02/06/2007 - City Council Public Works Committee
AGENDA
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING
FEBRUARY 6, 2007
4:30 P.M.
EAGAN CITY HALL
ENGINEERING CONFERENCE ROOMS 1 A/B
1. ADOPT AGENDA
II. NEW BUSINESS
A. Project 928, Meadowview & Alexander Rd. (Final Assessment Roll)
III. OTHER BUSINESS
IV. ADJOURNMENT
r
CRY of Eap ma
To: Tom Colbert, Director of Public Works
From: John Gorder, Assistant City Engineer
Date: January 30, 2007
Subject: Meadowview/ Alexander Road Final Assessments
City Project No. 928
Public Works Committee Meeting - February 6, 2007
This memo is to provide background information for February 6, 2007 meeting with the
Public Works Committee regarding the Final Assessment Roll for the above-referenced
project.
PROJECT TIMELINE
• 1995/ 1999 Projects First Identified In 5 Year Capital Imp. Program
• June 7, 2005 City Council Authorized Feasibility Report
• January 17, 2006 City Council Ordered Public Hearing
• February 15, `06 Project Informational Meeting
• February 21, '06 Public Hearing - Council Ordered Project
(Front Foot Assessment Methodology)
• August, '06 Construction Completed
• November 2, '06 Initial Final Assessment Neighborhood Meeting
• November 9, '06 City Council Re-schedules Public Hearing
(Driveway Unit Assessment Methodology)
• November 30, `06 Informational Neighborhood Meeting
• December 4, '06 Final Assessment Public Hearing/ Hearing Continued
• February 6, 2007 Public Works Cmte Mtg
• February 20, `07 Continuation of Final Assessment Public Hearing
PROJECT/ CONTRACT COSTS
A comparison of the costs presented in the feasibility report for Project 928 to the final
project costs for assessment is shown on the attached table.
Detailed plans and specifications for Citywide Street Improvements (Contract 06-02,
including Project 928 and Projects 786, 926, and 933) were approved by the City Council
and a contract awarded on April 4, 2006. While the bid prices received for Project 928 were
approximately 17% over the feasibility report cost estimate, the overall bid prices received
in April for Contract 06-02 were approximately 7% under the estimates presented at the
projects' respective public hearings. Increases in bid costs for Project 928 were mainly due
to increased grading and subgrade preparation quantities in the final design that were not
anticipated in the preliminary feasibility report.
The final costs for Contract 06-02, including construction and overhead, was
approximately 14% under the cumulative feasibility report cost estimates. The
breakdown of costs, per street improvement project, is as follows:
Feasibility Report Final Cost
Project 786 $400,100 $251,397
Project 926 $610,730 $464,807
Project 928 $363,720 $451,708
Project 933 $300,650 $276,445
06-02 Totals $1,675,200 $1,444,357
It should be noted that Project 928 was the only project that exceeded the feasibility report
cost estimate.
FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL METHODOLOGY
In accordance with the City's Special Assessment Policy, all street improvement costs for
the urban upgrade of Meadowview Road, the mill & overlay of Alexander Road, and
installation of commercial concrete driveway aprons on both Meadowview Road and
Alexander Road are 100% assessable to adjacent benefiting properties. The Policy
provides for various methods in determining benefit for adjacent properties.
The feasibility report presented at the project public hearing (Feb. 21, 2006) estimated the
special assessments based on the front foot method for both Meadowview Road and
Alexander Road, and the actual quantity of concrete entrance aprons installed (See
Attachment A).
The Final Assessment Roll presented to the City Council at the December 4 City Council
meeting utilized the per driveway method (Attachment B) for all assessments for
Meadowview Rd. based on existing or potential driveway access to every lot and the
front foot method for the Alexander Road overlay. The use of the per driveway method,
rather than the front footage method for Meadowview Rd is due to the significant variances
in individual lot frontage, and the recognizable similarity in access benefits to each property
based on their existing (or potential) driveway connections.
Another optional method of computing assessments is based on a parcel area method.
However, due to the large variations in parcel sizes (0.9 acre to 23.7 acres) in relation to
their access, this method was also deemed not equitable. A comparison of the potential
assessment resulting from the three alternative methods is provided in the Attachment C
(for information purposes only)
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MTG
TUESDAY FEBRUARY 6, 2007
Location: EAGAN CITY HALL
CONFERENCE ROOMS 1 AB
MEETING NOTES
The Public Works Committee of the City Council consisting of Councilmembers Cyndee
Fields and Paul Bakken convened the meeting at 4:30 pm. Also in attendance were City
Administrator Tom Hedges, Public Works Director Tom Colbert, Director of
Administrative Services Gene VanOverbeke, City Engineer Russ Matthys, Assistant City
Engineer John Gorder and property owner Mike Leitner (Parcel 10-00800-010-04) join at
4:55pm.
Councilmembers Fields and Bakken called the meeting to order and adopted the agenda
as presented.
