Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />City Council <br />Sept. 9, 1987 <br />Street <br />Assessment <br />Policy <br />(Cont.) <br />Storm <br />Sewer <br />On <br />Edgerton <br />Agenda <br />Addition <br />would then have to pick up these assessments. <br />Schafer asked if assessments on splitable lots could be deferred until <br />the property was divided and sold. <br />Fahey stated that this could be done, but was not good practice as <br />bond payments have to be met and the City would have to pay these <br />assessments. <br />Scalze also pointed out that interest accrues on deferred assessments. <br />Mr. Bob Tuerk, 24 Sunrise Drive, appeared before the Council regarding <br />storm sewer on Edgerton and NSP's exposed gas line. Tuerk reported <br />that NSP is planning to lower the gas line, however, if storm sewer <br />were installed on Edgerton, there would be no need to lower the gas <br />line. NSP would also be willing to contribute the cost of lowering <br />the line to the City to be used for storm sewer. <br />The City Engineer reported that he met with NSP and the County on this <br />issue last winter. If storm sewer were installed on Edgerton, it would <br />have to go under the bike path and the estimated cost is $110,000. <br />It would cost NSP approximately $10,000 to lower the gas main. <br />Therefore, there would still be $100,000 in costs for storm sewer. <br />Tuerk reported that it was his understanding that the County would pay <br />70% to 80% of the cost of storm sewer. <br />The Engineer reported that the County will pay for the area they drain, <br />namely, one-fifth of the total area. <br />Tuerk disagreed with the one-fifth figure and reported that the <br />County informed him they would pay 70 to 80%. Tuerk also stated <br />that if storm sewer is going to be put on Edgerton, why lower the <br />gas line and why not just put in the storm sewer now. <br />The City Engineer reported that his recommendation after talking to <br />NSP and the County was that the gas line be lowered. Nowever, the <br />Engineer stated that he would again contact the County to determine <br />if the 70% to 80% participation outlined by Mr. Tuerk was correct. <br />The Engineer will report back on this matter. <br />Stenger The City Engineer reported that he will make a recommendation on <br />Assessment the assessment for the Stenger property at 318 Savage Lane at the <br />R Other next Council meeting. <br />Assessment <br />Questions The City Engineer reported that he recommen~.ed no other amendments <br />to the assessment roll. <br />Scalze pointed out the assessment for St. John's Church. <br />Page -15- <br />