Loading...
030209 CC WS Min5735 COUNTRY CLUB ROAR SOUTIIS O E CENTS 5:30 P.M. 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION Mayor Liz& called the meeting to order at 5:31 P.M. A. Roll Call Present. Mayor Liz6e; Councilmembers Bailey, Turgeon (arrived 5:35 P.M.); Administrator Heck; Planning Director Nielsen; Director of Public Works Brown; and Engineer Landini Absent: None B. Review Agenda Woodruff moved, Bailey seconded, approving the agenda as presented. Motion passed 4/0. 2. 20 YEAR ROAD PLAN Director Brown stated the City has 46.54 miles of roadways, and of that 8.59 miles are part of the Minnesota State Aid (MSA) roadway system. He explained the City uses the PASER system to evaluate and rate the City's roadways. The evaluator assigns a number from 1 to 10 for each roadway; a new or newly constructed roadway is rated 10 and a completely deteriorated roadway is rated 1. This evening's meeting packet contains a list of all of the City's roadways and their ratings for 2005, 2006 and 2008. The 20-year Pavement Management Plan (PMP) reflects roadways with a 2008 rating of less than 5, which equates to approximately 8.5 miles of roadway, which are targeted for reconstruction over the next 20 years. Staff used an automated process to estimate the costs for this efforts and it's approximated to be $35.2 million. Brown explained reconstruction and maintenance of MSA roadways are theoretically funded through the MSA program. The City's MSA Fund has been encumbered because of the County Road 19 project. He stated Engineer Landini has estimated the Fund will have over $400,000 in it at 2009 year-end. Landini stated there will be approximately $363,000 available for roadway reconstruction and approximately $61,500 for roadway maintenance in the Fund at year end. Brown then explained that over the years Staff has drafted two, if not three, roadway assessment policies. To date, Council has chosen not to fund reconstruction with assessments. Council has preferred that the City's Local Roadway Fund (LRF), which funds local roadway maintenance and reconstruction, be funded through the general tax levy. The practice had been to transfer $400,000 - $500,000 from the General Fund in the past; the transfer amount was increased in 2008 and an increase is allocated for 2009. There is approximately $1.5 million in the LRF. The most recent cost estimate to reconstruct a roadway is approximately $1 million. The City's bonding consultant indicated the City's current debt limit is approximately $41 million. If Council were to choose bonding as a method for financing reconstruction, the bonding consultant has estimated that for every $1 million dollars bonded the City's debt service would be $91,000 a year over a 15-year period at 3.65 percent. Using a debt service amount of $91,000 and the cost of $1 million to reconstruct one mile of roadway, $400,000 could pay the debt service for approximately $4.3 million in roadway reconstruction per year. CITY OF SI OREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES March 2, 2009 Page 2 of 6 Councilmember Woodruff commented if the City borrowed $4.3 million the City would be "tapped out" for fifteen years. Councilmember Bailey stated the approximate $35 million cost to reconstruct the roadways rated less than 5 over 20 years amounts to approximately $1.5 million per year. Basically one-half of $1.5 million is being funded with equity. He then stated he thought the amount was manageable, noting the cost for reconstructing Vine Hill Road would be quite substantial. From his vantage point, he thought the City has a sustainable number without having to bond for road reconstruction. Director Brown commented the City of Minnetonka does not have the resources to reconstruct Vine Hill Road; therefore, Minnetonka is seeking an estimate to mill and overlay it. In response to a comment from Councilmember Woodruff, Engineer Landini stated a newly constructed or reconstructed roadway should be seal coated the first time within one to two years after construction, and then the roadway would fall into the once-every-five-year cycle for seal coating. Councilmember Woodruff stated he recently viewed a League of Minnesota Cities' webinar about how the Federal stimulus program will affect Minnesota cities. He thought there were two items discussed that are pertinent to the City. For tax-exempt bank qualified bonds, the exception for small issuers is raised to $30 million from $10 million for 2009 and 2010. There is $502 million for Minnesota in pass- through grants for highways and bridges. Of that $345 million is allocated to MnDOT and $155 million will be sub-allocated to local units of government. All of these funds must be spent on the federal aid system. The local portion of funds will be distributed by the MnDOT State Aid for Local Transportation Division (SALT) and selected by the Metropolitan Council. He questioned if there is any possibility the City could be recipient of any of the local finds. Director Brown stated he and Administrator Heck attended a Metropolitan Area Managers meeting during which the Commissioner of Transportation was asked if it would be likely that cities would receive any of these funds, and the Commissioner said no. He explained the Federal Aid program is administered similar to the MSA program, but the Federal program's requirements