The primary focus was the feasibility study for 80th Street, which has seen significant deterioration since its last improvement in the late 1990s. The street’s current state, lacking proper storm sewer and water main infrastructure, was outlined by the city engineer, with a plan proposed for full reconstruction. This plan includes removing the existing overlay, reinstalling the road to meet city standards, and adding a storm sewer system. The total estimated cost for these improvements is approximately $775,200, which increases to $987,200 if a water main is included.

A point of contention was the assessment calculations for property owners. The city’s policy typically mandates that 50% of the costs for street and storm sewer projects be assessed to property owners, yet the council is not strictly bound by this policy. The meeting emphasized the necessity of ensuring that assessments remain fair and equitable, in line with state statutes. One suggestion was to cap assessments at 25%, allowing for a specific type of bonding to finance the project. This would lower the assessment to $21,500 per unit for street and storm sewer improvements.

The council compared these figures with previous projects, noting that the proposed assessments for 80th Street were higher. This was attributed to the larger lot sizes involved, averaging about three-quarters of an acre, compared to less than half an acre in previous projects. The disparity in lot sizes provided context for the higher proposed assessments, as larger lots require more extensive infrastructure work.

The discussion also addressed the potential assessment for a water main, considering the city’s policy of a 100% assessment for water connections. The council recognized the importance of resident input in this decision. The cost of a $23,000 assessment for city water was discussed in light of the potential expenses of maintaining private wells. Concerns were raised about the implications of delaying the water main installation, which could lead to further disruptions and additional costs in the future.

To better inform the assessment process, the council considered conducting a special benefit appraisal to evaluate property values before and after the project’s completion. This appraisal would help establish a cap for assessments based on the determined benefits, with an estimated cost of under $5,000. The consensus among council members was to pursue this appraisal, recognizing its potential to clarify the assessment process and prevent future disputes.

The meeting also touched on the necessity of purchasing easements, particularly from Holy Family Catholic High School, whose land is adjacent to the proposed project. The council expressed hope that the school would donate the necessary easement, as the land is not used. However, debate arose regarding the potential assessment of Holy Family for the improvements, with some council members questioning if future development potential might warrant such an assessment.

The council explored the feasibility of constructing a rural section road without curbs and gutters, noting that while it could be an option, the existing conditions made it more disruptive for residents. The discussion concluded with a general agreement to proceed with sending out requests for proposals for the special benefit appraisal and to seek resident feedback on water connections before making a final decision.