Memo - Feasibility Report
. Public Warks Department
Memorandum
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
Copy: Jim Genellie, Acting City Manager ~
From:
Steven J. Stadler, Public Works Director
Date: December 17, 2004
Subject: Feasibility Report - 2005 Street Improvement project
As of today, the report is still being finalized and reproduced. The report will be
delivered on Monday, December 20,2005.
.
.
. - ----
.
CITY OF HOPKINS
Hennepin County, Minnesota
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-093
RESOLUTION ORDERING PUBLIC HEARING, 2005 STREET IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT, PROJECT NO. 03-10
WHEREAS, the City Council authorized and directed the City Engineer to prepare a
report with reference to the aforesaid improvement, and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has caused to be prepared the aforesaid repOli for
improvements to Madison Avenue North, Madison Circle North and South, Jackson
Avenue North, Sunnyside Lane, Van Buren Avenue and Shadyside Circle,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Hopkins,
Milmesota:
1. The City Council will consider the aforesaid improvements in accordance with
. the report and the assessment of abutting property for all or a portion of the cost
of the street improvements pursuant to Milmesota Statutes Chapter 429 at an
estimated total cost of $1,157,181
2. A public hearing will be held in the Council chambers of the City Hall at 1010
First Street South on Tuesday, January 18,2005, to consider said improvements.
The hearing time is 7:30 p.m.
The City Clerk shall give mailed and published notice of said hearing and improvements
as required by law.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Hopkins this 21 sl day of December, 2004.
Eugene J. Maxwell, Mayor
ATTEST:
Terry Obermaier, City Clerk
.
CITY OF
~
. kOPK1NS
December 17, 2004 Council Report 2004-195
Adopt Resolution Amending Legislative Policy #8-B, Roadway Improvements
Proposed Action.
Staff recommends adoption of the following motion: Move that Council adopt
Resolution 2004-094, resolution amendinQ LeQislative Policv #8-B, Roadwav
Improvements to institute a trial policv wherein the city will pay 1/3 the cost of private
water service replacements for sinQle-familv residential properties on the 2005 street
improvement proiect.
Overview.
City staff would like to change the current legislative policy to allow the City to partner
with property owners in regards to replacement of water services during a street
improvement construction project. This proposed policy change was discussed at the
November 30 City Council worksession.
New proposed language is proposed for Legislative Policy 8-B, Roadway
. Improvements. The revision is limited to apply only to the 2005 Street Improvement
project, per City Attorney recommendation.
Primary Issues to Consider.
. Details of proposed revision
SupportinQ information.
. Resolution 2004-094
Steven J. Stadler, Public Works Director
Financial Impact: $ 40,000 maximum Budgeted: Y/N N Source: Water Utility Fund
Related Documents (CIP, ERP, etc.):
Notes:
.
.. . - __n__
.
Council Report 2004-195
Page 2
Primary Issues to Consider.
. Details of proposed revision
As you know, the water services are owned and maintained by the property owners
from the building/home to the city water distribution main in the street. The City doesn't
want to own the service or be responsible for repair/replacement of failed services.
Rather, staff wants to provide a monetary incentive for owners to replace the service as
a part of a street improvement project. The goal being to improve the longevity and
quality of the street improvement by decreasing the likelihood of a water service failure
before the street is due for major rehab work again. The difficulty in getting services
replaced during street work is that the services are privately owned and property owners
are reluctant to add additional cost on top of a street improvement assessment. The
policy change proposal is as follows:
. Upon a request by the property owner, the City would pay one-third the cost
to replace the water service to the curb box, usually to the property line.
. The property owner's share could be added to the assessment amount.
The estimated total cost is $600 - $800/service.
The additional City cost on the 2005 street improvement project due to this policy
change would be: $300 - $400/water service replacement (maximum cost = $30,000 -
$40,000, based on 100 water service replacements).
e
-- ----.-- ----- ----
.
CITY OF HOPKINS
Hennepin County, Minnesota
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-094
RESOLUTION TO AMEND LEGISLATIVE POLICY #8B, ROADWAY
IMPROVEMENTS
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF HOPKINS, MINNESOTA,
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to assist single-family residential property owners
with the cost of replacement of their privately-owned water services during street
reconstruction projects; and
WHEREAS, the current legislative policy #8B should be amended to provide for the city
to pay a 1/3 contribution toward the cost of the aforementioned water service
replacements on the 2005 Street Improvement project, #03-10; and
WHEREAS, this policy change is being done on a trial basis to help determine the
potential success based on property owner participation and city cost before considering
. applying the policy change to other future projects;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Hopkins,
Minnesota, that the City of Hopkins hereby amends Legislative Policy #8B, Roadway
Improvements as shown on the attached revised policy document.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Hopkins this 21 st day of December, 2004.