are more stringent. He commented the City deals with SALT to manage its MSA finds. He stated he was uncertain if SALT would only serve as a conduit for the flow of funds, or if it would apply its requirements to funding requests. In response to a question from Councilmember Woodruff, Brown explained the list of highway and bridge projects is actually an old list that had been prepared. Therefore, the City does not have any projects on the list. Brown stated he was unsure if any local community safety improvement projects will be considered for stimulus finding. If they are the City will try for funds. Councilmember Woodruff stated Minnesota will receive $60 million for sanitary sewer and storm water projects. One half of funds will be used for grants and will be administered under the existing Public Facilities Program. It is his understanding there is already a list of projects for these funds, and he questioned if the City had any projects on the list. Director Brown stated the City was locked out of those funds. There was ensuing discussion about the roadway ratings; the up and down rating fluctuations for the three years identified due to deterioration and maintenance improvements ; and whether or not there will be additional roadways that will be rated less than five during the 20-year PMP cycle. The bottom line is as the City moves through the 20-year plan, additional roads will likely deteriorate to the point where they will be rated less than five; roadway ratings will likely drop as roadways deteriorate over time. Staff thought the estimate to complete the 20-year PMP could likely be closer to $40 million dollars once additional roadways are factored in. To date, Staff has not had the time to try an incorporate the ever changing level of deterioration into the 20 -year PMP, noting the deterioration rate should be considered over a 4 - 6 year period. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES March 2, 2009 Rage 3 of 6 Mayor Lizee stated some nearby communities do have roadway assessment policies. She suggested Staff research their programs and determine why they are or are not successful. She then stated as part of living in a civil society one should be able to assume there will be paved roads that will be maintained. It's up to Council to determine how to fund roadway reconstruction and reclamation. In response to a comment from Councilmember Bailey about Harding Lane, Director Brown explained Staff has a number of hydrologic concerns about the ground under Harding Lane. Some years the area is dry and other years there is a substantial amount of water. It's difficult to predict rapid deterioration because of unknown water factors. In response to a comment from Councilmember Turgeon, Director Brown stated it was more important to consider the rate of deterioration with respect to financing than in determining the exact order of reconstruction priority. Councilmember Woodruff questioned if the reclamation approach should be considered for low-traffic roads (e.g., Shady Island Road) and cud-de-sac roads (e.g., Echo Road). Director Brown stated it may be beneficial for Council to consider reconstruction of some roads and reclamation of others; he thought reclamation would be sufficient for certain roadways. Brown commented there is approximately $204,000 budgeted or seal coating of roadways and another approximately $163,000 budgeted for overlays in 2009; these costs are in addition to reclamation or reconstruction costs. Director Brown explained Strawberry Lane was reclaimed in 1995. Along with the reclamation some edge drain improvements were made at that time. Strawberry Lane has recently begun to show signs of distress. He stated he and Engineer Landini think a reclaimed road has an approximate 15-year service life, and the service life of a reconstructed is 30 - 35 years. Engineer Landini explained he determined the approximated per-square-yard costs to reclaim Strawberry Lane and factored 5 percent per year inflation and used this amount to calculate the cost to reclaim rather than reconstruct roadways. If Amlee Road, Manitou Lane and Glen Road had been reclaimed in 2008 the cost would have been approximately $480,000 and the approximate cost to reclaim Harding Lane and Smithtown Lane in 2009 is $300,000. He noted reclamation would not solve any foundation issues. In response to a question from Councilmember Bailey, Director Brown explained the cost to reclaim Harding Lane is about 35 percent of the cost to reconstruct. Councilmember Bailey stated based on what Staff has presented, reclamation costs are approximately one-third the cost of reconstruction, and last almost half as long. He questioned why lie would ever reconstruct a roadway. Director Brown explained reclamation does not solve drainage or safety concerns, and edge control would not be installed. Mayor Liz6e questioned if utility infrastructure improvements could be done as part of a reclamation effort. Director Brown explained that could occur if an expanded reclamation approach was used. With a pure reclamation effort the contractor mills the asphalt and immediately puts it back down. With the Strawberry Lane reclamation approach the contractor milled the asphalt, took it to a holding location where it was stockpiled, did the drain the work, and then brought the milled asphalt back and