment District for the maintenance of Landscaping along the west side of Palm Avenue, south of Washington Avenue and along the south side of Christine Street, adjacent to the Southerly boundary of the tract. This is being done to relieve the City of the costs of maintaining the landscaping and to prevent blight since property owners usually do not maintain the areas beyond the perimeter block walls of a tract. On June 21, 1999,this office received a letter of request from Verdemont Ranch, LLC,the property owner, for the formation of the Assessment District. The applicant has paid the $4,000 processing fee. Tract No. 15743 consists of 38 single family lots. The annual cost of maintenance, which is estimated to be $9, 393.98, including incidental and administrative costs, will be spread across these 38 lots. The annual assessment per lot is estimated to be $242.71. All potential buyers will be given a disclosure statement of the assessment by the seller/developer. An Engineer's Report has been prepared, which gives details regarding the district boundaries, proposed maintenance, method of assessment,total cost of maintenance and a proposed assessment roll and is on file in the office of the City Clerk. A District Boundary map has also been prepared and is also on file with the City Clerk. A copy of the Engineer's Report is has been attached. The attached Resolution declares the City's intent to form Assessment District No. 1025 and sets a public meeting date of February 22, 2000 and a public hearing date of March 20, 2000. As required by Proposition 218, all property owners of record within the proposed district will be sent a mailed notice, along with an Assessment.Ballot. The results of the ballots will be presented at the close of the public hearing. Ballots are weighted in proportion to the Assessment amount. The developer will still own the majority of the parcels when notices are mailed and thus a majority protest is not anticipated. FINANCIAL IMPACT, None. Applicant has paid the $4,000 processing fee and all subsequent work carried out in the district will be assessed back to property owners. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the attached Resolution be adopted. Location of Proposed Assessment District F 4 C C 1S 15 No Scale C, 40th St. „o V N Marshall Blvd. tt _ v 210 ° Highland Ave. as 3 d¢' 0 in a E Base Line St. o v 9th St a 5th St. v Rialto Ave. >; a Mill SL 15 V 0 0 a u 210 n Orange Show Rd 10 VICINITY MAP CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PROPOSED ASSESSMENT DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT PALM AND WASHINGTON AREA PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE ® thin tes un Sphere flu ratedreas ASSESSMENT DISTRICT w | U4) s � © o \ _aW , () (2 ^ e g . _ )_ |, � w s v / . . . 3 ( 6 � \ W m : . . . � O \ » | | \ | _ ' | W | 2 L4 . . . { � f . ■ | \ | | � ' § ( ) � ) ) ENGINEER'S REPORT for ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 1025 (Palm Avenue and Washington Avenue Area Landscape Maintenance Assessment District) in the CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA ARD�I,D 2 O � v a �G�DED `�♦0 File No. 14.40-117 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION Prepared December 21, 1999 ENGINEER'S REPORT for ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 1025 FILED in the office of the City Clerk of the City of San Bernardino on the day of CITY CLERK City of San Bernardino PRELIMINARY approval by the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino, County of San Bernardino, State of California on the day of CITY CLERK City of San Bernardino FINAL approval by the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino, County of San Bernardino, State of California on the day of CITY CLERK City of San Bernardino I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing assessments,together with the Diagram of Assessment District No. 1025, were approved and confirmed by the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bemardino, County of San Bernardino, State of California on the_day of CITY CLERK City of San Bernardino CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CPUBLIC WORKS DIVISION ENGINEER'S REPORT ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 1025 (Palm Avenue and Washington Avenue Area Landscape Maintenance Assessment