HomeMy WebLinkAbout2. Street Assessment PolicyTO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
(9i ty of
(�Kosernouni
P.O. BOX 510
2875 -145TH ST. W.
ROSEMOUNT. MINNESOTA 55068
612-423-4411
Mayor Napper
Council Members Klassen, Oxborough W'llcox,
Stephan Jilk, City Administrator
February 22, 1991
Assessment Policy
Wippermann
Attached please find a second draft of the proposed assessment
policy for your consideration and for discussion purposes on
Tuesday evening at 6:30 P.M..
This is a two part handout and includes the policy and information
that I hoped would help us understand how the assessment policy
would fit into the funding of the street reconstruction program.
The policy is one that provides for assessing property owners
based on a residential equivalent cost and on a front footage
basis. The actual residential equivalent is based on the current
years cost for constructing a section of residential street.
The cost would vary depending on the current years cost and the
type of street section that is to be constructed. The "type" of
section changes depending on where the street is being constructed
(i.e. rural, residential, industrial, commercial) and so the cost
would vary.
The policy sets out methods of construction initiation,
construction guidelines assessment procedures and assessment
deferment policies.
I believe it will, when completed, be all encompassing as to
construction guidelines and assessment procedures.
On Tuesday we need to focus in on the concept of:
1. Assessing by front footage v.s. area.
2. The percentage of total "residential equivalent" that the
property owner will pay.
3. The part that this policy will play in a long term street
reconstruction and maintenance program.
If we can leave the meeting on Tuesday with consensus on these
issues I believe we can wrap up the policy by the April 2nd
meeting.
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
ASSESSMENWIMPROVEMENT POLICY
2nd Draft
February 20, 1991
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
2
Introduction
Page
3
Definitions
Page
4
Policies and Procedures
Page
5
Project Initiation &
Hearing Process
Page
7
Construction Standards
Page
8
Useful Service Life
Page
9
New Development
Improvements
Page
12
Existing Development
Improvements
Assessment Computations
Page
15
Assessment Deferment
Policy
ASSESSMENT/IMPROVEMENT POLICY
PAGE 1
INTRODUCTION
This document sets forth the methods and policies relating to
local improvements and special assessments practiced in the City
of Rosemount. It is emphasized that the following summarization
is general in nature and that certain circumstances may justify
deviations from stated policy as determined by the Rosemount City
Council.
A local improvement involves one or more of the following types
of improvements:
Roadway grading and base
Bituminous surfacing
Curb and gutter
Sidewalks, trails and driveways
Water trunklines and laterals
Sanitary sewer trunklines and laterals
Service connections
Storm sewer trunks and laterals
All appropriate appurtenances associated with the
above approvements
Improvements are classified as follows:
1. New Developments - The construction of improvements related
to newly developed areas, normally made in conjunction with
the plat approval process.
2. Reconstruction - see definitions (Section I.1)
3. Rehabilitation - Complete or partial reconstruction of the
abovementioned improvements including bituminous overlays.
Rehabilitation does not include routine maintenance which
does not improve the structural integreity of a roadway,
such as sealcoating and crack trunks.
4. Preventive Maintenance - see definitions (Section I.3)
5. Extensions - Construction of improvements generally made to
extend services to a certain area. Extensions normally
pertain to water, sanitary sewer and storm sewer trunks.
The special assessment is a financing tool employed by the City
of Rosemount as a means to allocate the cost of specific
improvements to benefitted properties and to spread those costs
over a number of years.
ASSESSMENT/IMPROVEMENT POLICY
PAGE 2
Minnesota Statues Chapter 429 regulates the procedure for the
construction and financing of local improvement projects when at
least part of the cost is defrayed by special assessments.
Special assessments are collected from the property owner along
with real estate taxes. When an improvement is of benefit to
certain areas, it is the intent of the Council that special
assessments be levied against benefitted properties. A major
goal of this document is that special assessments be allocated
and levied in an equitable and consistent manner.
SECTION I
DEFINITIONS
Additional definitions will be added as policy is completed and
as needed.
1. RECONSTRUCTION - will be defined as a project whereby all
meaningful elements of a street are being removed and
replaced. This would include curb and gutter, bituminous or
concrete pavement, granular base, and items appurtenant to
these elements.
2. REHABILITATION - will be defined as a project in which one
or more of the aforementioned elements is modified or
supplemented in-place, to restore the serviceability of the
entire street, such as bituminous overlays.
3. PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE - will be defined as work that
involves a level of effort less than that involved in
reconstruction or rehabilitation, the intent of which is to
extend the life of the existing pavement. Preventative
maintenance will include but not be limited to crack
filling, patching, milling and cold planing, and seal
coating.
ASSESSMENT/IMPROVEMENT POLICY
PAGE 3
SECTION II
GENERAL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
The following are general principles, policies and procedures
applicable to all types of improvement:
1. Project costs shall include the cost of all necessary
construction work required to accomplish the improvement,
plus engineering, legal, financing, easement acquisition and
contingency costs.
2. Assessable costs are project costs minus the City share,
County share and other credits. MSA funds will not be
credited.
3. Special assessments will be levied as soon as practical.
Normally this will be within one year after completion of
the project.
4. Publicly owned properties, including municipal building
sites, schools, parks, State and Federal building sites, but
not including public streets and alleys, are regarded as
being assessable on the same basis as if such property were
privately owned.
ASSESSMENT/IMPROVEMENT POLICY
PAGE 4
SECTION III
SPECIFIC POLICIES
Project Initiation and Hearing Process
This section intends to describe the initiation of improvement
projects and the administration required to final Council action,
pursuant to the requirements of MSA 429.
A. Project Initiation
1. By Petition: Petitions for initiating improvements will be
prepared by City staff upon request. Such petitions,
circulated by the affected owners should bear the signatures
of the -property owners of 35% or more of the benefitted
property. Petitions may be requested and submitted at any
time. Projects for petitions received after February 1 will
not be scheduled until the construction season of the
following year. The normal time required for receiving,
processing, scheduling hearings and preparing construction
documents is six months.
2. By Council Action: If the Council determines that an
improvement is in the best interest of the City, it can,
without petition, initiate the improvement with a
four/fifths vote of the Council.
3. By 100% Signed Petition: When a petition is signed by 100%
of the property owners benefitted by the improvement, and
there is no City cost participation, the Council may order
the improvement without holding an improvement hearing.
4. By Development Contract: Improvement projects for new
development will only be considered upon execution of a
developers agreement signed by 100% of the benefitted
property owners. The Council may order the project without
a public hearing.
B. Hearing Process
1. Improvement Hearing After a petition if filed and its
adequacy determined, or the Council initiates the project,
the City Engineer is directed to study and report as to the
feasibility of the improvement. If after reviewing the
feasibility report, the Council feels the project has merit,
ASSESSMENT/IMPROVEMENT POLICY
PAGE 5
a public hearing is scheduled, notice published twice, and
all persons benefitted by the project notified in writing.
When an improvement project is to be financed by the sale of
improvement bonds, there is a statutory requirement that at
least 20% of the total costs of the project be assessed
against the benefitted property.
If after the improvement hearing, at which all persons are
heard, the Council feels that the project still has merit,
then the Council will authorize the preparation of necessary
plans and specifications, and upon receipt and acceptance of
those plans, will authorize the advertisement for bids, by
resolution, for the construction of the project.
C. Final Hearing (Assessment)
After the improvement is ordered and bids received, or the
improvement is completed or nearing completion, a roll will
be prepared and the affected property owners will be mailed
a Notice of Assessment Hearing stating the time and date
that an assessment hearing will be held. An assessment roll
will be prepared and will be posted at the City Hall for
review prior to the assessment hearing. All interested
parties shall have an opportunity to be heard regarding the
assessment.
Necessary and proper adjustment to the assessment roll can
be made by Council at the time the hearing is being held.
If an appeal is made regarding the amount of the special
assessment, written notice must be filed with the Council
prior to or at the assessment hearing.
After the hearing, the assessment roll is adopted by the
Council. The property owners have a 30 day period in which
to pay their assessment in part or in full at the City Hall,
interest free. After this period, the assessment begins to
accumulate interest. On or about October 10th of each year,
the assessment roll is certified to the County Auditor's
office where it is added to the tax roll for the following
year.
The assessment shall be levied over a period to be
established by the City Council, in equal annual
installments on the principal with interest on the declining
balance. The annual interest rate shall also be established
by the City Council upon the sale of the improvement bonds.
ASSESSMENT/IMPROVEMENT POLICY
PAGE 6
SECTION IV
CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS AND EXPECTED LIFE
Minimum Design Standards
The following are minimum design standards. Oversizing may be
required to serve areas extending beyond the scope of the project
as determined by the City Engineer.
