The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About6.e. Street Reconstruction Policy � �. -� .. , r ITEM # 6 E �c******��*�*��*************�*��*�**MEMO�l��*�*****,k+k�**,k�,k,k**1F*��F,k�r,k�*��# DATE: MARCFi 28� 1990 TO: MAYOR & COUNCILMEMBERS C/O ADMINISTRATOR JILK FROM: CITY ENGINEER/PUBLIC �PORRS DIRECTOR HEF I RE: ITEM FOR THE APRIL 3, 1990 COUNCIL MEETINl3 NEW BUSINESS Street Reconstruction Policv This item consist of having Council adopt the attached policies in order to be consistent when assessing praperties �or Collector or Local str�et projects. This memo pro�rides some backgraund on how this pol.icy was deri.ved and a recommended action for Council to consider. These policies are not particularly new as we have develo�ed them to finance some previaus street projects. Specifically, these pro�ects were County Road 38, 130th Street & Jay Simon Addition Street, County Road 42 fram County Road 71 to Trunk Highway 52, County Road 42 fram U. S. Highway 52 to Trunk Highway 55 and Shannon Farkway street improvements. Basieally we are attempting to formalize our existing policy so .that we can consistently administer it for upcoming grojects, such as 145th Street Reconstruction and other street reconstruction projects. Exhibit A that you find attached �o the assessment policy is intended to serve as a guide. The actual boundary lines may change slightly when we are actually investigating a pa�ticular project. This will probably be true more for the undeveloped eastern portion of the City than for the mcare developed weatern portion Qf th� City. The Xarger undevel�aped �rope�rtie� may in themseives require collector streets. Until w� have some development plans in those areas the best we can do is to foilaw our guidelines as presented in Exhibit A. As a note of interest for Council, the Citys' assessment poliey prevailed in a challenge from a propexty owner along County Road 42 east of U. S. Highway 52. The Court found that the property benefited by the amount of the assessment. The assessment amount was calculated very similar to the method we proposed in the assessment policy. The City Attorney has reviewed these policies and has no problem with them. Recommended action for Council ta consider is to adopt the attached assessment policy for Collector and Local street reconstruction and resurfacing. � �TEM # 6E �r�**+k+k***flrik�*tk+k�FiFik�F+k+k+klkikfk+kik�k�k**�Ffr�r�MEMO�r+k�kA�r#��k�k#r+k#r+k�r+k�r#r+k�k,k�rikiklF��k+k�F�k*,k�*�� DATES MARCH 28, 1990 TO: MAYOR & COUNCILMEMBERS C/U ADMINISTRATOR JILK FROMt CITY ENGINEER/PUBLIC WORRS DIRECTOR HEF .I RE: ITEM FOR THE APRTL 3, 1990 COUNCIL MEFTIN(3 NEW BUSINE88 Street Reconstruction PoZicv This item consist of having Gounca.l adopt the attached �olicies in order to be consistcnt when assessing properties for Collectar or Local street projects. This memo provides some background on how this polic�r was derived and a recommended action for Council to consider. These policies are not particularly new as we have developed them to finance some previous street projects. Specifically, these projects were County Road 38, 130th Street & Jay Simon Addition Street, County Road 42 from County Road 71 to Trunk Highway 52, County Road 42 from U. S. Highway 52 to Trunk Highway 55 and 5hannon Parkway street improvements. Basically we are attempting to formalize our existing policy so .that we can consistently administer it for upcoming projects, such as 145th Stree� Reconstruction and other street reconstruction projects. Exha.bit A that you find attached �o the assessment policy is intended to serve as a guide. The actual boundary lines may change slightly when we are actually investigating a particular project. This will probably be true more for the undeveloped eastern portion of the City than for the mo�e deve].oped western portion Qt' the City. The larger undeueloped prop�rtie� m�y in themselves require collector str�ets. Until we have some development plans in those areas the best we can do is to foilow our guidelines as presented in Exhibit A. As a note of interest for Council, the Citys' assessment policy prevailed in a challenge from a property owner along County Raad 42 east of U. S, Highway 52. The Court found that the property benefited by the amount of the assessment. The assessment amount was calculated very similar to the method we praposed in the assessment policy. The City Attorney has reviewed these policies and has no