District) PETITION-- On June 21,1999, a petition was received from the owner or the developer representing the owner of property within the proposed assessment district for the establishment of an assessment district for the maintenance of landscaping along portions of Palm Avenue, South of Washington Avenue and along portions of Red Sky Avenue within Tract No. 15743. The signatures on the petition represent 100% of the property owners of the parcels within the proposed boundaries of the district. This petition was the result of a requirement placed upon the developer of Tract No. 15743 by the City to relieve the City from having to maintain the areas of landscaping. AUTHORIZATION -- On July 6, 1999, by action of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino, the City Engineer and City Clerk were authorized to initiate proceedings for the formation of Assessment District No. 1025 (Palm Avenue and Washington Avenue Area Landscape Maintenance Assessment District) pursuant to the provisions of San Bernardino City Municipal Code Chapter 12.90 and this Report has been prepared and is hereby submitted pursuant to said provisions and in accordance with Resolution of Intention No. adopted by the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino on the day of ADVANCE OF ESTIMATED COSTS OF PROCEEDINGS--On August 17, 1999, pursuant to Section 12.94.030 of the Municipal Code, the developer deposited $4,000 with the City to cover the estimated cost of proceedings. At the conclusion of the proceedings and after confirmation of all costs, any amounts remaining will be returned to the developer. If actual costs are more than the deposit, then the remainder can either be paid in a lump sum by the developer or assessed against the properties involved. EASEMENTS— All landscaping to be maintained will be within the dedicated right of way, or within easements granted to the City for landscape maintenance purposes and no maintenance will be carried out on private property. DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS--The improvements to be maintained include landscaping and all appurtenances along portions of the West side of Palm Avenue, South of Washington Avenue, portions of Washington Avenue adjacent to Lot 1 of Tract No. 15743 and along portions of the South side of Red Sky Avenue, all within Tract No. 15743. PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS--Plans and Specifications for the landscaping have been prepared by the developer according to the standards of the City and is subject to final approval by the City prior to the installation of any landscaping. 1 Engineers Report—AD 1025 DESCRIPTION OF BOUNDARIES -- The boundaries of the proposed district are shown on the Assessment Boundary Map of Assessment District No. 1025 and are generally described as follows: The centerline of Washington Avenue on the North, Palm Avenue on the East, and the Southwesterly line of Tract No. 15743 on the Southwest. VICINITY MAP-- A vicinity map showing the general location of the proposed Assessment District is attached as Exhibit 1. DISTRICT BOUNDARYMAP-- A proposed District Boundary Map has been prepared and is on file in the office of the City Clerk. A reduced copy of the District Boundary Map is attached as Exhibit 2. DISTRICT DIAGRAM --A proposed Diagram of the Assessment District has been prepared and will be filed with the City Clerk after preliminary approval of this Report and will be filed with County Recorder and recorded in the office of the Director of Public Works after final approval of this Report, Confirmation of the Assessment Roll and Resolution Ordering Work. A reduced copy of the Assessment District Diagram is attached as Exhibit 3. NOTICE OFEXEMPTION-- a "Notice of Exemption" declaring a Categorical Exemption was prepared and will be filed with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of San Bernardino County upon formation of the District. No further environmental proceedings will be necessary. A copy of the Notice of Exemption is attached as Exhibit 4. METHOD OF ASSESSMENTAND DETERMINA TION OF BENEFIT--Landscaping and its proper maintenance enhances the esthetics of any given area and the benefit received by the owners of properties in the area is determined to be equal to the number of residential units that utilize the