applied it. There was additional cost to do this. This expanded reclamation process was more cumbersome because the contractor had to find an area to stockpile the milled asphalt and it may not be possible to keep residents' access to their properties open. This process would allow for utility improvements to be considered. In response to a question from Councilmember Turgeon, Director Brown explained if the pure reclamation approach was used for the Amlee Road / Manitou Lane / Glen Road project the contractor CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES March 2, 2009 Page 4 of 6 would have milled the asphalt and re-applied it at the same time, and cars could have been driven on the roads the same day. The contractor would then have installed drain the along the edges. This drain the was for the roadway only; it would not solve any drainage issues. The contractor would pack the roadway and let it sit for 2 - 3 weeks before overlaying it. Mayor Liz6e suggested Staff identify roadways that could be reasonable candidates for reclamation. She noted the City is a very wet city with many drainage issues, and there are relatively new Federal and State mandates that must be implemented for managing storm water. She did not think it would be prudent to reconstruct or reclaim a road without attempting to resolve drainage concerns; they would just shorten the service life of the roadway surface. Director Brown commented that Engineer Landini spends a significant amount of time staying abreast of watershed district regulations. He stated if a roadway was fully reconstructed the City may consider installing edge control, and it would likely install some form of Natural Urban Runoff Program pond. It's likely this would not happen with a reclamation effort. Engineer Landini stated if the roadway was reconstructed within the same footprint the City would probably not have to get a permit from the watershed district. Councilmember Woodruff suggested Staff identify criteria to use in determining if a roadway would be better suited for reclamation or reconstruction. He stated he did not think the City had many serious drainage concerns. Engineer Landini stated there have been 64 drainage concerns identified in the City, and the PMP does not consider drainage concerns. Director Brown stated reclamation works best for roadways without edge control, noting Harding Lane has edge control. Mayor Liz6e stated it would not make sense to her for the City to reconstruct or reclaim a roadway without considering the utilities, extending water main, fixing drainage concerns and burying power lines. These things should be should be considered on a roadway by roadway basis. Director Brown noted water main can be installed as part of an expanded reclamation effort, and the City cannot consider burying any more power lines Director Brown stated Staff will identify a set of criteria (including drainage issues, water main installation, traffic, etc.) for evaluating roadways for either reconstruction or reclamation and prepare a decision tree for each of the roadways identified in the 20-year PMP. Councilmember Bailey stated based on discussions it appears Smithtown Lane may be a candidate for reclamation while Harding Lane may be a good candidate for reconstruction. Director Brown stated Bailey's assessment was very good. Mayor Liz6e stated previous Councils have discussed the possibility of adopting a roadway assessment policy, but to no avail. She requested Staff research roadway assessment policies nearby communities have and report back to Council on the findings. Councilmember Turgeon stated Councils have discussed the difficulty in being able to prove the value- added to a property because of a reconstructed or reclaimed road. She suggested Council decide if it wants to assess property owners for roadway improvements. Councilmember Woodruff stated he had difficulty with the concept of assigning arbitrary boundaries for determining what property owners would pay for roadway improvements. He wanted to see examples of assessment policies that worked. He then stated there are two and one-half funding alternatives for roadway improvements - assessments, bonding and street improvement districts (one-half of an alternative). Councilmember Zerby commented with the bonding alternative all property owners pay. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES Match 2, 2009 Page 5 of 6 Administrator Heck clarified there are four funding alternatives - the general tax levy, bonding, special property assessments on properties abutting the roadway for some portion of the cost, and possibly street improvement districts. Council could use a combination of alternatives, noting if the City creates a street improvement district approach it could not assess the abutting properties. The City could levy for a portion of the cost, bond for a portion of the cost and pay for the debt service on the bond out of a street improvement district where property owners pay the same amount. The issue for Council to decide what funding method(s) it wants to use. Councilmember Woodruff stated in almost every case he thought the City would have to issue some bonds to pay the contractor who performed the work. The residents pay for the debt service through a special assessment a separate line item will appear on their property