HomeMy WebLinkAboutgr00090_000045_pg246October 11, 1977 Page 3
before having another analysis made of the City's financial situation.
Councilmember Ziebarth asked how often it was best to have the study done, whether
it should be done every year or every other year, or whatever.
Mr. Chenoweth replied that his firm puts all information into their computer, which
is where the information from the 1973 study is, and that it is best to update this
information yearly.
MSP (Pickar - Ziebarth) to renew the contract with Ehlers & Associates for 1978 and
request the debt service study, as outlined by the City Administrator, from
Ehler & Associates. 4 ayes
SANITARY SEWER CONNECTION - BALK ASSESSMENT HEARING WAIVER
Engineer Hubbard reported that when the Balk Addition was approved, a lot was created
fronting County Road J. This lot contains the existing home of the Balks. Project
1973 -4 did not provide sewer main extension along County Road J between Eastwood
and Sunnyside Roads. Therefore, the Balk's lot does not have direct access to a
sanitary sewer connection. The matter has been resolved by securing an easement
through underdeveloped lots still owned by the Balks fronting on Sunnyside Road.
The Balks will contract and pay for the cost of a long sanitary sewer connection
from the main on Sunnyside Road to their existing dwelling.
Engineer Hubbard stated that because the sewer main was not extended along County
Road J, the Balk's lot did not receive an assessment under Project 1973 -4. An
assessment for the connection service is required and has been agreed to by the
Balks. Such an assessment would normally require a public hearing, however, the
Balks have agreed to sign a waiver of the public hearing.
Engineer Hubbard reported that in order to come up with an assessment figure for
the Balks, he had taken the assessment figure for a 100' lot from the 1973 -4
project and updated it to 1977, which turned out to be $1,927 and that if the
charge to Mr. Balk from the contractor he chose was less than $1,927, the City
would assess Mr. Balk the difference. However, if it was exactly $1,927 or
more, there would be no assessment from the City.
Engineer Hubbard stated that he had spoken with Mrs. Balk during the day, and that
she had a verbal estimate from a contractor of $1,550 for the required work, which
would result in a $377 assessment from the City.
Mr. Balk stated that he was concerned with getting stung if the cost of the work
was above the estimate and he was still assessed the $377 by the City.
Councilmember Baumgartner asked if there would be additional connections put into
the line from the adjoining vacant property. Mr. Balk replied that the adjoining
property was already hooked into the main sewer system.
Attorney Meyers requested that the easements for the sewer line on the adjoining
property be recorded so that whoever purchased the property would know they were
there.
Mayor Pickar suggested that the Council could leave an option open to Mr. Balk that
he could come back to the City if he runs into trouble with the cost of the project