landscaped areas either as ingress and egress or by actual physical use of the land as in the cases of large open areas. The boundaries of the proposed district are drawn with this in mind and the Resolution of Intention delineates the specific areas of maintenance which will benefit all of the properties within the boundaries. Thus, each residential lot or unit, be it a single family lot, a condominium or an apartment will be assessed an equal share in the cost of maintenance (1 residential lot or unit= 1 Assessment Unit). The benefit received by the parcels within the boundaries of the district is determined to be of more than ordinary public benefit, thus each parcel within the district being assessed receives a special benefit from the improvements. If property not within the boundaries of a district also receives some benefit from the improvements, consideration must then be given to a general benefit given by the improvements, which may not be assessed to the parcels within the district. Since the installation and maintenance of the landscaping and establishment of an assessment district for the maintenance of the landscaping is a requirement by the City for this development, it is further determined that the improvements to be maintained by the assessment district are of special benefit to the district only and are 100% assessable to the parcels within the boundaries of the assessment district. Publicly owned lands within the Assessment District,if any, are subject to assessments, unless they receive no benefit with the exception of public right of way, which is not subject to assessments. Presently, no parcels within the district are publicly owned. 2 Engineers Report—AD 1015 METHOD OF FINANCING--The estimated cost of the first year's maintenance shall be assessed against the properties involved within the current fiscal year or the fiscal year following the establishment of the district. Depending upon when the costs are assessed and when the actual maintenance is assumed by the City, this assessed amount can be used as a source of pre-funding the first year's maintenance contract and incidental costs. Once the City has assumed the responsibility for the maintenance, the properties may be assessed in advance each year thereafter to establish a source of pre-funding each year's costs, or may be assessed for the actual contract and incidental costs plus interest. Interest will be included in the assessment costs for any amounts or portions not pre- funded through previous assessments. If there is a surplus from the estimated assessment in the event costs are pre- funded through previous assessments, any such surplus shall be applied as a credit to the following year's assessment or placed in a reserve fund to cover future increases or maintenance until such reserves are depleted. The assessment, whether pre-funded or not, shall be levied,collected and enforced in the same manner,at the same time, and with the same penalties and interest as in the case of taxes levied for property taxes. Table I sets forth the estimated costs of the first years maintenance. No Bonds will be sold relative to this Assessment District. ASSESSMENT SPREAD -- The amount of each Assessment Unit is determined by dividing the total maintenance costs, including all incidentals, by the total number of assessment units, as determined by the above Method ofAssessment. Each parcel in the district is then assessed based upon the total number of Assessment Units calculated for that parcel. ASSESSMENT ROLL -- Presently there are 38 single family parcels within Tract No. 15743, with each parcel representing 1 assessment unit as described under Method of Assessment, and assessment are spread accordingly. No further subdivision of the parcels is anticipated. An Assessment Roll representing the estimated first year's maintenance costs has been prepared for the 38 parcels within Tract No. 15743 and is shown as Exhibit 5. FUTURE APPORTIONMENTS--In the event that the assessment units, as determined under Method of Assessment, change for any parcel(s) during the term of the Assessment District, the assessment amount for that parcel(s) will change accordingly. Any Increases based solely on change in parcel size, land use or density, which would result in an increase of assessment units, will not be subject to a