Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
6.1. SR 05-18-2009
City of Elk. River REQUEST FOR ACTION To Item Number Ma or and Ci Council 6.1. Agenda Section Meeting Date Prepared by Public Works Ma 18, 2009 Ter Maurer, Public Works Director Item Description Reviewed by Resolutions Authorizing the Norfolk, Morton, Lowell, and King Lori ohnson, Ci Administrator Avenues Area Street Rehabilitation Project to Proceed Reviewed by Action Requested Consider adoption of the attached four resolutions moving the Norfolk, Morton, Lowell, King Avenues Area Street Improvement forward. Background/Discussion Earlier in the month, the City Council authorized the preparation of the attached feasibility report for the Norfolk, Morton, Lowell, King Avenues Area Street Improvement after an informational meeting with the affected residents was held. As has previously been discussed with the City Council, this project is on the same schedule as is used for overlay projects. That schedule provides for a public hearing/assessment hearing to be held the same evening after a bid is received for the work so that actual costs and assessments can be discussed at the hearings. The resolutions the Council is asked to consider include: Receiving the Feasibility Study and Ordering the Public Hearing to be held on July 20, 2009; Determinuig the Cost to Be Assessed and Ordering the Preparation of the Assessment Roll; Establishing the Date for the Assessment Hearing to be held also on July 20, 2009; and Ordering the Preparation of Plans and Specifications and Allowing for the Project to be Bid on July 7 so that a firm construction cost will be available on July 20, 2009. Financial Impact The feasibility for the improvement recommends that the assessment cover approximately 50 percent of the cost of the project. There is a mixture of single family homes, townhomes, apartment buildings, and commercial establishments in this project. Single family homes are assessed one unit; townhouses are assessed 0.75 units per dwelling; apartments are assessed 0.25 units per apartment, and the two commercial properties are proposed to be assessed two units each. The finance director has recommended that this project be funded internally through the Street Improvement Reserve fund. Ordering the preparation of plans and specifications and bidding the project will commit the City to engineering expenditures of approximately $17,500 beyond the feasibility costs. Attachments • Feasibility Study • Resolution Receiving Feasibility Report and Ordering the Public Hearing • Resolution Determining Assessment Cost and Ordering the Preparation of Assessment Roll • Resolution Establishing Date for Assessment Hearing • Resolution Ordering the Preparation of Plans and Specifications and Directing the Project to be Bid Action Motion by Second by Vote Follow Up S:\EngineerImprovProj\2009 Improvement Projects\Norfolk Area Street Improvements\OS 18 09 cc memo.doc RESOLUTION 09- A RESOLUTION FOR THE CITY OF ELK RIVER A RESOLUTION RECEIVING THE FEASIBILITY REPORT AND ORDERING A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE IMPROVEMENT IN THE MATTER OF THE NORFOLK, MORTON, LOWELL, KING AVENUES AREA STREET IMPROVEMENT OF 2009 WHEREAS the Feasibility Report ordered by the Council in Resolution 09-18 has been prepared with reference to the Norfolk, Morton, Lowell, King Avenues Area Street Improvement and was received by the City on May 18, 2009; and WHEREAS the Feasibility Report recommends that the proposed improvement is feasible; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Ciry Council of the City of Elk River, Minnesota: 1. The City Council will consider the Norfolk, Morton, Lowell, King Avenues Area Street Improvements as described in the Feasibility Report and the assessment of the property abutting this proposed improvement fox all or a portion of the cost of the improvement pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 429, at an estimated total cost for the improvement of $518,000, 2. A public hearing shall be held before the City Council on the proposed improvement on the 20`'' day of July, 2009, at 6:30 o'clock p.m. at the Elk River City Hall Council Chambers. The Ciry Clerk shall provide two published notices (one week apart) in the official newspaper with at least three days between the last publication date and the hearing, and mailed notice ten days to the hearing as required by law. Passed and adopted this 18~' day of May, 2009. Stephanie, A. Klinzing, Mayor ATTEST: Tina Allard, Ciry Clerk S:\EngineerImprovProj\2009 Improvement Projects\Norfolk Area Street Improvements\Resolutions\Recv real report order ph.doc RESOLUTION 09- A RESOLUTION FOR THE CITY OF ELK RIVER A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE DATE FOR THE ASSESSMENT HEARING FOR THE NORFOLK, MORTON, LOWELL, KING AVENUES AREA STREET IMPROVEMENT OF 2009 WHEREAS, by a resolution passed by the Council on May 18, 2009, the City Clerk was directed to prepare a proposed assessment roll of the cost of the Norfolk, Morton, Lowell, King Avenues Area Street Improvement; and WHEREAS, the Clerk has notified the Council that such proposed assessment roll will be completed and filed in the Clerk's office for public inspection by the appropriate time. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the Ciry of Elk River, Minnesota: 1. A hearing shall be held on the 20th day of July, 2009, in the Ciry Hall at 6:30 p.m. to pass upon such proposed assessment and at such time and place all persons owning property affected by such improvement will be given an opportunity to be heard with reference to such assessment. 