2012-12-12 CC Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City of Centerville Council Meeting Minutes November 28, 2012 Engineer Statz stated that he desired to review a presentation with the public and then would address any questions that the public had. Engineer Statz stated that the City is allowed by MN State Statute, Chapter 429 to assess for such improvement projects and that this was the first required public hearing and that another public hearing would be held to discuss the individual property owner assessments. Engineer Statz reviewed the improvements to be made for Center Street, Ivy Court, and Sumac Court. Engineer Statz stated that the improvements would include total reconstruction of the roadway with new concrete curb and installation of municipal water services. Engineer Statz stated that all other improvements stated at the previous public hearing except for the roadway work would also apply to this project with the additions of required rain gardens, infiltration trenches, pond expansion, etc. required by Rice Creek Watershed District. Municipal watermain with services to the property line would be constructed with the improvement. Engineer Statz stated that the City would be bonding for the street project (approx. $911,000) along with specially assessing benefiting property owners approximately 20% of the costs. The City would pay for the municipal watermain and services to the curbstop (approx. $261,000) through the City's Water Fund. Engineer Statz stated that Council may choose to include in the project a bid item to connect each home to the water service at the option of the home owner and could also include well abandonment. The City would finance this and in turn assess the property owners if they desired to be connected. However, if they did not desire to be connected then there would be future connection fees, permit fees, contractor fees and plumber fees at the time the owner connected. Engineer Statz discussed the pros and cons of having the municipal water installed at the same time as the reconstruction of the street: Pros — Entire project would be completed in one (1) season with the final lift being left until the remaining year, homeowners can finance the cost of the municipal water, connection and well separation/abandonment through the City and the City would likely receive more cost effective bidding if included in the bids. Cons — Additional engineering, legal and administrative fees, liability issues and degradation of the new roadway. Engineer Statz again stated that at this evening's meeting Council would be determining whether to go forward and prepare plans and specifications and receive bids for the project. Engineer Statz stated that the project could be stopped at any time at this point up to the award of a contract for construction. Administrator Larson explained that residents would have a period to pay off special assessments without incurring interest, the assessments would be placed on their property for a period of 15 years and at an interest rate of 4% and that this is similar to the procedure that was executed for the 2009 street improvement project. Engineer Statz stated that a typical assessment would range from $3,500- $4,200 with an annual payment of $400 -$500 for the street portion only. Discussion ensued regarding language within the current ordinance addresses connection to the municipal watermain if services are available and the deadline date of December 31, 2017. The City Council may consider extending the deadline to 2021 for this project similar to the 2009 Street Improvement Project property owners who received an extension of eight year from the completion date. Page 3 of 12 -3-