public hearing as long as the formula for determining the assessments as described is applied. Pursuant to Chapter 12.90 of the San Bernardino Municipal Code, such reapportionments do not require the recording of an amended Diagram Map. FUTURE INCREASES-- Due to the nature of landscape maintenance, it is anticipated that there will be future increases in assessments as contract, labor, water and energy costs are all subject to future increases. Annual increases may be increased without further notice or public hearing by a percentage equal to the increase in the Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers in the Los Angeles-Orange County-Inland Empire area,published by the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics over the previous year. C 3 Engineers Report—AD 1025 TABLE l ESTIMATED FIRST YEAR'S COST SUMMARY Assessment District No. 1020 (Mill Street and Dallas Avenue Area Landscape Maintenance Assessment District) ascription of Costs Quantity Unit Cost/Umt Annual Cost Maintenance of Turf/Irrigation - Sq.Ft. 0.25 $ - Maintenance of Groundcover/ShrubAMgation 18,150 Sq.Ft. 0.25 $ 4,537.50 Maintenance of Trees/Irrigation 1 L.S. 100.00 $ 10000 Water and Energy Costs 18,150 Sq.Ft. 0.10 $ 1,815.00 Weekly Inspection (labor,overhead) 52 Hours 25.00 $ 1,300.00 Annual Assmt. Engineering(labor overhead) 10 Hours 30.00 $ 300.00 Contract Adminstration (labor+overhead) 15 Hours 22.00 $ 330.00 Incidentals (materials, supplies, other costs) 1 L.S. 100.00 $ 100.00 Outside Department Services (labor+overbead) 38 parcels 10.00 $ 380.00 Subtotal $ 8,862.50 Estimated Interest for non-prefunded amounts* 6 Peirent $ 531.75 Adjustment (Roonding for Assessment Roll) $ (0.27) TOTAL FIRST YEAR'S ESTIMATED COSTS $ 9,393.98 * Estimate based on full year's interest. Interest charged only on portions that are not pre-funded by the prior years assessments as stated above. Rate varies based on City's average earnings as stated above. ASSESSMENT CALCULATION--Applying the Method of Assessment and Assessment Spread described above, the following formula is used to determine the assessment amount per Assessment Unit: Total Costs -Total Assessment Units = Cost per Assessment Unit thus 9,393.98:38=8147.21 per Assessment Unitperyear O 4 Engineers Report—AD 1025 ENGINEER'S STATEMENT This Report,together with the Assessment District Boundary Map,Assessment Diagram and Proposed Assessment Roll has been prepared and is being filed pursuant to and in compliance with Chapter 12.90 of the San Bernardino Municipal Code and also in compliance with the requirements set forth in Article XIIID of the California Constitution for the establishment of Assessment District No. 1025 lz/z j�'n Date RAYMQND A. CASEY City Engineer o QppFESS/qyq No.CE-41880 z \* Exp.03-31-2000 Jp CI VIA �P qTF OF CAO Engineers Report—AD 1025 List of Exhibits 1. Vicinity Map..................................................... Exhibit 11111 2. Reduced copy of Boundary Map....................... Exhibit "2" 2. Reduced copy of Assessment District Diagram Exhibit "3" 3. Copy of"Notice of Exemption"......................... Exhibit 114" 4. Proposed Assessment Roll (FY 2000/2001)...... Exhibit 115" 6 a Location of Proposed Assessment District P F fan°oii 1 B 15 No Scale na 40th St. 000 u d a Marshall Blvd. 0 u u 210 ° Highland Ave. av 3 a> 0 vi 0 E `v Bose Line St. i 9th St a 5th St. ` v Rialto Ave. > i a Mill St. 2 15 v 0 C 0 d 210 n Orange Show Rd. a. r O VICINITY MAP EXHIBIT 1 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PROPOSED ASSESSMENT DISTRICT - DEVELOPMENTSERVICESDEPARTMENT PALM AND WASHINGTON AREA PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE thin indicates un re 0f incooted areas ASSESSMENT DISTRICT w ! {itiJil i 11�i�ji [i l a ' ;alb F1 yO a�� Q Z F p F G ❑ ('v U 3nN3AV Nltld Q.4 Q 0 0 � 3< O y F Z5 � ° � v ' Y i Vl p W Y • n Yr 'I 6 Z L Y • Y 3 d P r , ` V O0 o p ? W a 3 OF-1 mu Y xW c • o g IU wMY V Fg y / 'lAi 3 i0 • ' V � � N © y W EXHIBIT 2 W W g ° � 3Efll ► tl i 4 i � SiI1 t6 I tt JAI Og Fl N w 3nN3AV NIVd 3 z o a Od � '•- � oc3i3 « O � b � P tt4 E.