2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and shall state in the notice the total cost of the improvement. The Ciry Clerk shall also cause mailed notice to be given to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the hearings. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City of Elk River, except that no interest shall be charged in the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of the assessment. The owner of any property may at any time thereafter pay to the City of Elk River the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31St of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15th or interest will be charged through December 31St of the succeeding year. Passed and adopted this 18th day of May, 2009. Stephanie A. Klinzing, Mayor ATTEST: Tina Allard, City Clerk S:\EngineerImprovProj\2009 Improvement Projects\Norfolk Area Street Improvements\Resolutions\estab date asses heaering.doc RESOLUTION 09- A RESOLUTION FOR THE CITY OF ELK RIVER A RESOLUTION ORDERING THE PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS IN THE MATTER OF THE NORFOLK, MORTON, LOWELL, KING AVENUES AREA STREET IMPROVEMENT OF 2009 WHEREAS a public hearing relating to the Norfolk, Morton, Lowell, King Avenues Area Street Improvement was held before the Elk River City Council after ten days mailed notice and two weeks published notice of the hearing was given; and WHEREAS the Ciry Council has duly considered the Feasibility Report and those matter presented at the public hearing by those person desiring to be heard on the matter; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Elk River, Minnesota: 1. Terry Maurer, City Engineer, hereby designated as Project Engineer for this improvement. The Project Engineer is directed to prepare plans and specifications for the making of the improvement and the solicitation of competitive bids. Passed and adopted this 18~ day of May, 2009. Stephanie A. Klinzing, Mayor ATTEST: Tina Allard, Ciry Clerk S:\EngineexImpxovProj\2009 Improvement Projects\Norfolk Area Street Improvements\Resolutions\Order plans and specs.doc RESOLUTION 09- A RESOLUTION FOR THE CITY OF ELK RIVER A RESOLUTION DETERMINING ASSESSED COST OF IMPROVEMENT AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT ROLL IN THE MATTER OF THE NORFOLK, MORTON, LOWELL, KING AVENUES AREA STREET IMPROVEMENT OF 2009 WHEREAS costs have been determined for the Norfolk, Morton, Lowell, King Avenues Area Street Improvement consisting of a contract price of $433,000, and expenses incurred or to be incurred by the Ciry in the making of the improvement in the amount of $85,000, for a total cost of the improvement of $518,000. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Ciry Council of the City of Elk River, Minnesota: 1. Based upon the Ciry Assessment Policies, it is determined that the portion of this improvement to be paid by the City and not assessed to benefited properties is $248,000. 2. The portion of the cost to be assessed against benefited properties pursuant to the Elk River City Assessment Policies shall be $270,000. 3. The assessments shall be payable in equal annual installments and shall extend over a period of 7 - 10 years, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 2010, with interest at the rate of 5.0% per annum from the date of the adoption of the assessment resolution. 4. The City Administrator with the assistance of the Project Engineer shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially assessed for such improvement against every assessable lot, piece, or parcel of land, without regard to cash valuation, as provided by law, and shall have available at the City Administrator's office a copy of the proposed assessment roll for public inspection. 5. Upon completion of the proposed assessment roll, the City Administrator shall notify the Council and schedule a public hearing upon the proposed assessment, causing notice of the hearing by publication and mail to be made at least two weeks prior to the hearing. Passed and adopted this 18th day of May, 2009. Stephanie A. Klinzing, Mayor ATTEST: Tina Allard, Ciry Clerk S:\EngineerImprovProj\2009 Improvement Projects\Norfolk Area Street Improvements\Resolutions\determ assessed cost order assess roll.doc FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR NORFOLK , MORTON, LOWELL, and KING AVENUES AREA STREET REHABILITATION PROJECT CITY OF ELK RIVER May 2009 FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR NORFOLK , MORTON, LOWELL, and KING AVENUES AREA STREET REHABILITATION PROJECT CITY OF ELK RIVER May 2009 CERTIFICATION PAGE I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and I am a duly licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. ~- ~u~cc Terry J. Maur .E. Lic. No. 15316 Prep y: John Anderson, P.E. Lic. No. 25889 S~ i~d ~ Date Sl 11 O Date TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ I II. PROJECT SCOPE ........................................................................................................................ I III. NECESSITY AND COST-EFFECTIVENESS ............................................................................ I IV. EXISTING CONDITIONS ........................................................................................................... 2 V. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS .................................................................................................. 3 VI. CITY/NIUNICIPAL UTILITIES COORDINATION ................................................................... 5 VII. RIGHT-OF-WAY, EASEMENTS, AND PERMITS ................................................................... 5 VIII. INFORMATIONAL HEARING .................................................................................................. 6 IX. ESTIMATED PROJECT COST ................................................................................................... 