A. Sanitary Sewer Laterals
Minimum 8" PVC (SDR35) or DIP (CL52). Manholes a maximum 4001apart.
B. Sanitary Sewer Services
Minimum 4' PVC (SDR35) or (CISP).
C. Water Main Lateral
Minimum 6" loop or 8" deadend DIP (CL52).
D. Water Main Services
1. Single Family Residences - Minimum 1" Type K copper.
2. Multiple Family Residences - To be determined by City Engineer
based on UBC.
3. Commercial/Industrial - To be determined by City Engineer based on
UBC.
E. Storm Sewer System
Pipe size shall be designed to handle a 10 year event and pond
shall be designed to handle a 100 year event. Catch basins shall
be placed so that overland drainage does not exceed 1,0001.
Concrete swales a minimum of 3' wide shall be installed where
overland drainage crosses an intersection at locations to be
determined by the city engineer.
F. Residential Streets
R1 & R2 Zones - minimum 32' back to back, urban cross section,
with concrete curb & gutter and 7 ton pavement
R-3 & R-4 Zones - minimum 37' back to back, urban cross
section, with concrete curb & gutter and 7 ton pavement.
ASSESSMENT/IMPROVEMENT POLICY
PAGE 7
Rural Residential Zone - minimum 24' edge to edge, rural cross
section, with 4' gravel shoulders and 7 ton pavement.
Agricultural Zone - none
Commercial Zone - minimum 49' back to back, urban cross section,
with concrete curb & gutter and 9 ton pavement.
Industrial Zone - minimum 41' back to back, urban cross section,
with concrete curb & gutter and 9 ton pavement; or
44' rural section and 9 ton pavement.
Useful Service Life
Public improvements are judged to have a normal useful life
expectancy. For the purpose of this policy, this life expectancy
shall be as follows:
A. Surface Improvements
Concrete Curb and Gutter 30 years
Bituminous Roadways 20 years
Sidewalks 50 years
B. Subsurface Improvements
Water Main 50 years
Sanitary Sewer 50 years
Storm Sewer 50 years
When any existing improvement is ordered to be renewed or
replaced, the assessments to be levied will be prorated from
0% at one-half like expectancy to 100% at full life
expectancy.as noted above or beyond.
ASSESSMENT/IMPROVEMENT POLICY
PAGE 8
SECTION V
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IN NEW DEVELOPMENTS
General Procedures and Policies
City Code requires execution of a development contract at the
time of land platting. The developer's agreement normally
references means and methods of providing for public improvement
construction.
As a standard, the City of Rosemount has pursued policies by
which all costs of improvement are directly attributable and
fully paid by cost allocation or assessments against the
development, developer or properties requiring and benefiting by
the improvement. The policies are established with the intent
that no developmental costs are incurred by existing lots or
parcels, by the existing residents, or by the City in general.
The exception is for improvements which are determined to have an.
area wide benefit which exceeds the scope of the development.
At the time of platting, the cost responsibilities for any
development for trunk improvements shall be defined. This
responsibility includes trunk sanitary sewer facilities, trunk
water facilities (including source, supply, storage and
distribution components), storm water drainage and control
facilities, arterial street, park dedication, pedestrian walkway
systems and other public improvements, existing or proposed, of
an area wide benefit. Normally the City will require a cash
payment by the developer for the development's share of
improvements for an area wide benefit. The amount to be
determined by the City Council.
At the time of platting, the development contract may provide
details on construction and timing of local or lateral
improvements of various nature for the benefit and improvement of
the individual properties as required by the Rosemount
Subdivision Ordinance.
City Improvement Financing and Construction
As a general policy, the City of Rosemount will assist developers
in the financing and construction of public improvements through
authority granted to the City by Chapter 429 of Minnesota
Statutes. Such assistance is granted by specific Council action
for each development proposal based on perception by the Council
ASSESSMENT/IMPROVEMENT POLICY
PAGE 9
of the project, viability, and development benefit to the City.
The City may elect to sell bonds for such improvement and assess
the costs of bond retirement against individual benefitted land
parcels for a period of repayment 3-5 years or as otherwise
determined by Council.
Typically, the total project costs for improvements benefiting
the development will be assessed on an equal basis against all
buildable lots in the development.
