Oshkosh council delays vote on stormwater easement after homeowners object

The Oshkosh Common Council on Sept. 9 laid over consideration of Resolution 25-480, a city proposal to acquire and execute relocation orders for stormwater easements affecting properties at 3820 Jackson Street, 3835 Somerset Way and 3847 Somerset Way.

The matter drew a lengthy public comment from Connor Miller of 3835 Somerset Way, who said the proposed 20-foot easement would take “nearly 15 to 20% of our entire lot” and would affect a garage, patio, fence, mature trees and newly planted landscaping. Miller said the pipe running under the yards has existed since the late 1980s and that homeowners had not been offered alternate stormwater solutions; he asked the council to consider alternatives and to put themselves in the homeowners’ position.

Council members pressed staff for alternatives before making a final decision. Several members — including Council Member Bulow, Nichols, Flom, Larson and others — said they supported delaying a final vote while staff completes additional routing, cost and constructability analyses. City staff said preliminary work had identified three possible reroute options but that those were high-level and would require further study of utility conflicts and receiving infrastructure capacity. Staff and the city attorney also told council that the city currently lacks permission to access private yards and that some form of easement or permission would be required for repairs or to abandon and cap the pipe.

Why it matters: the easement would authorize city access and potential future work on an existing 24-inch storm pipe that, staff said, conveys runoff from Jackson Street (State Trunk Highway 76) and other public right-of-way. Residents said the city’s long-term use of that pipe on private property reduced their property value, created maintenance burdens, and may have contributed to foundation cracking on some homes.

Key facts and council direction - The resolution before council (25-480) would authorize acquisition and a relocation order for a stormwater easement across three parcels. The plan commission had recommended approval at an earlier meeting. - Connor Miller (resident at 3835 Somerset Way) testified that the easement would affect a garage, patio, fence, one maple tree, 6 of 18 arborvitae he and his wife planted, a shed, and other landscaping, and asked for alternatives such as an on-site retention option or rerouting the sewer. - Staff described a trenchless lining option that could be performed from the side without removing fences immediately, but said easements would still be obtained to preserve the city’s right to access the pipe for future repairs. Staff said they found three preliminary reroute corridors but had not analyzed utility conflicts or downstream capacity. - Council voted to lay the item over until the Nov. 11, 2025 meeting to allow staff to return with more detailed alternatives, cost estimates and impacts. The motion to lay over passed on a roll call vote: Stevenson, Nichols, Larson, Spannbauer and Flom voted aye; Bulow voted no; Mugwower voted aye.

Discussion highlights Resident testimony: “This proposed 20 foot easement would take nearly 15 to 20% of our entire lot,” Connor Miller told council, and said the presence of the pipe may have contributed to foundation cracking. He asked the council to consider compensation for the decades-long use of the private land and to pursue alternatives.

Council concerns: Council Member Bulow said he appreciated staff work but would vote no on the resolution as presented and urged staff to continue looking for alternatives. Council Member Nichols and others said they wanted staff to study other routing options before authorizing easements or exercising eminent-domain powers. Multiple council members, identifying as recent or first-time homeowners themselves, said they were reluctant to reduce private backyards without exhausting other options.

Staff response: City staff explained that the pipe conveys runoff from Jackson Street and that the city did not install the original pipe, which is why historical documentation is incomplete. Staff said trenchless lining could allow the pipe to remain in place while addressing fence posts that penetrate the pipe, and that compensation would be offered for any required easement. The city attorney said that if the pipe were to be abandoned and removed from use, the recommended approach would be to cap and fill the 24-inch pipe rather than leave it open underground.

Next steps and community impact: Council instructed staff to analyze alternate routings, provide rough cost estimates and assess utility conflicts and downstream capacity. Staff estimated that the analysis would likely take a “couple months” and council set Nov. 11, 2025 as the layover date. Staff and several council members said they and other council members would continue outreach to the homeowners during the review period.

The council’s vote to lay over does not adopt the easement; it postpones final action while staff develops additional options and information for council consideration.