6 X. FINANCING AND ASSESSMENTS .......................................................................................... 6 XI. PROJECT SCHEDULE ................................................................................................................ 7 XII. CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................................7 Appendix A -Exhibits Exhibit 1 -Project Area Exhibit 2 -Sanitary Sewer Exhibit 3 - Watermain Exhibit 4 -Storm Sewer Exhibit 5 -Proposed Street Section Exhibit 5 -Proposed Street Improvements Exhibit 7 -Proposed Assessment Area Appendix B -Informational meeting minutes TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 1 II. PROJECT SCOPE ........................................................................................................................ 1 III. NECESSITY AND COST-EFFECTIVENESS ............................................................................ 1 IV. EXISTING CONDITIONS ........................................................................................................... 2 V. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS .................................................................................................. 3 VI. CITY/MUNICIPAL UTILITIES COORDINATION ............................................................:...... 5 VII. RIGHT-OF-WAY, EASEMENTS, AND PERMITS ................................................................... 5 VIII. INFORMATIONAL HEARING .................................................................................................. 6 IX. ESTIMATED PROJECT COST ................................................................................................... 6 X. FINANCING AND ASSESSMENTS .......................................................................................... 6 XI. PROJECT SCHEDULE ................................................................................................................ 7 XII. CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................................7 Appendix A -Exhibits Exhibit 1 -Project Area Exhibit 2 -Sanitary Sewer Exhibit 3 - Watermain Exhibit 4 -Storm Sewer Exhibit 5 -Proposed Street Section Exhibit 6 -Proposed Street Improvements Exhibit 7 -Proposed Assessment Area Appendix B -Informational meeting minutes I. INTRODUCTION On May 4, 2009 the City Council adopted Resolution 09-18 ordering the feasibility study for the Norfolk, Morton, Lowell, and King Avenues Area Street Rehabilitation Project. The area to be included in the project includes all streets south of Main Street between and including King Avenue and Norfolk Avenue as shown in Exhibit 1. The Norfolk, Morton, Lowell, and King Avenues Area Street Rehabilitation Project. includes pavement reclamation, reconstruction of most sidewalks, concrete curb and gutter repair and minor storm sewer, and watermain work. The streets included within the project are listed below: Affected Streets Name From To Method Kin Avenue Main Street South End Reclamation Lowell Avenue Main Street An el Avenue Reclamation Lookout Place Lowell Avenue West End Reclamation An el Avenue Lowell Avenue Morton Avenue Reclamation Morton Avenue Main Street South End Reclamation Manor Place Norfolk Avenue Morton Avenue Reclamation Norfolk Avenue Main Street Manor Place Reclamation Nile Place Norfolk Avenue West End Reclamation II. PROJECT SCOPE The purpose of this study is to analyze the necessity for improvement of the proposed streets included in the Norfolk, Morton, Lowell, and King Avenues Area Street Rehabilitation Project. In addition, the existing sanitary sewer, water, and storm sewer systems will be evaluated to determine the necessity for improvements. The study will discuss the existing conditions, proposed improvements, estimated construction costs, and overhead costs which include city administration, engineering, fiscal, and legal expenses. Past City practices with similar types of projects will be used as a guideline to discuss financing methods for the proposed improvements. III. NECESSITY AND COST-EFFECTIVENESS The improvements proposed in this study are necessary for a number of reasons. The reclamation of the streets is acost-effective means of continuing the City's proactive street efforts and ensuring an adequate means of transportation for local residents. The proposed improvements will provide a project large enough to ensure a competitive bidding environment and therefore will be cost-effective. Based on the information contained within this report, the proposed improvements are necessary, cost-effective, and feasible from an engineering standpoint. IV. EXISTING CONDITIONS Streef Below is a table summarizing the existing street conditions including information regarding street length, width, curb & gutter, and sidewalk. Existin Street Conditions Street Length (feet) Existing Curb & Sidewalk Width (feet). :Gutter King Avenue 270 35 Most of the West Side (Main to South End) length Lowell Avenue (Main to Angel) 370 28 West side West side Lookout Place 365 21 Vertical curb No (Lowell to west end) on north side Angel Avenue (Lowell to Morton) 710 28 - 30 No No Nile Place (Norfolk to West End) 280 18 No No Morton Avenue (Manor to south end) 450 28 Both sides No Manor Place All of north (Norfolk to Morton) 360 25 Both Sides side, half of south side Norfolk Avenue (Main to Manor) 625 25 Both sides Both sides A geotechnical evaluation will be performed in the area. Soil borings will be taken, frequently enough to represent the existing condition through out the project. The purpose of this investigation will be to determine the existing pavement thickness and depth of aggregate base in place. Vehicular Traffic No traffic counts have been taken in this area. The neighborhood is bounded by the Mississippi and Elk River to the south and thus no thru traffic is possible. The traffic volumes on these streets is assumed to be relatively low and limited to local traffic. Sanitary Sewer Eight-inch sanitary sewer is located on most of the streets in the area. An old 12 inch sanitary sewer line cuts through the area and parallels the river, The sanitary sewer lines will be cleaned and televised prior to final design to determine if any repairs are needed. The existing sanitary sewer is shown on Exhibit 2. 