Laserfiche WebLink
<br />deeding over half of the land within the ditch to Hunter's Crossing. If agreeable <br />to all council members, this needs approval along with a decision on who owns <br />the ditch. <br /> <br />, <br />Mayor Wilharber noted the ditch was originally dug by local farmers but has now <br />been maintained by the City. <br /> <br />Council Member Sweeney asked if the pond within the development was bermed <br />on the north side of the plat to avoid overflow into the ditch. Mr. March stated <br />there was a berm on the north side to avoid overflow. <br /> <br />Council Member Sweeney asked if an easement could be obtained from Hunter's <br />Crossing near the ditch. Mr. Hoeft noted this would need to be investigated for <br />future discussion. He suggested this item be tabled for discussion at the August 9, <br />2000 meeting. Mr. Hoeft indicated this ditch is being relied upon for water runoff <br />and needs to stay, which means it requires Council action. <br /> <br />Motion by Council Member Vickers. seconded by Council Member Sweeney <br />to table this item for future discussion at the August 9. 2000. All in favor. <br />Motion carried unanimously. <br /> <br />Award Bid for Hunter's Crossing <br /> <br />Mayor Wilharber reviewed the four (4) bids submitted and noted the low bidder <br />was Northdale Construction Company in the amount of $502,779.56. He <br />compared this to the City Engineer's estimate of$550,000. <br /> <br />Mayor Wilharber asked how the fees with County Bank were discussed. Mr. <br />March noted discussions were held with County Bank and that utilities could be <br />brought to this site for future development. He indicated it would be less <br />expensive to bring these services to the site at this time. Mr. Palzer explained the <br />thought was to loop the site at the County Bank with a six (6) inch line. <br /> <br />Mayor Wilharber asked what would be charged back to the County Bank. Mr. <br />Hoeft noted this was for future service and would not be adding any value to the <br />County Bank and therefore could not be invoiced at this time. He indicated this <br />would be merely for future development. <br /> <br />Mayor Wilharber stated he saw the benefit of placing the lines at this time but <br />asked if it could be assessed to future developers. Mr. Hoeft stated this could not <br />be assessed at a future date to a new developer and that the City would acquire <br />this expense. <br /> <br />Council Member Sweeney stated he was not interested in placing this line if the <br />City would need to fund the additional line on the eastside of County Bank. <br /> <br />Mr. Hoeft noted the Council would only need to approve the base bid at this time <br />and would not need to approve the County Bank utility lines. Mr. March noted <br />the assessments still have not been set at this time with bid approval and that it <br /> <br />Page 3 of 10 <br />