-1 w0 w d E C C4 S C/� w U � o ' d >N C� O y Z o � € EXHIBIT 3 W g 0 i 0 N, ti W Qn WASHINGTON STREET e- a at, k — N NIna mII Ixo >� I w O - U"UR = O ti tlE k tl ° RR r( O IV Insl I a V(I ms w U � IaII � Ifaw x tl 0 N R P d cn InCI _ wa � Inr W I p � m V P N O n k Cif L N C� Oa • _ a II a In l> vii W � Ifl.w aJ1 7•/a h� tl O R r� 'pfpSKrq�� ti w Con 6 L CgAr ,R COCK CHq �< 9 9 0 ml Z 133HS 33S ti W 2 e 31N3AV VSMIVddtl e v e e F mu an nn nn all C N Y2 w N E2 C n 22 e N I2 R N 02 O .un on no nn an 5 an an mn mn yIN Qv a �i ♦— tl N 52 N 92 N © [2 y Q 82 At O p �` 'y r F Y VV vrl I— �' Kw P ma mn .un x .u• y 4i U N e 133N1S VN33S3 e Z e .Rw e I--1 0 dd nn n'ml ma an H _ ! @ 2f A 9 IE a l'�f pE 0 WF�1 Q .Rau Mai rn mn, K� 6 [ @ 4 fi W xa W uxl IF V� Vl 4 CIO P i mml e a n � v 6'RI Al p 9 O W OKE � d tY I CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT NOTICE OF EXEMPTION File No. 14.40-117 FROM: CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, PLANNING TO: OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT 1400 TENTH STREET, ROOM 121 300 N."D'STREET SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92418 X COUNTY CLERK COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO 385 NORTH ARROWHEAD AVENUE SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92415 Project Title: ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 1025 Project Location-Specific: TRACT NO. 15743—SOUTH OF WASHINGTON STREET, WEST OF PALM AVENUE Project Location-City: SAN BERNARDINO Project Location—County: SAN BERNARDINO Description of project: SBMC 12.90 PROCEEDINGS FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT Name of Public Agency Approving Project: CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO Name of Person or Agency Carrying out Project: CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO Exem t Status: (check one) M& Ministerial (Sec. 21080(b)(1); 15268); ❑ Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080(b)(3); 15269(a)); ❑ Emergency Project(Sec.21080(b)(4); 15269(b)(c)); Ca Categorical Exemption. State type and section number: Class 1 15301(c) Res 90-217 Sec B2c ❑ Statutory Exemptions. State code number Reason why project is exempt: ESTABLISHMENT PROCEEDINGS FOR ASSESSMENT DISTRICT TO PROVIDE FUNDING SOURCE FOR MAINTENANCE OF LANDSCAPING Lead Agency Contact Person: LASZLO FOGASSY Area Coderrelephone/Extension: (909) 384-5026 If filed by applicant: 1. Attach certified document of exemption finding. 2. Has a notice of exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? [] Yes ❑ No Signature: Date: Title: Real Property Official ® Signed by Lead Agency ❑Signed by Applicant Date received for filing at OPR: EXHIBIT 4 PLAN10.05(5-90)Rev ENG(5-97)Page 1 of 1 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PROPOSED 2000 / 2001 ASSESSMENT ROLL -AD 1025 PALM AND WASHINGTON LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT Assessment No. Parcel No. or Lot No. Assessment Amt. 1 01 - S24Z21 2 02 - - $247.21 3 03 - - $247.21 4 04 - - $247.21 5 05 - - $247.21 6 06 - - $247.21 7 07 - - $247.21 8 08 - - $247.21 9 09 - - $zazzl 10 10 - - $247.21 11 11 - - $247.21 12 12 - - $zazn 13 13 - - $247.21 14 14 - - $247.21 15 15 - - $247.21 16 16 - - $247.21 17 17 - - $247.21 18 18 - - $247.21 19 19 - - $247.21 20 20 - - $247.21 21 21 - - $247.21 22 22 - - $247.21 23 23 _ _ $247.21 24 24 - - $247.21 25 25 - - $247.21 26 26 _ _ $247.21 27 27 _ _ $7.47.7.1 28 28 - $za7.z1 29 29 _ $247.21 30 30 _ _ $7.47.7.1 31 31 _ $247.21 32 32 _ _ $247.21 33 33 - - $za7.n 34 34 - _ $247.21 C 35 35 - - $247.21 36 36 - - 5247.21 1025 1 2000 EXHIBIT 115" Page 1 of 2 Assessment No. Parcel No. or Lot No. Assessment Amt, 37 37 - - 5247.21 38 38 _ _ $247.21 TOTALS: 38 Parcels _ $9,393.98 1025 /2000 EXHIBIT "5" Pag;2 oft CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO Entered into Record at INTEROFFICE MEMORANIlRMc'1If`1.vnP"fms Mtg: by .. re Age (� _.- TO: James F. Penman • ,4 City Attorney rgton F ROM: Huston T. Carlyle, Jc� City ClerkICOG Secy Sr. Assistant City Atto ity of San Bernard nu DATE: January 24, 2000 RE: Resolution of Intention --Palm and Wpe Maintenance Assessment District-- Tract No. 15743 (Agenda Item # 10) Reference is made to the above-indicated subject matter now scheduled for Mayor and Common Council consideration at its January 24, 2000 meeting. I have reviewed the back-up materials supplied in connection with this item, and have some questions which I believe require additional time to sort out before this proposed assessment district No. 1025 should proceed. It should be noted at the