2 Watermain Existing watermain is located throughout the project area. Pipe sizes range from 4-inch to 6-inch. The existing watermain is shown on Exhibit 3. Storm Sewer Two main storm sewer line run south from Main Street, one along Lowell Avenue and the other along Morton Avenue. Inlets connected to the main lines serve to collect storm run off in the area. The storm line along Morton Avenue is known to have problems in the spring time. The storm water from the pipe bubbles to the road surface in several locations at times of high flows. Televising of the two main storm lines will be scheduled and completed prior to final design to determine what problems need to be addressed. The low point in Angel Avenue just south of Lookout Place is seared by a catch basin on either side of the road and may be subject to short term street flooding due to inlet capacity or blockage. The existing storm sewer is shown as Exhibit 4. Existing Private Utilities Private utilities that have facilities in or near the project area will be notified of the project and requested to incorporate repairs and replacements with the project as needed at their cost. Private utilities include Elk River Municipal Utilities, Qwest, Center Point Energy, Charter Communications, Northstar Access, and Sherburne Telephone Systems. V. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS The proposed improvements for the Norfolk, Morton, Lowell, and King Avenues Area Street Rehabilitation Project include pavement reclamation, sidewalk replacement storm sewer repair, and watermain hydrant updates. A detailed description of each proposed improvement is provided below. Pavement Reclamation The process that is proposed for pavement rehabilitation is Full Depth Reclamation (FRD). The process involves grinding the existing bituminous pavement along with the aggregate below to a depth of 6 inches from the surface. It is anticipated that there is 2 to 4 inches of bituminous pavement in place. The FDR process generates an aggregate base that can be graded, shaped and compacted. On top of this aggregate base The bituminous base and wear courses are paved. The process of FDR recycles the existing pavement into a usable product thus eliminating the need to truck out the old bituminous 3 pavement and truck in new aggregate base. A portion of the reclaimed material does need to be removed from the site to allow for placement of the bituminous base and wear course. The material removed from the site can be utilized by the public works department as aggregate for shouldering or gravel road maintenance. The existing concrete curb and gutter can remain in place in conjunction with the FDR process. As a result of leaving the curb in place there is no dimensional change to the elevation- or width of the street. The bituminous pavement section would include 2 inches of bituminous base course and 1 % inches of bituminous wearing course The proposed street section is shown in Exhibit 5. The proposed street and sidewalk improvements are shown in Exhibit 6. Elk River Municipal Utilities will review the street light installations and replace pole mounted lights with decorative street lights in accordance with their lighting policy as part of the project. Sanitary Sewer The sanitary sewer within the project area will be televised to determine the extent that repairs or replacement would be necessary. A review of the Closed Circuit Televised Sewer Inspection Report is expected to show that the existing system will not need any repairs at this time. The report will also be discussed with Mr. Gary Leirmoe, Chief Operator. Watennain Watermain improvements were discussed with Mr. David Berg, Superintendent of Water and Electric Technologies Elk River Municipal Utilities (ERMU). The following items were a result of the discussions and will be incorporated during design: Existing old-style hydrants will be replaced and additional hydrants added. The location of new hydrants has been discussed with former Fire Chief Bruce West and ERMU. 4 Sform Sewer A review of the drainage patterns and pavement conditions reveal no significant storm drainage issues exist. The inlet capacity at the low point on Angel Avenue just south of Lookout Place has been reviewed as part of design and additional inlets added as needed. The storm sewer mains along Lowell Avenue and Morton Avenue will be televised to determine if repairs are needed but no major replacement is anticipated VI. CITY/MUNICIPAL UTILITIES COORDINATION In previous reconstruction projects, groundwork was laid for cooperation between the city and the municipal utilities. Similarly with this project it is agreed that the Municipal Utilities will fund all of the construction costs associated with their water improvements. In addition, the Municipal Utilities agreed to pay a percentage of construction cost for plan and specification preparation. This percentage is proposed to be 10 percent of the water improvement construction cost. Finally, the Municipal Utilities agreed to pay directly for services during construction, including construction staking, construction observation, contract