Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Minutes 01-18-2005 SpecialAdopted Minutes Special Council Meeting January 18, 2005 Mayor Johnson called a Special Meeting of the Plymouth City Council to order at 7:09 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 3400 Plymouth Boulevard, on January 18, 2005. COUNCIL PRESENT: Mayor Johnson, Councilmembers Willis, Hewitt, Slavik, Bildsoe, Stein, and Black. ABSENT: None. STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Ahrens, Community Development Director Hurlburt, City Engineer Faulkner, Park and Recreation Director Blank, Finance Director Hale, Financial Analyst Kohn, Water and Sewer Supervisor Young, Civil Engineer Renneberg, Assistant City Engineer Beckwith, Street Supervisor Smith, Street Supervisor Newberger, and City Clerk Paulson. Discussion of Street Reconstruction Program Financial Analyst Kohn gave a very detailed explanation on the City's reconstruction program and the condition of the roadways. He stated that a group of staff has met to examine the issue of preserving and improving the condition of the City's street system. Input was received from street maintenance, engineering, sewer and water, and finance to develop a comprehensive and multifaceted approach to a very significant problem. He stated staff is recommending an integrated "mix -of -fixes program to resolve the City's street condition problem. It would emphasize increased preventive maintenance activities, greater use of temporary overlays on streets due for reconstruction, and the phase-in of more street improvement (reconstruction and mill -and -overlay) projects. The following is a list of the more significant changes in practice that staff recommends: 1. Establish a staff committee to plan and coordinate maintenance and street improvement activities on an annual basis. This committee would provide a report to the Council and submit recommendations for projects to be included in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). 2. Establish and fund a more aggressive and higher quality sealcoat application and pre-sealcoat repair program. This would cost-effectively preserve the quality of the City's good streets and extend street life. 3. Implement and fund a catch-up program of temporary overlays to increase the condition of failing streets while the City phases -in an increased street improvement program. 4. Implement and fund an expanded street improvement program. The expanded program, along with additional maintenance efforts, is anticipated to result in the increase of the average street rating from 66 to 70. 5. Change the City's Assessment Policy to allow for the assessment of street reconstruction and mill -and -overlay or full -depth mill -and -overlay projects. Both types of projects benefit adjoining properties. This would be a more equitable approach. Adopted Council Minutes Special Meeting of January 18, 2005 Page 2 of 5 6. Change the City's Assessment Policy to increase the assessment amount of 40% of project cost. This amount conservatively estimates the increased value enjoyed by adjoining property and compares well with other communities in the metro area. 7. Change engineering specifications for street reconstruction from a fairly rigid standard that is significantly higher than that required for new road installed by developers, to a more flexible standard based on soil and drainage conditions for each street. This would save money while maintaining a comparable and reasonable life. 8. Change engineering specifications to allow the use of PVC or HDPE water main. This would provide a better product, more resistant to damage by the City's poor soils, at a lower cost. 9. Consider the replacement of water main and replacement of relining of sewer main, in street projects as applicable. This would reduce the need to dig up new street to repair or replace decaying underground infrastructure. He stated the Council discussed long-term road reconstruction and financing at a Study Session on September 28. At that meeting, staff discussed the need for an average of $7,415,000 per year to be allocated towards street reconstruction ($13,710,000 in 2005) in order to raise the current street condition from a Cl 66 to a 70. He stated that sealcoating costs $15,000 per mile, temporary overlay costs $115,000 per mile, mill and overlay costs $260,000 per mile, full depth mill and overlay costs $350,000 per mile, and complete reconstruction costs $850,000 per mile. These costs are only for the street surface, not curb and gutter and utilities. A considerable amount of discussion was held on the condition of water mains and sewer main lines throughout the City and repairing those lines after a street has been recently reconstructed. It was noted that the City's rating system doesn't take into consideration the condition of the utilities when rating the streets. The sewer mains are televised, but that is impossible for the water mains due to the pressure on the water mains. City Manager Ahrens reported that staff is checking the condition of the utility mains, on a case-by-case basis when the streets are being opened up for repair. Because of the financing issue in the future, staff believes that the Council needs to start thinking about the utility reconstruction. Financial Analyst Kohn discussed the advantages and disadvantages of sealcoating and mill and overlay reconstruction. Councilmember Slavik asked how the City would handle petitions received for street reconstruction. Financial Analyst Kohn replied they would be reviewed in the process of selecting streets but wouldn't be the primary criteria. Councilmember Slavik stated the petition process does play a role in the whole process. She noted a couple recent projects that were petitioned and weren't part of the CIP, but they were two of the worst streets in the City. Financial Analyst Kohn stated the worst streets would be reconstructed first, so the petition process wouldn't be necessary. However, the City could still allow the petition process for projects assessed at 100% according to the State Statutes. He discussed the following items to consider: Adopted Council Minutes Special Meeting of January 18, 2005 Page 3 of 5 1. Reactive maintenance funding appears to be currently adequate. 