5.2. SR 03-09-2009Item # 5.2.
,1t1 ~.ti,
River
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Terry Maurer, Public Works Director
DATE: March 9, 2009
SUBJECT: 2009 Street Improvement Projects
Attached is some brief information to help facilitate discussion about whether or not to
proceed with street reconstruction projects contained in the 2009 Capital Improvement
Program (CIP). The 2009 CIP contains $1 million for pavement management programs.
The two neighborhoods that were identified for the use of that money are shown on the
attached exhibits. The first area is south of Main Street, west of downtown including King
Avenue, Lowell Avenue, Morton Avenue, Norfolk Avenue, and other side streets in that
neighborhood. The second neighborhood is also south of Main Street, east of TH 10 and
includes Evans Avenue, Freeport Avenue, Gates Avenue, and Railroad Drive along 2na
Street.
The 2009 CIP assumed approximately 1/3 of the $1 million would be assessed to these two
neighborhoods. As we looked at these two neighborhoods for inclusion in 2009, we have
assumed that the neighborhood east of TH 10 in the Evans Avenue area would be a total
reconstruction, addition of storm sewer, and concrete curb and gutter. The last total
reconstruction of the Deerfield 3Ta Addition and the Irving Avenue area was assessed to the
benefitting property owners at a rate of $6,500 per residential unit. In the neighborhood
west of TH 10 in the Lowell Avenue/Norfolk Avenue area we anticipate something less
than a total reconstruction. The concrete curb and gutter is generally in reasonably good
shape, although areas need to be repaired. The sidewalk generally needs to be replaced and
the bituminous surface needs to be replaced. We believe reclaiming the existing bituminous
and overlaying would be appropriate. Final determination on this would need to be done
after soil borings of the area are taken. This type of approach would lend itself to an
assessment rate somewhere between a reconstruction ($6,500 per unit) and an overlay
($1,500 per unit). This is a type of pavement rehabilitation that we have not taken on in the
past, so if we proceed with this neighborhood we will be setting a new precedent for an
assessment level.
The other project that is included in the 2009 CIP is mill and overlay of Main Street as a
$500,000 estimate in the CIP. We requested stimulus funds for this project but in the first
tier of local projects were not successful. There may be future tiers of local project funding,
but that is not known at this time. If the City Council wants to proceed with this mill and
overlay with local funds, the question that arises is should there be an assessment to the
abutting property owners. I believe that there definitely should not be an assessment equal
to 100 percent of the overlay costs, considering that the road is substantially wider and
carries significantly more traffic than a typical neighborhood street. I think the argument
could also be made that the street needs major rehabilitation sooner because of its collector
status than if it was a simple neighborhood street. This would likely lend itself to some
lower percentage of a typical overlay assessment.
I will be available at Monday evening's meeting to answer any questions you may have.
S:\PUBLIC WORKS\Engineering Division\2009 CC Memos\2009 CIP 03-09-09 CC.doc
o ~ z
T
N
t~
~ .nr°~
~ _ --,- y
~:~~%" ~
"~i
'=' ;
s ~~
~~. ~p
< D
<
...
~, ~•~ m
x
'~
d ~
< ~
m
~ g _. `
tz ~i
~ ~ ~
~` ~ ~ ~'
m
D
~
re~
;'!. "'
~ ~.
,, ~'' m
~' ~
~~s-~ h~
2009 PAVEMENT MANAGMENT
AUDITOR'S SUBD No. 4 AREA
~ , ,~ ~ ~ ;
tt
w i ~ ~ ~.-
N
(]060 Feet