Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. Area 1 to be assessed 100% of sanitary sewer, lateral watermain, trunk water and sewer <br />charges, storm sewer, and the width of a 32 feet street restoration. <br />. Area 2 would be assessed 50 % of the cost of street improvements, which includes storm <br />sewer. <br />. City would contribute cost of additional street width beyond 30 feet, water trunk costs; <br />100% of the lateral sanitary sewer and water in Area 2; and 100% ofthe sidewalk <br /> <br />The Committee reviewed the following summary of assessment costs to both the Area 1 and <br />Area 2 property owners as well as the total cost to the City for each of these options: <br /> <br /> Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 <br />Area 1 <br />Streets $ 12,208 $ 12,208 $ 12,208 <br />Water $ 6,852 $ 6,852 $ 6,852 <br />Sewer $ 5,532 $ 5,532 $ 5,532 <br />Storm Sewer $ 5,006 $ 3,004 $ 3,004 <br />S& W Trunk Charges $ 3,144 $ 3,144 $ 3,144 <br />Total Assessment $32,742 $30,740 $30,740 <br />Area 2 <br />Streets $ 5,021 $ 5,021 <br />Storm Sewer $ 3,004 $ 3,004 <br />Total Assessment $ 8,025 $ 8,025 <br />City Cost $ 32,260 $ 36,562 '$ 76,185 <br /> <br />Chairperson Elvig verified that the fee collections would roughly recoup the $36,000 for Option <br />2. <br /> <br />Councilmember Olson inquired about the funding source. <br /> <br />Public Works Director Olson indicated the funding source would be the Sewer and Water <br />Improvement Fund, and the street project would likely be out ofthe General Fund. <br /> <br />City Engineer Jankowski advised that six of the eight lots would need to hook up to break even <br />on costs. <br /> <br />Councilmember Olson verified with City Engineer Jankowski that there are not any wetlands on <br />these properties. She requested clarification that the property owners could hook up whenever <br />they determined if Option 3 were to be chosen. <br /> <br />Public Works Committee / July 17, 2007 <br />Page 9 of 12 <br />