Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />City Council/Orono Lake 3rd Addition <br />April 1, 1993 <br /> <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />- Can the location of the service lines into the households be arranged <br />to the best benefit of the homeowner, especially on corner lots <br />- What is the life span of the old wells and old septic systems and the <br />cost to replace them <br />- Whether or not this proposal goes against past City Council commitments <br />to not do improvement projects in this neighborhood <br />- Whether or not the neighborhood is receiving a price benefit due to the <br />development activity south of County Road 30 <br />- Whether or not the Fresno alignment for extension of sewer and water <br />south of County Road 30 could be changed <br />- If the project does not happen now, then how long before sewer and <br />water will be forced into the neighborhood <br />- Is this improvement project consistent with what happens in other <br />neighborhoods and is the costs for these improvements also consistent. <br /> <br />The City Engineer and City Council generally responded to each of the <br />questions raised. The overall responses by the City were: that this <br />neighborhood would be treated identically to other neighborhoods; that a <br />sewer and water project would take place some time in the near future when <br />major street restoration is required; that, at this point, the Fresno street <br />alignment has been accepted by the City Council; that there is some economy <br />of scale benefit to the neighborhood if this project takes place at this <br />time, but no benefit is received by the developers south of county Road 30 <br />if the neighborhood is included in the project; that the service lines could <br />be located in an area that best benefits the homeowner; that street lights <br />are not part of the project as outlined; that this neighborhood is not being <br />charged, in the costs outlined, for a water tower; that the taxes most <br />likely will increase on the homes if the value of the property increases; <br />and that the assessment would be levied and the first payment due in 1994 if <br />this project happens today and that the cost of interest on the project is <br />very reasonable at this time. <br /> <br />The overwhelming majority of the citizens in attendance voiced their <br />opposition to this project for the extension of sewer and water into their <br />neighborhood. There are 38 homes in this area. There were 24 citizens <br />present at this meeting plus the developers for the projects south of county <br />Road 30. These 24 citizens represented 14 homeowners. <br /> <br />Vice Mayor Dietz indicated that, due to not all of the homeowners being <br />present, the City would send out the 4/1/93 informational packet along with <br />a survey requesting feedback from the citizens on their desire for the <br />project. It was noted that even if all of the citizens do not desire a <br />project, that it is likely that the alignment for the extension of sewer and <br />water will still go down Fresno Street and that the city would have to <br />discuss this part of the project again with the Fresno Street property <br />owners. The issues to discuss with the Fresno Street property owners <br />include the same elements discussed tonight; street, storm sewer, lateral <br />sewer, and lateral water assessments. <br /> <br />Vice Mayor Dietz thanked everyone in attendance for their participation and <br />encouraged them to contact City staff or City Councilmembers with any <br />feedback that they may have regarding the proposed proj.ect. <br />