For such City assessed developments and improvements, the City,
through the development contract, requires a 60% down payment, a
bond or letter of credit to protect the City from potential
project default, and requires assessment payment concurrent with
building permit issuance or per the assessment payment schedule
whichever comes first. For such City assisted projects, the City
provides design, construction supervision and assessment
certificate, legal, fiscal and administrative services and charge
costs for those services back to the project.
Public Improvement Work by Private Developers
No public improvements may take place before a development
contract has been executed.
A private developer may have his plans prepared by other than
City forces under the following conditions:
1. All plans, drawings, specifications and related documents
required shall be prepared by a professional engineer,
registered in the State of Minnesota and approved by the
City.
2. The developer must keep the City informed as to the time
table of development and design, the letting date of a
construction contract, and the starting date of construction
work.
3. In order to warrant the construction for the life expectancy
as previously set forth, the City will provide inspection of
all phases of construction as set forth in the contract
documents.
4. The City of Rosemount may perform construction surveys,
staking and other engineering services when requested by the
contractor or developer. The City will also assist the
contractor in interpretation of the contract documents,
ASSESSMENT/IMPROVEMENT POLICY
PAGE 10
ordinances, codes and other items necessary to meet the
criteria as established by the City of Rosemount.
5. No public improvement work shall be performed by any
developer or other private party in City right of way or
easement unless a development contract has been executed and
the final construction plans have been approved by the City.
6. The City will require a surety deposit of 100% of the
estimated project costs in the form of cash, escrow deposit,
certified check or irrevocable letter of credit.
The City and its representatives shall at all times have access
to the work in order to complete the services as herein provided,
and the developer shall give the City timely notice of his
readiness for inspections or other work to be rendered. Permits,
licenses and easements or permanent changes in existing
facilities shall be secured and paid for by the developer.
The developer shall be charged for these services, and the value
of the services shall be determined on a percentage basis as
agreed upon by the developer and the City before the project is
started. The fee for plan review and City administration is set
annually by resolution of the City Council. All inspection costs
will be billed on an hourly basis.
Upon proper completion of sanitary sewers, storm sewers, water
mains, curb and gutter, roadway base, surfacing and sidewalk by
the developer, the City will accept said improvements by
resolution under a two (2) year guarantee to the City.
ASSESSMENT/IMPROVEMENT POLICY
PAGE 11
SECTION VI
IMPROVEMENTS IN EXISTING DEVELOPMENTS
(RECONSTRUCTION/REHABILITATION)
A. Initiation
Improvements may be initiated by petition or by Council as
set out in Section III -1-A.
B. Reconstruction and rehabilitation work proceeding under the
terms of this policy shall provide for the standards set out
in Section IV. F.
C. Computation of Assessable Costs
1. Property Cost Assessable Allocation - Assessable costs will
be allocated to properties based upon their zoning
designation at the time of the improvement. The "basic
improvement unit" which will be utilized for assessing costs
is set out in Section IV. F. (i.e. R3 Zone - ' back to
back, urban cross section with concrete curb and gutter and
ton pavement). The "current" cost for constructing the
"basic improvement unit" in Section IV. F. will be
determined using actual bid prices for those units and then
these costs will applied to the adjusted front footage value
determined in Section VI.D. 3.
2. Cost Sharing - Project costs for improvements completed
under this section will be based on a cost sharing formula
as follows:
Assessed to Affected Property Owner _o
City Pays
D. Method of Assessment
1. Basic Assessment Data
a. Area (used for sanitary sewer and water trunks)
Area used is the gross area of the parcel as it is
benefitted by each separate improvement. All property
within district boundaries is to be included as
determined by the City. In general, all property will
be assessed except lots or areas which are not
developable.
ASSESSMENT/IMPROVEMENT POLICY
PAGE 12
b. Units
Generally used for sewer and water services in
residential developments. May be used for sewer and
water laterals in existing residential developments.
In undeveloped areas units shall be determined based on
density allowed under land use designated in City
Comprehensive Guide Plan.
C. Adjusted Front Footage
Generally used for all improvements except for the
above.
2. Method for determining Adjusted Front Footage. The
following formulas will be used to determine adjusted front
footage:
A. Properties zoned Residential, Rural Residential,
Industrial and Commercial
(1) Odd shaped or pie shaped lots - Area of the lot up
to a maximum depth of 150' divided by 150 (e.g.
15,000 square foot lot on a cul-de-sac = 15,000
divided by 150 = 100' (adjusted).