PROJECT 928, FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL (MEADOWVIEW & ALEXANDER)
Director Colbert provided background information on the project, the proposed Final
Assessment Roll (FAR), the comments/objections raised by the 3 property owners who
spoke at the public hearing held on Dec. 4, 2006 and the Council's direction to the Public
Works Committee for further review. He went on to explain that there were 2 basic
policy questions to be addressed in addition to the increase in costs and notification
process.
Policy Issues
1. Methodology of assessment allocation
The City's Special Assessment Policy provides for a variety of methods to
allocate assessable costs to benefiting property owners (i.e. front foot, parcel
size/area, per lot, etc). The original Feasibility Report's Preliminary Assessment
Roll and the proposed Final Assessment Roll (FAR) were based on a front foot
method, with some artificial footage assigned to various lots in an effort to
achieve some equity between parcels. After complaints were received from a
property owner about excessive assessable footage vs. actual frontage,
consultation was sought from the City Attorney's office. It was determined to be
more equitable (and defensible if challenged through possible appeals) to allocate
the assessment on a "driveway connection" equivalent. Subsequently, a new FAR
was prepared, sent to affected property owners and presented at the Dec. 4 public
hearing.
Public Works Committee Recommendation. After reviewing the various
methodologies and the irregularity of the size and shapes of assessable properties,
the Committee concurred with the revised "driveway connection" method. (Mr.
Leitner also concurred with this recommendation.)
2. Allocation of costs - Assessments vs. City Funds
The current Special Assessment policy states that all costs associated with
upgrading substandard local streets to current city standards should be assessed
100% to the benefiting property owners. Meadowview Rd was a gravel street
upgraded to a bituminous surface (9 ton industrial capacity) with concrete curb &
gutter, storm sewers and concrete entrance aprons. The first proposed FAR
erroneously limited the assessments to an estimated predetermined rate as stated
in the City's Fee Schedule. This resulted in a reduced special assessment (less
than Policy) and the City financing $56,525 more from the City's Major Street
Fund to cover this shortfall. When the FAR was corrected for the assessment
methodology, the assessment cost allocation was also corrected, resulting in an
increase in the overall assessments to be allocated to the benefiting properties.
Public Works Committee Recommendation. After reviewing the assessable costs
and the City's Assessment Policy, the Committee concurred that this local street
project had no larger community benefits than any other industrial street and
should be assessed according to the Policy (i.e. 100% vs. Fee Schedule limits).
Mr. Leitner still expressed his dissatisfaction with the increase and proposed final
assessment.
Cost increase and Notification process
Director Colbert explained how the cost of the project increased significantly
from the estimate contained in the pre-design feasibility report due to under
estimating the quantities required for excavation, grading and subgrade correction
necessary to upgrade a rural road to an urban industrial street. Mr. Leitner
explained the hardship of budgeting for an anticipated lesser cost and then having
to finance an assessment that was more than twice the original estimate. In was
noted that the assessment is already proposed to be spread over the maximum 15
years to help with annual payments. It was also noted that, while extremely rare
and unusual, significant cost overruns can happen and mortgage companies
routinely escrow 2 -21/2 times a pending assessment with a sale of property.
Public Works Committee Recommendation. After reviewing the project's design,
cost estimating and notification process, the Committee recommended that the
City provide stronger emphasis and clearer notification that the Feasibility Report
estimate is subject to change based on final design and bid prices and that pending
assessments should be updated with property notification if significant increases
occur during the design and/or bidding process.
The meeting adjourned at 5:25pm.
Notes prepared by Tom Colbert.
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
FEBRUARY 6, 2007
1. NEW BUSINESS
A. CITY PROJECT 928 - MEADOWVIEW/ ALEXANDER ROADS
FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL
ISSUE: At the public hearing held on December 4, the City Council passed a motion to continue
consideration of the Final Assessment Roll for Project 928 (Meadowview Road /
Alexander Road - Street Improvements) to February 20, 2007, and directed the Public
Works Committee to review the proposed Final Assessment Roll (FAR).
BACKGROUND: The upgrade of Meadowview Road to current City street standards, along with
the re-alignment and overlay of Alexander Road, (under Project 928) have been
completed under Contract 06-02, all related costs tabulated and a Final Assessment Roll
was prepared.
On October 5, 2006 the City Council received the FAR and scheduled a formal public
hearing to be held on November 9. As a result of questions raised by an affected
property owner (Jay Tyler) prior to and at the November 2 neighborhood informational
meeting regarding the final assessments and allocation methodology, staff reviewed the
proposed Final Assessment Roll with the City Attorney's office for sustainability and
subsequently revised it. The Final Assessment hearing was rescheduled to December 4,
2006 to insure proper re-notification of the proposed new assessment amounts.
As a result of questions raised during the December 4 Public Hearing, the City Council
continued the hearing to February 20 and referred the matter to the Public Works
Committee for review and recommendations.
