The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1998-05-20 PACKET 12.A.REQUES`f (7F CI7Y COUNCIL ,4CTION C(7UNGIL P.GENDP, (VtEETING 17EM # DATE 5/20l98 . PREPARED BY Finance Liz Johnson ORIGINATIIVG DEF'AF2TMENT STAFF F�UTHOR ��a��.�m.��,�.�..«��<.�.�4x.4«�.�«�¢�.�..««�� C+� *I � P• La I l�� i� P. � 7 3 � I I I�� I Fteceive information regarding 80th Street assessments. SUPPORTING DOCUMEiVTS � MEMQ/LETTER: Liz Johnson, Acting Finance Director - May 15, 1998 ❑ RES(7LUTIdtd: ❑ ORDINANCE: ❑ EtdGINEERING RECOMMENDA710Rl: ❑ LEGAL fdECOMMEtdDATION: ❑ OTMER: �(' ` / I I Date �k��>...��..�<*«��.�...«.�>��<.�>.�.�.�.�.� COUNCIL ACTIOIV TAKEN: ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED ❑ OTHER To: Ryan Schroeder, City Administrator From: Elizabeth Johnson, Acting Finance Director� Date: OS/ I S/98 Re: 80'� Street assessment for schools Introduction The Counci] considered 80` Street schoo] assessments at a warkshop session held on May 6. It was my understanding that the Counci] was in favor of assessing street costs, storm sewer costs, a portion of Iights and (maybe) signals. It was also my understanding that the Couneil is not in favor of assessing what was termed `community cosYs', such as turn lanes, sidetivalk, aesthetics and engineering. Discussion I received an estimate of construction costs based on actual bid for the segment of 80' street directly adjacent and in front of both Crestview and Park High School. These cost may be summarized as foliows: I. Streets $291,000 2. Median 49,000 2. Storm sewer 42,000 3. Signals 121,000 4. Street lights 22.000 Total 525.000 The street and median cost represents half the cosT of a four-lane road for that portion directly in front of the schools. The storm sewer cost represents ha]f of the cost of the storm sewer segment that serves the schooPs portion of the road. The signal system costs represents ] 00% of the cost of the signals at Hinton and Hyde. The street light cost represents 100% of the cost to refurbish the existing lights directly in front of the schools. This last cost does not include replacing the existing lights with the �ew decorative lighting chosen by Council. I understood from the discussion that the Council considers street, storm sewer, signals and possibly streeY lights to be assessable. Using this guideline, this implies that the actual cost for the road segment directly in front of the schools equals $809,000 (calculated as (291,000*2)+(42,000*2)+121,000+22,000). The school represents May 15, 1998 approximately 6/10 of one mile of a 2-mile project. The total project cost, with decorative lighting, is in the range of $3,600,000. This segment of road equals approximately 25%- 26% of Yhe total project. The Pavement Management Task Force recommended that schools be assessed ] 00% of cost. It becomes difficult Yo try to apply this guideline because the term `cosY may come under different interpretations. Does iY cost $525,000 for the schools or does it cost $809,000? We received copies of assessment policies from surrounding cities. They are as follows: 1. Mounds View uses an adjusted front footage method for street reconstructipn. That city also combination of unit assessment and front footage assessment for other types of projects. The unit assessment is based on the total project cost divided the number of residential equivalent density units in the project area. This unit cost would be applied to the densiry units for different property classes. The policy does not specifically address schools. 2. Brooklvn Center breaks assessments down into zoning categories. For residential (Rl ) properties, that city uses a unit amount that is established annually by Council. 3. Plvmouth also sets an assessment rate that is adjusted annually based on a construction cost index. They have a stated goal of assessing 30% of street reconstruction costs. Schools are assessed at the commercial rate and the area is calculated based on a formula 4. Minnefonka uses an assessment rate multiplied by the number of assessment units mulYiplied by a factor. That city uses a half-acre lot as a basic assessment unit. The factor that is used is introduced to modify the policy for trunk sewer, trunk water, and lateral sewer and water. 5. Inver Grove Heiehts assesses streets on a front foot basis at tl�e average front foot cost for similar work constructed during that year. Schools are not specifically identified. 6. Oakdale uses a combination of adjusted front foot rate, area method, unit method and benefit appraisal. 7. Woodburv assesses a percenYage of actual projecY costs. Tax exempt property is assessed at 75% and residential is assessed at 33%. The most common theme is the unit basis. I would (ike to explore the possibility of setting an assessment rate on a project basis and applying that rate to a density number. I am attaching the memo I received from BRAA that calculates the cost of the road segment in front of the schools. Requested Action Please review and comment. � R0o ROSENE ANDERLIK � 6126361311 05/14/98 14:59 �:02/02 N0:869 � TQ: FRpM: Liz Johnson Dave Hanson DATE: May 14, 1998,, �� SUBJECT: rest and Park High School Assessments Thc f'ollowing information and costs ure estimated construction costs bascd on the actual bid quantities and unit ptices from the eontract proposai. Calculations reflect a segment of 8Q`" Stroet directly adjacent and in front of Crestview School ( 1,280 feet) and Park High School (1,380 feet), s of Contract Streets Sidewalk StOrm Sewcr Water Main Signals Street Lighting La�dscaping Total Estimated Construetion Co.�t ost 340,000' 20,000 42,000� 0 121,000' 22,000 0 545,000 � Co�t ineludes; wastbound 80`" Street (2 lanes) and wrn lanes specifically remova�s, excavotion, :,ggregates, bituminous, cunereu curh, concreta mtdiuns, p�venunt markings ond s�dding. ' Storm sewer cnst includes the �tarm sewer on the westbound lano's of 80" Strect. 3 CostF indude both interscclions of Hintan and 1Iyde. `T'ho sereet lighiing costs includc remvval and replaccmene of ex;sting lights nnt the now Aec�r:,iivc lights.