(2) Approximate Rectangular Lot - Average of the front
and back lot line.
(3) Rectangular Lot - Actual front footage.
(4) Shallow Lot (less than 120') - Area of lot divided
by 120.
(5) Corner Lot - Same as rectangular lot except credit
against long side equal to 75% of the short side.
Credit will be assessed against short side and
lots adjacent to short side to the midpoint of the
block.
B. Property zoned Agricultural
Will be assessed adjusted front feet per unit
Based on unit numbers calculated in Section VI.4
3. Details for Computing Area
Area shall include square
excluding public easements
natural waterways, swamps,
the DNR.
4. Method of Determining Unit
ASSESSMENTJIMPROVEMENT POLICY
PAGE 13
footage within property lines
for roads, stormwater ponds,
or other wetlands designated by
The number of potential units possible by subdividing based
on minimum lot requirements based upon existing zoning
designation. If the street, in which sanitary sewer or
water lines are to be installed, is to be improved, all
services will be installed to service the maximum number of
potential lots based upon existing zoning designation.
5. Typical Methods of Assessment
a. Streets - Adjusted front footage
b. Curb and Gutter - Adjusted front footage
C. Sanitary Sewer Lateral - Adjusted front footage
d. Sanitary Sewer Service - Per unit
e. Water Main Lateral - Adjusted front footage
f. Water Main Service - Per unit
g. Sidewalks - Adjusted front footage
h. Driveways - Actual cost
i. Storm Sewer - per Stormwater Management Policy (to be
completed)
j. Sanitary Sewer Trunk - The adjusted front footage of
abutting property shall pay a lateral benefit equal to
the Engineer's estimated cost of installing an 8"
lateral at a depth of 121. The oversizing cost of the
project shall be paid out of the Sanitary Sewer Core
Facility Fund.
k. Water Main Trunk - Same as sanitary sewer
6. Method of Payment (Interest on the assessment will begin
accruing from the date of the adoption of the assessment
roll.)
A schedule for the payments of special assessments will be
determined by the City for each project. The payment
schedule for projects in new developments will be set
through a development contract but in no circumstances will
those schedules be less than the following schedule(s) used
for existing developments.
ASSESSMENT/IMPROVEMENT POLICY
PAGE 14
The owner may pay the entire or partial amount of assessment
within 30 days of adoption of the assessment roll without
interest. The remaining amount shall be paid in equal
principal installments (per the schedule in 6.a.) plus
interest as determined by the Council (typically 2% above
the net interest rate of the bond issue). Annual payments
will be remitted with the property taxes. An owner may pay
off the assessments in full at any time, but will be charged
the entire year's interest.
ASSESSMENT/IMPROVEMENT POLICY
PAGE 15
SECTION VII
ASSESSMENT DEFERMENT POLICY
Deferment of Special Assessments
A. Purpose - To determine in which instances the City may
legally allow deferment of special assessments levied under
this policy so as to not create undue hardship for property
owners because of the project being assessed.
B. Under Minnesota State Statutes 429.051, 529.061, 273.111 and
435.193 Cities may legally defer special assessments for the
following reasons:
1. For Property covered under the Green Acres Law
2. Unimproved property until it is improved
3. Senior Citizen and low income deferments due to age and
low income
C. Based on these Statutes and the desire of the City to
provide adequate street, sewer, water and stormwater systems
to the City residents while not causing property owners
undue hardships due to the construction of and assessment
for these systems the following deferments will be available
upon written request of the affected property owners:
1. Green Acres
2. Unimproved property
3. Senior Citizen/Low Income
CONSIR------------------- Route
YEAR
STREET
FRC14
91
14 5711 ST. W .
SI IAN PKWY
91
DIAMOND PA'17I
144171 ST
92
CHILI AVE
N. END
92
14'5TIl ST. W.
CAMEO AVE
92
CAMEO AVE
14 5TI I ST.W.
92
L.147`111 ST.W.
HWY 3
92
143RD ST.W.
1114Y 3
93
CAMEO AVE
143RD ST.
93
14 5'171 ST. W.
SI IAN PKWY
94
160TI1 ST
APPLE VALLEY
94
160TII ST
'Ili 3
94
C,'HIPP. AVE
151ST ST.W.
95
145111 ST. W.
BISCAYNE AVE
95
DODD BLVD
C11IPP. AVE.