problem with them. Recommended action for Council to consider is to adopt the attached assessment policy for Collector and Local street reeonstruction and resurfacing. •4 r Local Street Reconstruction Assessment Policy Page 2 (i) Assessable costs for reconstruction would include all costs of reconstructinq a 32 foot wide bituminous surfaced residential urban section (concrete curb & gutter) and a 24 foot wide bituminous surfaced 'rural section (with 4 ft gravel shoulders and ditches) . RESURFACING & MISC. REPAIR (1) Subgrade correction work should have been done at the time of initial construction and therefore shall be assessed, (2� 50� of the costs of miscellaneous preparatory work for the overlay and the overlay cost shall be assessed. (3) Pavement cut-outs shall be considered as maintenance and not assessed. (4) Replacement of sections of concrete curb & gutter shall be considered as maintenance and not assessed. Summarv: (1) Assessment Area (a) The assessment area for local street reconstruction or resurfacing shall include property ad�acent and having direct driveway access onta it. (2) Assessment rate determination. (a) The assessment rate shall be based on a single family residential equivalent unit as shown in the following table: RES Zonina Unit Units SF detached (R-�.,RR,RL) per platted lot 1 SF attached (R-2) per dwelling unit 1 MF residential (R-3,R-4) per dwelling unit 2 Commeraial (C-1,C-2,C-3,C-4) pe� acre {2.5x20) 50 Industrial (IG,IP,w1K) per acre (2.5x2j 5 Institutional (PUB) per acre (2.5x2) 5 For example, a development with 24 single family lots would have 24 RES units as would a development with 24 single family attached units, such as four-plexes. However, a development with a 48 unit apartment building would receive 96 RES units. To determine RES units for commercial zoned property containing 10 acres one would multiply the 50 RES units/acre for commercial property by 10, which would result in 500 RES units. For agricultural zoned properties the Public Works Department would estimate the number of units per acre based on the Comprehensive Guide Plan's underlying use. c:�word\lstrasst.pol March 23, 199Q '� TLocal Street Reconstruction Assessment Policy Page 3 Agricultural (R-�.) per acre (2. 5) 2.5 Agricultural (RR) per acre (5 ac min. � Q.2 Agricultural (RR) per acre (10 ac. min. ) 0. 1 Agricultural (R-2) per acre (4.0) 4 Agricultural (R-3) per acre (6. 0) 6 ' Agricultural (R-4) per acre (1Q.0) 10 For example, agriculturally zoned property with a Comprehensive Guide Plan Use designated as single family detached (R-1) will have its RES units determined based on 2.5 units per acre. If the underlying use is rural residential (RR) , then the RE5 un�ts would be based on the minimum lot size, which would be either 5 or 10 aeres depending upon the lacation. (2) Funding for street reconstruction and resurfacinq that does not meet the eriteria for 100� assessment will be funded by line item amounts in the City Five (5) Year CIP Program. Alternative fundinq methads will be investigated as they become available for this type of need. (3) Assessments for homesteaded residential or aqricultural property in amounts over $5, 000 shall be spread over 15 years, otherwise, the assessments shall be spread over 7 years. c:\word\lstrasst.pol March 23, 1990 , F A . Y Local Street Reconstruction Assessment Policy Page 4 RES�DENTIAL EQUTVALENT TABLE BASED ON TRIP GENERATION BY DWELLING TYPE Owellinq T,ype Trips/DU DU Ac Trips�Ac RF� Single Family 10 2 .5 25 1.0 Multi-family (R-2) 6 6 36 1.4 Apartments (R-3,R-4) 6 10 60 2.4 Commerical x x 50q 20. 0 Industrial x x 60 2 .4 Institutional x x 55 2 .2 A11 numbers derived from Transt�ortation and Traffic Handbook, 2nd Edition, by the Institute af Transportation Engineers. According to the table single family dwelling types generate 25 trips per acre, which for purposes af establishing RES units will equal 1.0. The remaining RES numbers were obtained by d3.viding the Trips/Acre numb�r by 25. For the tabl� in the pol.icy text, thes� RE5 numbers wers raund�d to the nearest whale number. c:�word\lstrasst.pol March 23, 1990 � � f CITY QF ROSEMOUNT FOLICY: Collector Street Reconstruction &/or Resurfaoinq A$sessment RECOMMENDED BYt Stnft PRESENTED TO COUNCIL: April 3 , 1990 ADOPTED BY COUNCIL: Purpose: The purpase of this policy is to provide a rational and equitabl.e method of asseesing abutting and benefited property �o hel.p finance the reconstructic�n