administration and record drawing preparation. VII. RIGHT-OF-WAY, EASEMENTS, AND PERMITS Right-of-Way and Easements No right-of-way will need to be acquired for the street improvements. Temporary construction easements may be required throughout the project area to accommodate driveway repair andlor finished grading related to sidewalk replacement. Verbal permission will be secured from private property owners during the construction process should work need to be completed on private property. Permits Several permits will be required prior to construction of the proposed improvements. Required permits include, but are not limited to, the following: • Minnesota Department of Health • Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (NPDES) Watermain Grading/Storm Water Quality 5 VIII. INFORMATIONAL HEARING An informational hearing was held on April 22, 2009 with the affected property owners. The project was discussed and residents were encouraged to voice their concerns and to ask questions. Residents from 27 of the 60 properties notified for the informational meeting were in attendance. Detailed minutes and the sign in sheets from the informational meeting can be found in Appendix B. IX. ESTIMATED PROJECT COST The estimated construction costs and associated overhead costs for the proposed improvements are summarized in Table 1. Based on past experiences on similar projects in the City, the overhead costs have been estimated at 21 % of the total construction cost. The overhead costs include city administration, engineering design, fiscal, and legal costs. Table 1 Project Cost Estimate Street & Storm Sewer Improvements Watermain Improvements Total Construction Cost Administration, Engineering, Fiscal, & Legal (21%) Contingency (5%) Total Project Cost X. FINANCING AND ASSESSMENTS $ 395,000 $ 16,000 $ 411,000 $ 86,500 $ 20,500 $ 518,000 The improvements discussed in this report are proposed to be financed through a number of .different methods. Benefiting properties would be assessed on a per unit basis for street, curb and gutter, sidewalks, storm sewer, and street lighting. A residential lot that could not be further subdivided would be assessed as one unit. Apartment units would be assessed at 0.25 of a residential unit, townhomes would be assessed at 0.75 of a residential unit. Lots that can be subdivided would be assessed as multiple units as appropriate. Commercial property would be assessed at 2.0 residential units. The number of assessable units is approximately 55 for the area, which is graphically shown in Exhibit 7. The proposed assessment rate is $4,500.00 per unit The total assessment amount would then be $247,500. The Elk River Municipal Utilities would be responsible for funding all water improvements, including construction cost plus associated overhead. The water improvements are estimated at a total project cost of $20,000. 6 Based on the estimated total project cost of $518,000, total assessments of $247,500 and Elk River Municipal Utilities contribution of $20,000 the remaining project cost to be funding by the City is $250,500. The City's portion would be funded by the Street Improvement Reserve Fund (SIR). Financing of the assessed portion is proposed to be over a 7 year period. Residents can request extending this period to a total of 10 years. XI. PROJECT SCHEDULE Informational Meeting April 22, 2009 Resolution Ordering Feasibility Study May 4, 2009 Feasibility to City Council May 18, 2009 Plans and Specifications Ordered May 18, 2009 Prepare plans and Specifications May /June 2009 Advertise for Bid June /July 2009 Public Hearing /Assessment Hearing July 20, 2009 Bid Awarded July 20, 2009 Begin Construction August 2009 Construction Substantially Complete October 2009 First Assessment Payment with Real Estate Taxes May 2010 XII. CONCLUSION The total estimated project cost for street, storm sewer, and watermain including overhead costs is $5?8,000. The project is necessary and cost-effective. As previously stated, this cost will be financed through a combination of assessments to benefiting properties, Elk River Municipal Utilities funds, and City funds. Based on the information gathered and the analysis presented, the proposed improvements discussed in this study are feasible from an engineering standpoint. 7 APPENDIX A -EXHIBITS CITY OF ELK RIVER NORFOLK-MORTON-LOWELL- KING NEIGHBORHOOD AREA EXHIBIT 1 PROJECT AREA 0 300 ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 I I 1 i ~ ~' 1 ~ ~ I , CITY OF ELK RIVER NORFOLK-MORTON-LOWELL- KING NEIGHBORHOOD AREA EXHIBIT 2 EXISTING SANITARY SEWER 0 300 1 ~ ~ ~ i I1 11 i i I I I ~ ~ t c~ CITY OF ELK RIVER NORFOLK-MORTON-LOWELL- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , EXHIBIT 3 EXISTING WATERMAIN 300 CITY OF ELK RIVER NORFOLK-MORTON-LOWELL- KING NEIGHBORHOOD AREA EXHIBIT 4 EXISTING STORM SEWER 0 300 ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 1 / j ~ ~ ~ 1' ~-RECLAIM TO A DEPTH OF 6" 1.5" WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (MVWE350356) 2" NON WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (LVNW35030B) 4" THICK BY 5' WIDE CONCRETE SIDEWALK (6" THICK IN DRIVEWAY AREAS) ROW INTEGRAL BITUMINOUS BERM PROPOSED STREET SECTION BITUMINOUS EDGE/BERM (NO CONCRETE CURB) NO BITUMINOUS EDGE/BERM (NO CONCRETE CURB) >W ~ RO 50' LIGHT POLE 6' 2' 0.67' 2.009, I 2.00% 1 r-- 2.00% 2.00 _y 1 I I 4" GRANULAR BEDDING (INCIDENTAL) SOD LRECLAIM TO A DEPTH OF 6" 1.5" WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (MVWE350356) 2" NON WEARING COURSE MIXTURE (LVNW350308) PROPOSED STREET SECTION EXISTING CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER r CITY OF ELK RIVER NORFOLK-MORTON-LOWELL- KING NEIGHRORFI00® AREA EXHIBIT 5 PROPOSED STREET SECTION ~ SOD 6618 