95
AKRON AVE
CSAlf 42
96 145TII ST. W. CO. RD. 42
97 DODD BLVD SHAN. PKWY
STREET
REcx-)Ns'PRUC,"PIoN
------------------
LINEAL
PROP.
TMAL
MSA
lu
PRIORMILES
FEET
WIDIII
COSTS ASSESSIBLE CITY SHARE
ELLIv1BLE
DIA. PATH
2
0.36
1901
40
$575,1.00
$503,1.00
138'111 ST
5
0.7
3696
64
$214,000
$789,100
$555,000
145TH ST.
2
0.2
1056
32
$48,892
CIIIPP. AVE:
2
0.52
2746
40
$585,900
L. 1471'11 ST.W.
3
0.17
898
32
$83,117
CANADA AVE
3
0.24
1267
32
$117,341
W.END
6
0.1
528
32
$48,892
$874,400
$584,142
145TH ST.
2
0.17
898
32
$83,117
CIII PP . AVE
4
0.48
2534
40
$9,11,308
$1,024,424
111 3
2
1.0
5280
52
$945,000
$373,000
US HWY 52
4
5.0
26400
44
$331,000
$287,000
160TH ST.W.
6
0.9
4750
48
$373,000
$1,649,000
BRAZIL 'AVE
2
0.33
1742
40
$318,000
SHAN. PKWY.
4
0.54
2851
40
$585,900
$426,000
INVER (ROVE HGPS
8
2.5
13200
44
$647,712
$1,551,612
BISCAYNE AVE.
2
0.38
2006
40
$461,000
DELFT AVE
4
0.53
2798
40
$585,900
SI'RU.'r
CAMBRIAN AVE
CAMARO LANE
CIIARLSTON AVE
C'1fA1AHTI AVE
CIIILI AVE
1.46'111 SI' - W.
1.46`191 ST.W.
L. 147'191 ST.W.
147TH ST.W.
U.147TI1 ST - W.
148'191 ST. W -
U.149'1'11 ST.W.
L. 150111 ST.W.
143RD ST.W.
144TH ST.W.
C7}ORLEY AVE
147111 ST.W.
148TH ST. W.
149'191 ST.W.
U.149TH ST.W.
DALLARA AVE
DALLARA AVE
DANV I LLE AVE
DELFT AVE
U.145171 ST.W.
U.145TH ST.W.
U.148TH ST -14.
121ST S1'. W.
BURNLEY AVE
1.147'TH ST.W.
149171 ST.W.
CIMARRONAVE
14 6TI I ST W.
U.148TH ST.W.
149TH ST -14.
DAMASK Cl'.
L.146111 ST.W.
150'1'11 ST.W.
Route
FROM
L.147`I'Il ST.W.
CAMBRIAN AVE
1.48`1'11 S'1'.W
145`1'11 ST.W.
L .14 7TH ST.W.
BURNLEY AVE
CAMEO AVE
CANADA AVE.
CANADA AVE
CANADA AVE
CANADA AVE
C'LIARLSTON AVE.
CAMFIELD CIR.
C11I LE AVE
ClIl LI AVE:
U.148'TII ST.W.
QIIPP. AVE.
C'HIPP AVE
CIIIPP. AVE'.
C11ORLE:Y AVE.
1 -45TH ST.W.
DODD BLVD
U.145111 ST.W.
U.145'TH ST.W.
DALLARA AVE
DANVILLE AVE
DELFT' AVE
AKRON AVE
145'191 ST.W.
BURMA AVE:
CANADA AVE
148'111 ST.W.
CHIPP. AVE.
CHORLEY AVE
CIIORLF:Y AVE
N.END
DANBURY AVE
DALLARA AV[,:
TO
IlWY 3
S. EI`I D
11. 150111i ST.W.
L. 147TH ST . W .
148TIi ST.W.
IHY 3
CliIPP.AVE
(:1111,1 AVE:
CIIIPP. AVE
CIIILI AVE
CHILI AVE
C'i-IIPP. AVE
C'IIARLSTON AVE
C I HHARON
CIMMARON AVE
U.1,19111 ST.W.
C I14ARRON AVE
C 1' 14AIUZON AVE
ClIORLEY AVE
CIMARRON AVE
DODD BLVD
150TH S,r . W .
DODD BLVD
DODD BLVD
DAMASK AVE
DEL.F1' AVE
DIAMOND PA'I'R
WEST FIND
146TH S'I' . W .