tax statement. If improvements are paid through the general tax levy, the residents will not see a separate line item. With street improvement districts the residents would see on special line item on their utility bills. Administrator Heck clarified for special assessments a special assessment district is not created. Properties abutting the roadway are assessed for the improvements. If a City-wide street improvement district is created, all property owners will pay the same amount over some period of time. The first few years of street improvements could be funded through bonding and after a while the payments on the utility bills would have accrued to the point where the City may no longer have to bond for improvements. Director Brown explained some communities had implemented assessment policies based on a specific roadway width; assessments were not based on the width of a road. Some cities have assessed by frontage to the roadway and others per property. He stated Council has to decide if it wants to assess property owners in this economic climate. Mayor Lizee again requested Staff research other communities' assessment policies to determine what did and did not work. She asked each Councilmember what their thoughts on special assessments were. Councilmember Turgeon stated she would not consider assessing for roadway improvements. Councilmember Woodruff stated he was not comfortable with the assessment process, but he would like Staff to research other communities' assessment policies. He has a philosophical issue with abutting property owners funding improvements on roadways that many residents drive on. Water assessments are specific to benefiting property owners; roadway improvements are not. Councilmember Bailey stated he would like to have more information about special assessment policies, and he did not have a strong problem with special assessments. Councilmember Zerby stated lie would like more information on what bordering communities are doing. He generally would prefer that roadway improvements be funded out of the General Fund, but there may be times when property owners requested specific improvements to a roadway. If the City mandates when a roadway will be reconstructed or reclaimed then the property owners at large should pay for that improvement. Director Brown stated Staff can prepare financial examples of how different funding alternatives would work for two City roads. Councilmember Bailey stated lie can't imagine the City using special assessments for all of a roadway's improvement. Councilmember Woodruff stated assessments must be based on a price per foot. Director Nielsen stated the first assessment policy the City considered was based on the City paying one- third of the cost, and residents on each of the two sides of the road paying one-third. The City would also CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORD SESSION MEETING MINUTES March 2, 2009 Page 6 of 6 pay for any frontage against wetlands. Collector streets were also addressed in the policy. The policy was comprehensive. Director Brown again stated Staff will identify a set of criteria (including drainage issues, water main installation, traffic, etc.) for evaluating roadways for reconstruction or reclamation and prepare a decision tree for each of the roadways identified in the 20-year PMP for the next work session. Staff will also provide examples for different finding alternatives for two roadways. In response to a comment from Councilmember Bailey, Director Brown stated Staff is continuing with the next steps in the process for the improvements to Harding Lane and Smithtown Lane per Council's direction. In response to a comment from Councilmember Zerby, Administrator Heck asked how much credence Council wants to give to property owners' reluctance for improvements. Councilmember Turgeon stated if a roadway is to be reclaimed within its existing footprint she did not think the public should have much input. Mayor Lizee stated property owners want to be provided with a 20-year roadway improvement plan. She suggested the 20-year PMP be reviewed as part of the Comprehensive Plan Planning Districts review sessions with residents. She stated Council has to decide if and when a roadway should be improved, but whether it is reclaimed or reconstructed can be affected by rights-of-way issues and drainage concerns. Councilmember Turgeon stated if improvements are going to be paid for out of the General Fund, then the only question property owners have to answer is if they want water main installed. Mayor Lizee recapped what Staff is expected to prepare for the work session on March 16"'. They will assemble various assessment policies for neighboring communities, they will prepare decision trees for each roadway identified in the 20-year PMP which determines what method of improvements will be made, and they will prepare two examples of the impact of the four finding alternatives. Councilmember Turgeon suggested assessment policies for cities similar to Shorewood only be considered. 3. OTHER There was no other business for discussion this evening. 4. ADJOURN Turgeon moved, Zerby seconded, Adjourning the City Council Work Session Meeting of March 2, 2009, at 7:15 P.M. Motion passed 510. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Christine Freeman, Recorder Christine Lizee, Mayor