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER i i 1 I II 1 I 1 I ~ ~ ~ 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 ® STREET REPAIRS (FULL DEPTH RECLAMATION) PROPOSED SIDEWALK REPAIRS AND ADDITIONS EXISTING SIDEWALK STAYS IN SERVICE r CITY OF ELK RIVER NORFOLK-MORTON-LOWELL- KING NEIGHBORHOOD 14REA EXHIBIT 6 PROPOSED STREETS AND SIDEWALK 0 300 Legend ASSESSMENT FACTORS Non-buildable 0.0 g y ~~` ~ Commercial Parkin Sin le Famil Residential -1.0 ~ , g - 0.0 Apartment - 0.25 multi family residential 0.75 a Commercial - 2.0 NORFOLK, MORTON, LOWELL AND KING AVENUES AREA STREET REHABILITATION PROPOSED ASSESSMENT AREA Exhibit 7 APPENDIX B -INFORMATIONAL MEETING INFORMATIONAL MEETING FOR THE NORFOLK, MORTON, LOWELL AND KING AVENUES AREA WEDNESDAY. APRIL 22.2004 - 6:00 PM ELK RIVER CITY HALL -UPPER TOWN CONFERENCE ROOM Attendees: See attached sign-in sheet. Terry Maurer, Public Works Director gave a brief PowerPoint presentation. Mr. Maurer stressed that this was slightly different than in past years. The city, for a number of years, has been doing street reconstruction in odd-numbered years and assessable overlay projects in even-numbered years. Typically, the City Council will have already ordered a feasibility study and the informational meeting with the neighborhood is part of completing that study. This year, due to the economic situation the country is in, the City Council was unsure whether or not to proceed with these projects. They directed staff to have an informational meeting with the neighborhood to solicit input as to whether or not to proceed with the proposed project this year. Mr. Maurer explained the scope of the streets involved in the proposed project. He indicated that the sanitary sewer lines would all be televised and any problem areas would be corrected, although none are known of currently. He indicated that the water system has been reviewed by the Elk River Municipal Utilities and the only water improvements anticipated is replacement of some old-style hydrants and the addition of one new hydrant for better fire flow coverage. He indicated that there is a known problem with the storm sewer on Morton Avenue that will be investigated and repaired as part of this project. Also, the inlet capacity at the intersection of Lowell Avenue and Angel Avenue will be investigated and increased, if necessary. With regard to the street improvements, he indicated that the proposal is to do full-depth reclamation of the bituminous surface. This involves grinding up the existing bituminous with the existing aggregate base to make a blended mix. As much as possible will be left in place; the only portion that will be removed is to allow enough room for the new bituminous to be placed. There will be two lifts of bituminous pavement placed. Approximate total depth will be 3 '/z inches. The concrete curb and gutter is intended to be left in place, since it is in very good condition. There will be some minor spot repairs with additional curb added on Lowell Avenue and near intersections where necessary for drainage. Sidewalks throughout the area are proposed to be replaced in their entirety. The sidewalk width currently is only 5 feet; that sidewalk width will be maintained since it will fit well with the boulevard width and the existing trees in the area. It was indicated that the city would look at completing the sidewalk along the south side of Manor Place and on the east side of Morton Avenue to provide conductivity throughout the neighborhood. Street lights were discussed briefly. It was indicated that the eastern half of the neighborhood has the new style street lights placed by the Municipal Utilities. The western part of the neighborhood still has the old wood poles with lights mounted on them. It was indicated that if the neighborhood would like, the city would work with the Municipal Utilities to get the new style lighting throughout the entire neighborhood. The estimated project cost was shown to be approximately $500,000. Fox assessment purposes, it was estimated that there are 50 - 60 assessable units; some single family that would be assessed at 1 unit; some townhouses that would be assessed at .75 per unit; and the Guardian Angels facility would be looked at as an apartment at 0.25 units per apartment unit. The assessment rate is proposed at $4,500. This will fund approximately half of the total project cost. An assessment spread of $4,500 at 5 percent interest over 7 years with constant principal payment was shown. It was indicated that the city would consider extending the term up to 10 years if an individual requested it The individual request is necessary because there will be an increase in the total amount paid, if the term is extended from 7 to 10 years; or the city would consider an equal payment option which would lower the annual payment in the early years but raise it in the late years versus the amortization schedule shown. Finally, a brief schedule was shown. It was indicated that staff would be reporting back to the City Council on May 4th with the outcome of this informational meeting. It was also indicated that anyone who was not in attendance could still send an email to Terry Maurer's email, which was in the letter announcing the meeting, and that would become part of the records presented to the City Council. If the project were to proceed, plan preparation, bidding, public hearing, and assessment hearing would be accomplished between May and July. It was indicated that the public hearing and assessment hearing would likely be held the same evening, so tha the neighborhood is not invited back twice to hear basically the same information. If the project proceeded after hearings, construction would begin in August and