I 54 3
CHARLSTON AVE
U.148111 ST.W.
C i t* AKRON AVE
CIMARRON AVE
CfIRYSLER AVE
DODD BLVD
DANVILLE AVE
W EN D
PRI ORM I LES
4 0.25
4 0.19
4 0.13
4 0.1-4
4 0.18
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
�1
4
'I
4
4
4
4
8
:LO
10
10
1.0
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
0.1
0.38
0.21
0.24
0.21
0.21
0.15
0.1-6
0.21
0.24
0.1
0.21
0.21.
0.04
0.16
0.3.1
0.16
0.38
0.42
0.06
0.11
0.09
0.64
0.09
0.06
0.09
0.16
o.2
0.1.7
0.1.
0.1"3
0.06
0.18
STRUC1'UAL MAINTENANCE;
1 L:Is"1'
1320
1003
686
739
950
528
?006
1109
1-267
11.09
1109
792
845
1109
1.267
528
11.09
1109
211
8.15
1637
845
2006
2218
31.7
581-
475
3379
475
31.7
475
845
10`16
898
528
686
31 _'1
950
TO`1'AI,
$1.3,000.00
$11,000.00
$6,000.00
$6,000.00
$8,000.00
$6,000.00
$18,000.00
$9,000.00
$11-000.00
000.00
$9,000.00
$9,000.00
$7,000.00
$7,000.00
$9,000.00
$.1.1,000.00
$4,000.00
$9,000.00
$9,000.00
$2,000.00
$7,000.00
$14,000.00
$7,000.00
$15,000.00
$17,000.00
$2,000.00
$,1,000.00
$4,000.00
$24,000.00
$4,000.00
$11,000.00
$4,000.00
$-1, 000.00
$9,000.00
$7,000.00
$4,000.00
$5,000.00
$2,000.00
$7,000.00
TOTAL 7.13 37 646 $311,000.00
Five Year Street Reconstruction Program
Estimated Cost of Reconstruction $5,700,000 over 5 years
Estimated Cost of Maintenance/Overlays $ 300,000 over 5 years
Sources of Revenue
1. Assessments
2. MSA Funds
3. CIP
4. General Tax Levy
Concebt
Develop five year, ongoing, street reconstruction program to
reconstruct and maintain city streets. Initially this program
would cover years 1991 - 1995. Each year this program would be
reviewed and upgraded to add next year.
In order to fund this general reconstruction/maintenance program
it is necessary to look at sources of funding in a broader sense
than on a project by project basis. It is necessary to consider
"pooling" of all available sources so that a "financing program"
can be generated. These sources would be:
1. Assessments - under the proposed assessment policy a
portion of all construction costs, will be assessed.
The percentage of individual project costs to be
assessed will typically be %, but could range from
a low of 50% to a high of 100% depending on what type
of street it is and how many abutting properties have
access to the street, the type of development
occurring, etc.. Generally if the street is larger
than a residential street MSA Funds offset city costs.
(Those not collected through assessments.)
2. MSA Funds are available to the city through the State
of Minnesota from the MVET Fund. There is no
indication now that those funds are in any great
extent, in jeopardy.
1
On some projects the amount of dollars that the city
can receive for reconstruction of an MSA designated
street is almost 100% of the cost. The city receives a
maximum amount per year from MSA Funds even if our
costs are greater. We don't lose those funds which are
not covered in a single year but we must wait for our
allocation to be great enough to cover those costs.
In 1991 our construction allocation for MSA is about
$300,000 per year. This amount would expand as the
number of street miles that are eligible increases.
What many cities do is to develop a 5 year
reconstruction plan and borrow against their MSA
allocation. That is, say borrow money to fund large
projects which have to be done before MSA Funds are
available and use their allocation as it comes in to
pay off the debt. This is actually quite a common and
a good approach if you have a "Street Reconstruction
Program" in place.
3. CIP. As part of a reconstruction and maintenance
program it is appropriate to set aside, as part of a 5
year CIP Program, monies for general overlay and
maintenance. This is simply part of the General Fund
but funds specifically designated for the Street
Reconstruction Program.
In fact, the Street Reconstruction Program should be
just one part of an overall 5 year CIP Program for the
city and the "General Tax" contribution would be part
of it.
The specific dollar amount to be designated in the CIP
would vary depending on the overall needs.