Eugene J. Maxwell, Mayor
ATTEST:
Terry Obermaier, City Clerk
.
- -- -- ------
. 10. ASSESSMENT POLICIES
10,01 When assessments are levied for roadway improvements, the assessment will be
calculated in accordance with the formulas set forth in the section on Assessment
Formulas, using either the adjusted front foot method or per lot unit method. The adjusted
front foot method will be used for assessment purposes unless the per lot/unit method is
requested by petition by at least 55% of the assessed property owners and/or it is
determined that the affected lots have received equal benefits. The City Council shall
have final authority on the type of formula to be used.
10.02 The total project cost for streets constructed or reconstructed in any given project shall be
equal to the actual construction cost, plus associated costs such as legal, bonds,
administrative and engineering,
10.03 When the city CONSTRUCTS A NEW LOCAL OR MAJOR STREET, 100% of the
total project cost, including all utilities, will be recovered by assessing the benefiting
property for actual benefit received. A new street shall be defined as a roadway including
curb and gutter which had not previously existed.
10.04 When the city RECONSTRUCTS AN EXISTING LOCAL OR MAJOR STREET, 70%
of the total project cost will be recovered by assessing the benefiting property for benefit
received. The remaining 30% shall be absorbed by the city. A reconstructed street shall
be defined as a roadway which existed previously. The addition of curb and gutter when
it did not previously exist is still considered reconstruction.
. 10.05 When the city CONSTRUCTS OR RECONSTRUCTS AN ALLEY, 80% of the total
project cost will be recovered by assessing the benefiting property for benefit received.
The remaining 20% shall be absorbed by the city.
10.06 When major street construction or reconstruction is partially financed by State Aid Funds
to improve the design and capacity, the adjoining properties will be charged an
assessment based on the cost of an average street construction. The remainder to be paid
by State Aid Funds or General Funds,
10.07 The following assessment policies will apply for existing single family property when a
major street is improved:
1. Existing single family residential property abutting two or four lane divided median
roads will be assessed using the adjusted front footage method, based on 1/4 of the
cost of a standard local street as if built at the time of the assessment.
2, Existing single family residential property abutting two or four lane undivided roads
will be assessed using the adjusted front footage method, based on 1/2 of the cost of a
standard local street as if built at the time of the assessment.
10.08 Lots which are split subsequent to a roadway improvement project shall be assessed as if
in existence at the time the assessment was adopted, using the formula used at the time of
assessment plus interest as per current City policy from date of assessment.
10,09 The following items are to be assessable as part of a reconstruction project cost:
1. Remove concrete curb and gutter
. 2, Remove concrete pavement
3, Remove/replace concrete steps
. 4, Construct and reinforce concrete steps
5. Remove concrete driveway pavement
6, Remove/construct apron 6" thick concrete pavement (residential)
7. Remove/construct apron 8" thick concrete pavement (commercial)
8. Common excavation
9. Core excavation
10, Construct concrete C & G Design B-618 or surmountable
11. Saw joint in concrete
12. Adjust manholes
13, Adjust catch basin
14, Adjust gate valves
15. Retaining wall
16, Electric conduit
17. Construct 4' x 8" thick valley cone gutter
18. Surfacing aggr. Cl. 2 100% crushed
19. Cultured sod with 4" thick topsoil in place
20. Clearing
21. Grubbing
22. Aggregate backfill
23. Replacement of driveway aprons
24. Construct concrete pedestrian ramps
25. Full-depth asphalt milling and overlay
. 26, Pavement reclamation
10,10 The following items would not be included in a reconstruction project cost. The items
will be billed directly or assessed to the benefited property:
1. Sewer and water service line repairs
2. Random 6-8" concrete pavement
3. Random concrete sidewalk
4. Random sod
10.11 The following items will be paid at city expense when part of a reconstruction project:
1. Remove, replace or relocate hydrants
2. Install hydrants and/or gate valves
3. Sanitary sewer and water mains repair and replacement
4. Storm sewer reconstmction or construction
5. Applicable only to single-family residential property (sin2:le or duplex) affected
by the 2005 street improvement proiect: The city will pavone third the cost of
private water service replacement from the water distribution main to and
including the curb stop (normally at/near the property line). This policy applies
only when the property owner has requested the water service replacement prior
to proiect bidding and the replacement is included as a bid item in the proiect
construction documents.
.