and resurfacing of city collector stre�ts. Collector streets shall be defined as streets that collect traffic from local and feeder streets and connects with arterials. Collector streets will generally have average daily traffic volumes of between 1,000 and 10,000 trips per day. Collector streets provide some access to abutting property, but more importantly enable moderate quantities of traffic to mave expeditiausly between local streets and the major street (arterial) network. Backqroun$: Many of the city streets are approaching the end of their design life. The Public Works pepartment has completed a Pavement Management System for about 30 miles of older streets, including collector streets. This consisted of taking an inventory of the streets and rating th�ir condition. Streets with a rating of less than or equal to 8. 0 (on a scale of 16=excellent and 1=poor) are candidates for complete reconstruction. Unless a collectar street was a county road that was built entirely with county funds prior to 1980 and turned back to the city, then property along that collector street would have paid for its construction. Payment would have been made either of two ways. One way would have been through special assessments, if the city contracted to construct a collector street. The other way would have been with the purchase of a lot, if the developer installed collector streets under a private contract. Streets have service lives no different than vehicles or appliances, sa they also have to be replaced when they wear out. State law allows a 20 year life for bituminous surfaced streets. This is consistent with the actual service life of a bituminous surfaced street, which by industry standards is between 20 to 25 years. As a result, streets meeting or exceeding the 20 year life that need to be reconstructed can be financed using special assessments. In order to borrow money under the special assessment section of State law - Chapte�r 429 - the minimum that must be assessed is 20� of the amount borrowed. Usually 25-30% of the amount borrowed is assessed to insure meeting the 20� minimum rule. If collector streets need reconstruction prior to reaching their 20 year life span, then it would be appropriate to prorate the assessable cost. For example, should a 15 year old street require reconstruction, then the amount of assessable cost would be 15/20 or 3/4ths of the total assessable cost. c:\word\strasst.pol March 23, 1990 ' � r � Collector Street Reconstruction Assessment Folicy Page 2 Rationale: RECONSTRUCTION (1) Assessable costs for reconstruction would include all cos�s of reconstructing a 32 foot wide bituminous surfaced residential urban section (concrete curb & gutterj and a 24 foot wide bituminous surfaced rural section (with 4 ft gravel � shoulders and ditches) . RESURFACING & MISC. REPAIR (1) Subgrade correction work should have been done at the time of initial construction and therefore shall be assessed. (2) 50� of the costs of miscellaneous preparatory work for the overlay and the overlay cost shall be assessed. (3) Pavement cut-outs shall be considered as maintenance and not assessed. {4) Replacement of sectior�s of concrete curb & gutter shall be considered as maintenance and not assessed. summarv: (1) Assessment Area (a) The assessment area for Collector street reconstruction or resurFacing shall include property within the general ' district it serves, as shown in Exhibit A, dated March 1990. These callector street service districts were determined using the following criteria: 1. District shall include all praperty within a maximum distance of 1/2 mile of the collector street, ar 1/2 the distance between parallel collector streets, whichever is less. � 2. Property with the potential of lying within two districts shall be included entirely within one or the other or split between the two. It is not the intent of this policy that property be assessed more than its full RES share for collector stre�ts. 3 . When property lies within overlapping districts, the property will be inciuded within the district for the collector street that is closet to the property. Distance shall be measured from the approximate center of the property to the nearest collector street following existing public streets. (2) Assessment rate determination. c:�word\strasst.pol March 23 , 199Q . � � ( � Collector Street Reconstruction Assessment Policy Page 3 (a) The assessment rate shall be based on a