2. Preventive maintenance, specifically sealcoat and pre-sealcoat work appears to need more funding. 3. Funding could be freed up by elimination of all contractual spray -patching and removal of temporary overlays from the General Fund. This would redirect about $120,000 and one full- time equivalent toward those activities. 4. The City has a backlog of potential temporary overlay projects. 5. The City could hire a contractor to do them in 2005. 6. Temporary overlays delay the need for reconstruction and should be funded by the street reconstruction fiend. 7. One-time funding for a $600,000 project could come from General Fund surplus. Financial Analyst Kohn discussed the five alternatives identified by staff on how to proceed: 1. Continue the current allocation of $2,500,000 per year on street improvements. The projection based on this alternative shows that the condition of the City's streets would continue to decline. The average CI rating would go from 66 to 51 over the next 10 years. In addition, while the amount of streets in good condition (CI greater than 75) would hold at about 42%, the amount of streets in poor condition (CI under 50) would increase from 28% to 50%. 2. Move forward the level of street improvements anticipated in the 2005-2009 CIP. This amount, which varies by year, averages approximately $4,000,000, or approximately 60% more than what has been done in the past. The average CI rating would go from 66 to 60 over the next 10 years. In addition, while the amount of streets in good condition (CI greater than 75) would increase from 42% to 51 %, the amount of streets in poor condition (CI under 50) would increase from 27% to 41%. 3. Move forward the first three years of the 2005-2009 CIP and increase total expenditures by 20% each year from 2008 through 2011. Expenditures then remain at $8,500,000 per year thereafter. The projection based on this alternative shows that the condition of the City's streets would decline to a 64 and then increase to and maintain a 70 CI rating. It would take 11 years for street condition to reach the 70 CI goal. 4. Move forward the level of street improvements currently in the CIP for 2005, a $10,000,000 program funded by debt in 2006, a 20% increase per year (based on 2005) for years 2007 to 2010, $7,500,000 for 2011 and 2012, and $8,000,000 from 2013 to 2020. The mix of projects s projected at 85% reconstruction and 15% mill -and -overlay for the first two years, 50% reconstruction and 50% mill -and -overlay for the next five years, and 90% reconstruction and 10% mill -and -overlay for the remainder. This option is designed to increase condition quickly based on the large program in 2006 and use 50% of funding for mill -and -overlays from 2007 to 2011. The average CI rating would increase to 69, decline to 67, and then increase to maintain a 70 rating by 2012. Mayor Johnson wondered if some of these initiatives shouldn't be citizen driven so there is the support. Councilmember Bildsoe commented there could be a fragmentation of the City if this issue goes to a referendum. Adopted Council Minutes Special Meeting of January 18, 2005 Page 4 of 5 Financial Analyst Kohn commented regarding the City's sewer and water infrastructure, it's estimated that it could cost $650,000 per year for water main replacement, which would require a one time 18% increase in the utility rates. However, the City's rates would still be among the lowest in the metro area. He discussed a list of possible actions for the Council to consider in the next two to three weeks, next four to eight weeks, and next two to four months. Councilmember Black stated she doesn't support bonding as it just defers the cost of the improvements. Council_member Hewitt suggested that the Council receive information from the cities of Minnetonka and New Hope on their street reconstruction programs and the impact to their general funds. Councilmember Slavik stated she wouldn't be opposed to a referendum, as she doesn't feel the Council could increase the property taxes due to levy limits. She commented that she is very concerned about the condition of the City's :utility infrastructure. Councilmember Bildsoe suggested that the Council start to educate citizens, through articles in the newsletter, that they would be reviewing the total street reconstruction program as well as the Special Assessment Policy this year. Councilmember Black added there could also be articles in the Environmental Extra. The Council stated they would also be reviewing funding options and continuing to study the options as discussed this evening as well as funding new development and how that factors in with the Cl rating system. Set Future Study Sessions The Council set March 8 at 5:00 p.m. to review City Center concept, parking, downtown council, and signage issues. In addition, the Council would be discussing redevelopment at that meeting. They requested that staff prepare a report on the tools that other metropolitan communities use to attract redevelopment. The Council scheduled a Study Session on January 25 at 6:00 p.m. for the purpose of completing the City Manager's evaluation. The Council directed staff to prepare a list of legislative priorities for the January 25 Regular Council Meeting. Councilmember Slavik requested in the future a report on implementing paperless agendas (use of laptop and website for Council packets/meetings). The Council scheduled the quarterly update with the City Manager following the April 5 Board of Equalization meeting. Adopted Council Minutes Special Meeting of January 18, 2005 Page 5 of 5 It was noted that a quorum of the Council wouldn't be present for the March 22 meeting. Therefore, staff was directed to prepare a report for the January 25 meeting moving the March 22 meeting to March 29. Adjournment Mayor Johnson adjourned the meeting at 9:55 p. Sandra R. Paulson, City Clerk