Laserfiche WebLink
Case 09: Pb. iicy for Assisting Individuals with Hookup Charges to Water and <br /> 'S~wer Utilities Receiving Availability from Subdivision Extensions. <br />City Engineer~.lalikowski presented a draft policy with regard to sewer and water hookup charges. <br />Notwithatand',mgilthe fact that the water and sewer improvements would not be charged to these <br />properties, th~ h~0kup charges would be considerable. Some members of City Council felt that <br />two years w~iin~afficient time to prepare for the financial burden of paying the hookup charges. <br />Therefore, thl~ p~liCy allows for a home owner to request that hookup charges be special assessed <br />over a periOd tbf years, with the City charging interest on the outstanding balance. <br /> <br />City Council wo0eeded to review the draft policy. <br /> <br />Councilmemb~r Beyer viewed the two year time limit for hookup as an unfair burden for home <br />owners and fe~ ~tanguage in the City Code should be amended to extend the time limit. <br />Mayor Gilbert~o~ felt that a septic system failure could constitute the required time for hookup to <br />municipal serviceS: <br /> <br />Councilmemi~er Zimmerman supported Councilmember Beyer's ideas on examining other <br />alternatives. <br /> <br />Finance Office~' H¢lling stated that Metropolitan Council set the time limit at two years. <br /> <br />Councilmemb6'r P~eterson stated that it was pan of the original agreement to adopt the two-year time <br />limit and the 4 !in i~0 density zoning when the City obtained additional sewer pipe. <br /> <br />City Adrninisttat~rr Schroeder noted that those who would be burdened would be the people who <br />install a new S~pt~!system and do not know that municipal services are coming into their area. He <br />added that mos~ p~Ople research this before either installing a new septic system or buying a home. <br /> <br />Councilmemb~i Z,immerman stated that the fear expressed by citizens was that municipal services <br />would be for¢~ upon them when connecuons came close to then' sulxhws~ons. <br /> <br />City Enginear ~a~owski was directed to contact Men'opolitan Council and further research the <br />question of tithe limitations and to also find out how many residences had municipal services <br />available but w~'e!n, ot yet connected. <br /> <br />Motion by Cotinci!member Beyer and seconded by Councilmember Zimmerman to table this case <br />until Mr. Jank~wski brought the requested information back to City Council. <br /> <br />Motion carried~ Voting Yes: Mayor Gilbertson, Councilmembers Beyer, Hardin, Peterson and <br />Zimmerman. ¥oti'ng No: None. <br />Case #11: Re~:e, ve B~ds and Award Contract for the 1992 Street Sealeoating <br /> project. <br /> <br />City Engineer Jank0wski reported that bids were received from both of the two plan holders and <br />the bid sumrna~ ~as presented to City Council. ASTECH Corporation was the low bidder at <br />$84,060. Mr. ~angOwski recommended award of the 1992 Street Sealcoating Project to ASTECH <br />Corporation. ' ~' ' <br /> <br />Motion by Counci,~'nember Peterson and seconded by Councilmember Hardin to adopt Resolution <br />g02-07-173 award! ig the 1992 Street Sealcoafing Project to ASTECH Corporation in the amount <br />of $84,060. <br /> <br />City Council/July 14, 1992 <br /> Page 9 of 11 <br /> <br /> <br />