single family residential equivalent unit as shown in the following table: RES Zonina Unit Units SF detached (R-1,RR,RL) per platted lot 1 SF attached (R-2j per dwelling unit 1 MF residential (R-3,R-4) per dwelling unit 2 Commercial (c-1,c-2,c-3 ,c--4) per acre {2.5x2oj 50 Industrial (IG, IP,WM) per acre (2 .5x2) 5 Institutional (PUB) per acre (2.5x2) 5 For example, a development with 24 single family lots would have 24 RES units as would a development with 24 single family attached .units, such as four-plexes. However, a development with a 48 unit apartment building would receive 96 RES units. To determine RES units for commercial zoned property containing 1U acres one would multiply the 50 RES units/acre for commercial groperty by l0, which would �esult in 500 RES units. For agricultural zoned properties the Public Works Department would estimate the number of units per acre based on the Comprehensive Guide Plan's underlying use. Agricultural (R-1) per acre (2 .5) 2 .5 Agricultural (RR) per acre (5 ac min. ) 0.2 Agricultural (RR) per acre (10 ac. min. ) 0. 1 Agricultural (R-2) per acre (4.0) 4 Agricultural (R-3) per acre (6.0j 6 Agricultural (R-4) per acre (10.0) 10 For example, agriculturally zoned property with a Comprehensive Guide Plan Use designated as single family detached (R-1) will have its RES units determined based on 2. 5 units per acre. If the underlying use is rural residential (RR) , then the RES units would be based on the minimum lot size, which would be either 5 or 10 acres depending upon the location. (2) Funding for street reconstruction and resurfacing that does not meet the criteria for 100� assessment will be funded by Iine item amounts in the City Five (5) Year CTP Program. A�.ternative funding methods will be investiqated as they become available for this type of need. � (3) Assessments for homesteaded residential or agricultural property in amounts over $5,000 shall be spread over 15 years, otherwise, the assessments shall be spread over 7 years. c:�word\strasst.pol March 23, 199U a y` Collector Street Reconstruction Assessment Policy Fage 4 RE5IDENTIAL EQUIVALENT TABLE BASED QN TRIP GENERATION BY DWELLING TYPE Dwellina Tvne TripsfDU DU Ac Trips Ac RES Single Family 10 2.5 25 � 1.0 Multi-family (R-2) 6 6 36 1.4 Apartments (R-3,R-4) 6 10 60 2 .4 Commerical x x 500 20. 0 Industrial x x 60 2.4 Institutional x x 55 2 .2 All numbers derived from Transportation and Traffic Handbook, 2nd Edition, by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. According to the table single family dwelling types generate 25 trips per aere, which for purposes of establishing RES units will equal 1. 0. The remaining RE5 numbers were obtained by dividing the Trips/Acre number by 25. For the table in the policy text, these RES numbers were rounded to �he nearest whole number. � c:\word\strasst.pol March 23, 1990 . � � CITY OF ROSEMOUNT POLICY: Local Street Reconstruction &/or Resurfacinq Assessment RECOMMENDED BY: Staff PRESENTED TO COUNCIL: April 3 , 1990 ADOPTED BY CQUNCIL: Purpose: The purpose of this policy is to provide a rational and equitable method of assessing abutting and benefited property to help finance the reconstruction and resurfacing of local city streets. Local streets provide access to immediately adjacent properties. Through movement may be possible. Each abutting property may have a driveway connection to the street. Average daily traffic volumes are generally less than 1,000 vehicles per day. Background: Many of the city streets are approaching the end of their design life. The Public Works Department has completed a Pavement Management System for about 30 miles of older streets. This consisted of taking an inventory of the streets and rating their condition. Streets with a rating of less than or equal to 8. 