Laserfiche WebLink
<br />and the cul-de-sac to create a loop. This would take up a lot of the northern route and would be a <br />true loop, and Option A would become a little more feasible. He stated if these residents were <br />alerted to the possibility of sewer and water they may want to be included in this feasibility <br />study. <br /> <br />Street Improvements: <br />(a) Elements included in the draft study and assessed to the project <br />· Standard urban section 32 feet wide with concrete curb and gutter <br />· All storm sewer including a water quality stormceptor manhole <br />· Tree removal and retaining walls <br />· Existing driveway and sod restoration <br />· Streetlights <br />· Sidewalk <br />(b) Dolomite Street connection cost $41,500 <br />· City contributes cost <br />· Assess as a project cost <br /> <br />Assessments: <br />(a) Per Council direction tonight, assessments will be calculated on a per-developable lot <br />basis. <br />(b) Trunk assessment will be collected for each existing lot of record. Future trunk <br />assessments will be collected as additional lots are created through the subdivision <br />process. <br />(c) Schedule of assessment hearing <br />· After project is completed andfinal <br />· Prior to the project being ordered <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec expressed his preference in holding the hearing prior to the project being ordered. <br />He asked whether the City would be required to pay the extra cost if the bids came in higher than <br />published at the hearing. <br /> <br />City Engineer Jankowski indicated he discussed this with the City Attorney many years ago, and <br />he believes there is nothing to prevent the Council from holding a second assessment hearing if <br />the costs are different. The other option would be to refuse the bids if they corne in over the <br />assessed amount. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig suggested the requirement of an agreement or earnest money from <br />property owners wishing to participate in the project. <br /> <br />Public Works Director Olson suggested the feasibility study could include language that the <br />project will only move forward if a certain percentage of the property owners are willing to move <br />forward, and requiring another petition to be submitted to determine the costs based on the <br />number of property owners committing to the project. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen asked what other communities have done in this type of situation. <br /> <br />City Council Work Session / January 16,2007 <br />Page 6 of 10 <br />