outset that this proposed assessment district is to be formed and managed according to the provisions found in the State Constitution as a result of the passage of Proposition 218 at the November 5, 1996 general election. Since the developer(Verdemont Ranch, LLC)is expected to still own a majority of the parcels when notices are mailed for election purposes, the issue of the vote on the creation of an assessment district does not appear to be a concern at this time. However, I am concerned with the projected annual cost,the method of assessment and determination of benefit, and the automatic inflation factor. First,I do not find sufficient back-up documentation to support the conclusions presented in Table 1 that the total first year's estimated costs will be$9,393.98. The Engineer's Report states at page 3 under Method of Financing the following: "The estimated cost of the first year's maintenance shall be assessed against the properties involved within the current fiscal year or the fiscal year following the establishment of the district. Del2ending upon when the costs are assessed and when the actual maintenance is assumed by the City this assessed amount can be used as a source of pre-funding the first year's maintenance contract and incidental costc." [emphasis added] i j 1-a�-oa Since it clearly appears from the Engineer's Report that the actual maintenance will be assumed by the City in some fashion, I think the Report or the back-up materials should reflect on what basis this annual amount was arrived at in order to determine its accuracy. That supporting information has not yet been presented. Second, I am concerned by the statement in the Method of Assessment and Determination of Benefit at the bottom of page 2 of the Engineer's Report which says: "Since the installation and maintenance of the landscaping and establishment of an assessment district for the maintenance of the landscaping is a requirement by the City for this development, it is further determined that the improvements to be maintained by the assessment district are of special benefit to the district only and are 100%assessable to the parcels within the boundaries of the assessment district." Under Proposition 218, "special benefit" means a particular and distinct benefit over and above the general benefits conferred on real property located in the district or to the public at large. General enhancement of property value does not constitute"special benefit." The cost attributed to a"special benefit"must be that amount that is valued as a direct and special benefit conferred on the property that exceeds the benefit conferred on the public at large or even to other similar properties. The Engineer's Report describes the improvements to be maintained as including "landscaping and all appurtenances along portions of the West side of Palm Avenue, South of Washington Avenue,portions of Washington Avenue adjacent to Lot 1 of Tract No. 15743 and along portions of the South side of Red Sky Avenue, all within Tract No. 15743." Two observations: First, I am not aware of any law which states that if the formation of an assessment district for the maintenance of landscaping is required as a condition of approval for a tract,then the cost is automatically attributed as 100%special benefit. The benefit conferred needs to be judged on a case by case basis. Second, it is difficult to imagine that there is not a general benefit of some kind to the public (if not the properties across the street) as a result of having portions of Palm Avenue and Washington Avenue landscaped. Accordingly, I do not agree that the total cost of the landscaping is all a special benefit and thus borne only by the owners of the lots. Finally,the Engineer's Report at the bottom of page 3 includes an automatic inflation factor for future increases. While this is permissible under Proposition 218, there is no information to determine whether this Index is the proper one to be used for this type of assessment. It may in fact be the correct one to use, but there is nothing in the Engineer's Report or back-up materials to support that assumption. Again, since future increases would occur without any other votes by the property owners as a result of this automatic inflation factor,we would want to make sure that the proper Index is being utilized.