0 (on a scale of 16=excellent and 1=poor) are candidates for complete reconstruction. Unless a local street was a county road that was built entirely with county funds prior to 1980 and turned back to the city, then property along that local street would have paid for its canstruction. Payment would have been made either of two ways. One way would have been through special assessments, if the city contracted to construct a local street. The other way would have been with the purchase of a lat, if the developer installed local streets under a private contract. Streets have service lives no different than vehicles or appliances, so they also have to be replaced when they wear out. State law allows a 20 year iife for bituminous surfaced streets. This is eansistent with the actual service life of a bituminous surfaced street, which by industry standards is between 20 to 25 years. As a result, streets meeting or exceeding the 20 year life that need to be reeonstructed can be financed using special assessments. In order to borrow money under the special assessment section of State law - Chapter 429 - the minimum that must be assessed is 20� of the amaunt borrowed. Usually 25-30% of the amount borrowed is assessed ta insure meeting the 20� minimum rule. If local streets need reconstruction prior to reaching their 20 year life span, then it would be appropriate to prorate the assessable cost. For example, should a 15 year old street require reconstruction, then the amount of assessable cost would be 15/20 or 3/4ths of the total assessable cost. Rationales RECONSTRUCTION c:�word\lstrasst,pol March 23, 1990 � I RHni i�E FA� �12-2�6-3?a� �AGE P2 � ' 03/30/98 (REVI$p12 ) HMW/BD �#Agq-12d2 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . moveA ta amend . . F. No. . . . . , As fo�.low$! � Paqe . . , aEEer linp . . , inserte 3 "SpC. . . . �RCJSF,MQUNT; ARMOEiY LEVY. J 4 Subdivision 1. (ARMORY L�vY. j Tk�� cit oE Ro��mt�unt maiy -�----- --?-- __�__Y. , � 5 levy not more than $9S,000`p�r v�ar dnd oth�rwf�_ ��incU�debt 6 under_Minnesota� StatutEs, cha��er 193 or �y5 0� bvkh, tr� �cquit� 7 and better an armory �,nd to be serviced by the le_v,Y wsthvut 8 reg�rd tQ th� limit� on d�bt gervice�nd debt otherw��e provid�d 9 b�chapter 193 or,d�75w. �0 Subd.__2� [REVEASE R�FERENDUM. j x� th� Ci�_ coun� cil 11 ro vses to make a l�vy pursuant ko �ubdivision l,�i.t sh�pa�►f� 12 a resolu,�kfo��,��inq that �act. Ther�sf��r,� the rr��talu�.lc�n . . . . - .. �� a . . . � ,� . . 13 sh,� all be published fot _two suc�essive w��kg it1 th�a oE�Eici�l , 14 new�aper qf th� cik or, f� _ther� iS no .bf�iCi�l n�wsA�lppt, in � . . .. . . ..4 .. . . . .. . . .�� 15 a ��w�t�2��er of qeneral Girculation in the citY► tog�th�r with d ---�._____, . 16 natict fixing a date fvr�public hearing on khe ,ma�tter. ;_ _The , — I RHn�I,E FAX E 12-2�5-39�19 PAC�E 011 n:3J�n/90 (R�VIS�R } HMW/�b HA90-�.�4� 1 five percen� af the_votes cast .in th��f� th� lg�t g�tter��, 2 electi�n requestin a re��rendum o�� ro vs�d r�Solut�ah i� -� 3 filed with the caunt�uditior,� t�golution sh� ��E 1�p 4 effective until it has be�tz sut�mit� �.ed�to the vat�r$ $t � r��n�p�1 5 or speCidl�ctian �nd -� r. a m�ori��te, cast an th� qv��tion 6 of ap_provinc� the resolution �re in the ��irmative. TM� : - �._...,�_�...._�___._,_,_,�.,.�____,_ 7 commi�sion�� revenue shall pr��re� suc�qest�d Eorm v� �-;�.�,.� � u��tic�n to be �resented at the r_` eEerendum. _The re��r�ndum mu9t 9 be held 2�t a s�e�ial o�eneral �].ection�r�ior to J�nu2trv 1, IQ 1992. 1i Subd_�. 3� (LbCAL APFROVAL. J �'his �@Ck�.on �ak@!t �LE�C� th� �� . t2 da�after the overnin� body of khe city of l�os�mount compli�� : . � 13 wi�h Minneeota„�Statutes, sect�an 6q� p21r_� subdiv.�sion 3. " .�._._ -e.�.._,..�..� _ . 14 Ftenumber th� sections in s�quenc�� - - �-� Correr.t inter.�at rePerences 16 17 Amend th� title aecordingly r � PO E30X 5t0 � �jZ�� 2875-745TH SL W � Q�E�,Q�� ROSEM�UNT. MINNESOTA 55068 612.-.q23-4411 � � � � �TE� # �g March 28, 1990 T0: Mapor Napper Council Membera: Klassen Oxborough Willcox Wippermann FROM: Stephan Jilk, Citp Administrator � RE: Council / Staff Workshop Based upon our discussion at our last council meeting regarding workshops on �he goals/objectives set on Januarp 30th I would submit the follow�,ng recommended schedule for those workshops. Following your review and ciiscussion I would ask your appraval on the schedule and direct staff to proceed an preparing £or those workshops. 1� . . . ' CITY COUNCIL j CITY STAFF WORKSflOP SCHEDULE GOALS / OBJECTIVBS REVIEW & DISCUSSION WORKSHOP N0. TOPIC DATE/TIME 1 . Waste to Energy Plant Apr . 10 Industrial Development - East Side 6 : 30 - 9:p0 F.M. Non-Hazardous Waste Aisposal 2. Balancing Small Town Rural Ambiance Apr . 14 with Growth 8s30 A.M, - Noon Update Comprehensive Guide Plan Maintaining Open/Rural Areas 3. New Commerc3al Development Outside of Apr . 24 Downtown - Different Business Types 6: 3Q - 9:00 P.M. Indentifp/Recruit Retail and Industrial Business That Work in Rosemount 4. City Involvement Process Maq 8 City Facilities Fxpansion 6: 30 - 9:00 P.M. Taxes Versus Needs