4. General Tax Levy. Funds made available through general
taxes could be provided in a couple of ways.
a. In a five year street reconstruction program as we
borrow money to pay for projects a certain portion
of that debt could be calculated as "General Fund"
debt, and, if the levy needed to pay for that debt
is greater than the assessments available, the
general tax base would support that debt.
b. Through a CIP Program, as noted in No. 3 above,
the general taxes used to help finance a program
would compete with other uses of our tax levy.
04,
Example:
YEAR
REC'ON41'RUC11ON
MAIMMNANCf:
"1'O"I'Al,
1991
S 800.000
S 60.000
S 860.000
1992
800,000
60,000
860,000
1993
1,000.000
60,000
1,060.000
1994
1.600,000
60,000
1,660,000
1995
1500,000
60.000
1560,000
Total Cost
$5,700,000
S 300,000
56,000,000
Revenues
1. Assessments - Assume average of 500 of
Reconstruction cost would be assessable.
50% X $5,700,000 = $2,850,000
Typically assessments would be spread for seven
years in these issues.
2. MSA - Based on the projects now projected for
complete reconstruction over the next 5 years
it is calculated that $3,000,000 would be MSA
Fundable. Since our MSA allocation is only
$300,000 per year we could either use that
$300,000 per year to offset that amount of debt
to incur or borrow against this allocation up
front and utilize our allocation to pay off
that debt.
3. General Tax/CIP - The shortfall created between
the total needed and those dollars available in
No. l and 2 above would have to be picked up
through general taxes either through a debt
levy or general tax levy and funding the CIP.
Assume:
A. 1991, 1992, 1993 $2,780,000 in cost
MSA Allocation (900,000)
$1,880,000
CIP Funding 300,000
(100,000 per yr.)
$1,580,000 DEBT NEEDED
Issue $1,600,000 in Bond At 6
for 7 Yrs. in 1991
Annual debt payment $ 299,255
Assume 50% Assessments 260,000
Increase in Debt Levy 40,000 (rounded)
ki
B. 1994, 1995 $3,220,000 in cost
MSA Allocation ( 600,000
$2,620,000
CIP Funding 300,000
(150,000 per yr.)
$2,320,000 DEBT NEEDED
Issue $2,325,000 in Bonds at 8% for
seven years in 1994
Annual debt payment $ 434,855
Assume 50% Assessable 301,125
Increase in Debt Levy 134,000 (rounded)
This example shows what two debt issues over
a five year period would cause as an increase
in debt services levy. The amount of
$174,000 is equal to about a 2% increase in
the city's portion of our tax levy.
Typical Assessment
Assume a 80 foot frontage residential street lot.
Assume residential equivalent front footage cost
equals $40.
Percentage Assessed Assessment Amount
100% $3200
90% 2880
80% 2560
50% 1600
40% 1280
30% 960
20% 640
10% 320
4
EQUIVALENT ESTIMATEE
RESIDENTIAL STREET 4
The quantities listed below are for a 500' length
of residential street, 32' wide bituminous,
including lateral storm drain
and street lights
Item Ouantity Units Unit Price Total
4 1. Soil Correction 2000 C.Y. $ 4 $8,000
2. 6" Class 5 Aggregate 600 Ton $ 5 $3,000
3. 1%2" 2331 Bitum. Base 135 Ton $ 17 $2,295
4. 1-," 2341 Bituminous 135 Ton $ 19 $2,565
Wear Course
5. Concrete Curb & Gutter 1000 L.F. $ 5 $5,000
6. Restoration 1 L.S. $3500 $3,500
7. Street Light 1 Each $1800 $1,800
8. Catch Basins 2 Each $ 800 $1,600
9. Manhole 1 Each $1000 $1,000
10. RC Pipe 250 L.F. $ 23 $5,750
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION ................ $34,510
10% CONTINGENCY ...................... 3,450
SUBTOTAL ...... $37,960
PLUS 10% ADMINISTRATION 11,390
TOTAL.... ... ........................... $49,350
$49,350 divided by 500 L.F. = $98.70 per foot of street.
$ 98.70 divided by 2 sides = $49.35 per assessable foot.
Equivalent residential street assessment = $49.35 per foot for all
items.
Street only = $34.85 per assessable foot (items 1-6)
Storm drain only = $11.95 per assessable foot (items 8-10)
Street light only = $ 2.57 per assessable foot (item 7)