be complete by October. With that as background, the informational meeting was opened to questions. The following is a summary of the questions that were asked and the answers that were given: Question: Would stimulus money be available to fund any of this? Answer: The city has applied for stimulus money on a number of projects including transportation projects. We have not been successful in getting any stimulus money at this point in time; but, the criteria we have seen indicates that neighborhood streets would not qualify. The city has applied for and is hoping that some stimulus money will be made available to do some work on Main Street. Question: Do the assessments go on our taxes? Answer: Yes. The city uses the county as the collection agency. Property owners always have the option to prepay the assessment to avoid interest or to prepay at any time during the life of the assessment. If you choose not to prepay it, each year the city will certify to the county the amount that is due for the assessment that particular year. Half of that money will be due with your tax bill in May and the other half will be due with your second tax payment in October. Question: Would the construction be an open bidding process? Answer: Yes. We would follow state law and solicit competitive sealed bids opened at a specific time and place for this project. Question: How many bids do you normally get and would you expect more, given the economy? Answer: This project would primarily be a paving project, so I would expect that paving contractors would typically general this type of bid. We have normally received 5 - 8 bids on paving projects and I would anticipate that many or more, given the economy. Question: Can you predict the price of this project if we were to wait two years? Answer: It is very difficult to predict how things will change over the period of a couple of years. I think it is fairly safe to assume that oil is about a low as it is going to go. As soon as the economy starts to pick up and hopefully that will happen within two years, the demand for oil will likely make the price rise. Also, an economy where there is more work out there for contractors of this nature will also make the prices rise. Question: Is any work scheduled for Main Street? Answer: There is no work on Main Street as part of this proposed project. As indicated earlier, the city does anticipate full-depth reclamation of Main Street, but we are waiting to see if any stimulus money is made available. If the Main Street work does not proceed this year, it will likely be completed in 2010. Question: Are commercial properties assessed at the same rate as residential? Answer: There are two commercial properties on this project, at the corners of Main Street and King Avenue. They are not assessed at the same rate as residential; they are typically assessed at higher rates, but commercial properties are looked at individually. It is difficult to come up with an assessment that would deal with a bank as we have on King and Main Street, versus a Wal-Mart or Home Depot, which are also considered commercial properties. So once again, they will be looked at individually and that determination will ultimately be made by the City Council as to how many units each commercial property is proposed to be assessed. Question: How do you determine if this project moves forward, is it a vote of the property owners? Answer: No. It is not ~~ vote of the property owners; it is a vote of the five elected officials. They typically follow the will of the property owners if there is a clear majority. Question: Can we take a show of hands vote to determine who is in favor and who is opposed? Answer: If you would like to have a show of hands vote in favor or against the project, I will record that in the minutes, but I would hesitate to take a specific hand count, because I have no way of knowing whether a husband and wife owning one property might both put their hands up, or whether or not people in this room are the actual owners of the property. So I would be happy to reflect a general sense of those in attendance relative to a show of hands for or against. At this point, we proceeded to ask for a show of hands for those in favor. Avast majority of all those in attendance raised their hands in favor of the project. When it was asked for those opposed, only one hand was raised. The person raising their hand in opposition indicated that they had just lost their job and were concerned about whether or not they could take on an assessment at this point in time. Question: If corner lots on Main Street are included in this neighborhood assessment, will that change the assessments for everyone else? Answer: No. The assessments will still be levied on a per unit basis. The reason the Main Street corner lots are shown in a different color is that they will be presented to the City Council as having paid an assessment back in 1988 for the reconstruction of Main Street. The Council will be asked to determine whether or not they should get any credit for that assessment. The Council could determine that they should be included in this project at a full assessment amount; that they should be excluded from this project because they paid for the 1988 Main Street; or some point between. Questions: Will this neighborhood be removed from future redevelopment plans? Answer: I assume you are talking about the downtown redevelopment plan. That, of course, is not driven by the Public Works Department; that was part of the Community Development Department plan, acting on City Council direction. From what I understand about that project and Council's actions on assessment street projects, I would doubt seriously that the Council would do work on your streets, assess your property, and then include you in a plan that would affect any of those improvements. Question: How will the corner lots on Main Street be assessed? Answet: As I indicated earlier, we will be asking the City Council for direction on that. They could go from no assessment because of the 1988 Main Street assessment against those properties, to a full assessment for this project, deters,rning that 23 years ago is too long a time to get credit. The third option would be give partial credit by reducing the assessment for the neighborhood streets to some portion of a full unit. Question: Since I am on Main Street, will I be assessed in this project? Answer: As I indicated, you will be included in the project until the Council makes a determination that would exclude you from it. Question: How do the proposed improvements here compare with what was done on Islandview Drive last year? Answer: The work that was done on Islandview Drive last year was a simple 1 '/2 inch overlay. This proposed project in your neighborhood is significantly different in that we will be grinding up the old bituminous surface and increasing the base material using the ground up bituminous. There will be two lifts of bituminous paving put back down for a nominal thickness of 3'/z inches. Your new pavement will crack simply because bituminous is a flexible pavement and in our extreme temperatures from well below freezing to 80's and 90's, the bituminous material will crack. There will be no cracks to reflect through, as there are on overlays. Question: How thick will the sidewalks be? Answer: The new sidewalks will be 4 inches thick except through driveways where they would be increased to six inches in order to carry the heavier loads of vehicles crossing them. The sidewalks would be again, 5 feet in width which is the same width that the current sidewalks are. Question: We just put in a new concrete driveway. Will that need to come out? Answer: We will attempt to match the new concrete as well as we can. If it becomes apparent that we cannot work around the new concrete driveway as we are pouring sidewalk, part of the project will be to remove and replace with similar material that portion of concrete driveway through the sidewalk area. Question: Are concrete driveways replaced with concrete? Answer: Yes. Question: Can stumps from the old Elm trees in the neighborhood be removed? Answer: If we can remove them without doing any damage to the concrete curb and gutter which is intended to be saved, or without making major disruption of the boulevard area beyond what is needed for the sidewalk replacement, we will attempt to do that with this project. Question: What is the commitment from the city relative to maintaining this new bituminous in the future? For as long as I have lived here, I only remember one sealcoat in the past 14 years. Answer: If new bituminous surfaces are put into the neighborhood, within two years our street crews will come through the neighborhood and seal any cracks that appear. Once the new streets are built, they will be put into the normal cycle for sealcoat. Neighborhood streets like these with a lower volume of traffic, we try to sealcoat on a 7 - 10 year cycle. At the end of a 10-year cycle, your street should have had cracks sealed at least twice and one sealcoat. Of course, the work that the street crews can do is always dependent upon budgets and economic conditions. As the economic conditions have worsened recently, manpower and materials have been reduced in an effort to balance the city budget. Question: What is the life expectanry of the new street? Answet: If it is properly maintained, the life expectanry should be well beyond 30 - 40 years. Maintaining the new street would include crack sealing and sealcoating on the schedule that I had 'just mentioned during a 40-year life cycle. There may be a point in time where the surface shows enough wear and oxidation that an overlay would be necessary. Question: Will the people who have frontage on Main Street get a lower assessment if stimulus money is awarded? Answer: First of all, in order to even get to that question, we will need to receive stimulus money. As I indicated earlier, we attempted to get stimulus money but have been unsuccessful thus far. If we are successful, this is an issue the City Council will be asked to deal with. Being no further questions, the meeting was adjourned at 6:45 p.m. Submitted by: Terry J. Maurer, P.E. Public Works Director ~,... D z i ~ ~Wo tiz~ ao© ~~~ ~~ Z m 0 Cl~ C5~ ~ p~~p (1- ~ ,~ ~~ N 1 tsr t)-~ ~ ~ ~ ,° ~ !\ ~ ~ t ~ ~ ~ p., ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ `~ ~ ~ ~ Cr , -~" ~ ~ ~ (~ a ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ` ~, ~ ~ ° ~ ~ ~ ~~.. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .L ` `M a. ~ a ~ ~ ~~ ~ a ~ ~ Z ~ f ~ U O b .~ ..-~ bgA `i-+ 0 `~ 0 W a o Z tD ~ f~ `~ `-- rn ,~ a ~ `~ ~ - M . ~ ~, ~ ~+ ~ ~'. ~ ~ ~ ~ `~ ~ ~S~. b ~~ o ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ .~, ~' ~ ~ ~` ~ M ~ 1 v - M ``` M M M r~ ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ ~, .~ 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L ~ ~ ~ v ~ ~ ~ a ~ o ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ '~ y ~ ~~ ~ ~ a ~` ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - v ~ ~1 ~ p ti n r~ ~ 0 a ~ ~ J M - ~ C, ~ ~ 7 cf-- D ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ m vi L n n ~,~-,f ~! 1 ~-~1 ~ ~ ~ ~,1 ,~ '~' ~' ~ 1~J ~ Z ~ ~ ~ L 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~~ ~ J ~ ~ Z ' ~ ~ `~ ~ ,~ ~[~ ` ~ -2 .1 4~ ~. -~ 0 b .~ .~ 3 0 a 0 `~ z w a W ~o N o z ~ _ o a ~ ~ ~ cJ ~ } L a `~- Q c .~ a ~ H d c ~~ a ~c Z ~1 ~ \` U O 'd .~ •H ~VI ~.~/! ~~ 0 a 0 0 ~: 0 N N W N p,