ATTACHMENTS:
• Final Assessment Report - City Project 928
• Background Informational Memo from Assistant City Engineer (1-30-07)
o Project Timeline/ Costs/ Assessment Methodology
o Recent Similar Project Assessments
o Comparisons of Assessment Methods
o Comparison of Proposed Final Assessments to Feasibility Report Estimates
o Map of the Proposed Assessment Area
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION OPTIONS:
1. Approve the Final Assessment Roll as presented to the Council on December 4, 2006.
2. Recommend Revisions to the Final Assessment Roll for Council consideration.
3. Other:
City Project No. 928
Final Assessment Roll Totals -Front Foot Method
Meadowview Road/ Alexander Road
Street Improvements
Nleadowview - FF Nlethod Concrete Entrance R & R .alexander - FF Nlethod Total .assmt. Prelim. Assmt
Rate Street Ent. Rate Ent. Rate
P.I.N. /Parcel FF /FF Assmt. S.Y. /F.F. Assmt. F.F. /F.F. Assmt. Total Assmt. Total
10-00800-010-04
Vacant 73 $116.00 $8,468.00 88.3 $69.35 $6,123.61 $14,591.61 $8,738
10-00800-030-04
3083 Sibley Memorial Highway 382 $116.00 $44,312.00 $44,312.00 $31,263
10-00900-010-26
3045 Highway 13 576 $116.00 $66,816.00 179.5 $69.35 $12,448.33 $79,264.33 $52,668
10-22480-010-01
3103Sib1eyMemorialHighway* 230 $116.00 $26,680.00 341 $69.35 $23,648.35 447.00 $15.85 $7,084.95 $57,413.30 $45,769
10-22480-020-01
3107Sib1eyMemorialHighway* 336 $116.00 $38,976.00 226.5 $69.35 $15,707.78 180 $15.85 $2,853.00 $57,536.78 $36,828
10-39900-010-02
Vacant* 190 $116.00 $22,040.00 56.4 $69.35 $3,911.34 385 $15.85 $6,102.25 $32,053.59 $26,445
10-48100-050-00 3105 Sibley
MemorialHighway* 150 $116.00 $17,400.00 24.00 $15.85 $380.40 $17,780.40 $12,873
10-78500-010-01
3085 Highway 13** 277 $116.00 $32,132.00 65 $69.35 $4,507.75 $36,639.75 $25,741
TOTALS 2214 - $256,770.26 957 - $66,347 1,036.00 - $16,421 $339,592 $240,325
* Also have direct D/W access to Alexander Road
Based on average frontage of other properties with frontage on
Meadowview Road (1,937/ 7 = 277')
ATTACHMENT A
G:PROJCONTRACTS/928/FINAL ASSMT INFO/FinaIRollComparison
City Project No. 928
Final Assessment Roll Totals -Driveway Method
Meadowview Road/ Alexander Road
Street Improvements
N'leadowview - DW Method Concrete Entrance R & R .alexander Rd - FF Nlethod Total .assmt. Prelim. Assmt
# Rate Street Ent. Rate Ent Rate
P.I.N. /Parcel D/W's /D.W. Assmt. S.Y. /F.F. Assmt. F.F. /F.F. Assmt. Total Assmt. Total
10-00800-010-04
Vacant 1 $23,342.75 $23,342.75 88.3 $69.35 $6,123.61 $29,466.36 $8,738
10-00800-030-04
3083 Sibley Memorial Highway 1 $23,342.75 $23,342.75 $23,342.75 $31,263
10-00900-010-26
3045 Highway 13 2 $23,342.75 $46,685.50 179.5 $69.35 $12,448.33 $59,133.83 $52,668
10-22480-010-01
3103 Sibley Memorial Highway* 1.5 $23,342.75 $35,014.13 341 $69.35 $23,648.35 447.00 $15.85 $7,084.95 $65,747.43 $45,769
10-22480-020-01
3107Sib1eyMemorialHighway* 2.5 $23,342.75 $58,356.88 226.5 $69.35 $15,707.78 180 $15.85 $2,853.00 $76,917.65 $36,828
10-39900-010-02
Vacant* 1 $23,342.75 $23,342.75 56.4 $69.35 $3,911.34 385 $15.85 $6,102.25 $33,356.34 $26,445
10-48100-050-00 3105 Sibley
MemorialHighway* 1 $23,342.75 $23,342.75 24.00 $15.85 $380.40 $23,723.15 $12,873
10-78500-010-01
3085 Highway 13 1 $23,342.75 $23,342.75 65 $69.35 $4,507.75 $27,850.50 $25,741
TOTALS 11 - $256,770.26 957 - $66,347 1,036.00 - $16,421 $339,538 $240,325
* Also have direct D/W access to Alexander Road
ATTACHMENT B
G:PROJCONTRACTS/928/FINAL ASSMT INFO/FinaIRollComparison
City Project No. 928
Final Assessment Roll Totals -Area (Acreage) Method
Meadowview Road/ Alexander Road
Street Improvements
area Method Concrete Entrance R & R Alexander Rd .assmt. Total .assmt. Prelim. Assmt
Rate Street Ent. Rate Rate
P.I.N. /Parcel Ac /Ac Assmt. S.Y. /F.F. Assmt. F.F. /F.F. Assmt. Total .assmt. Prelim..assmt
10-00800-010-04
Vacant 3.68 $6,631.46 $24.403.77 88.3 $69.35 $6,123.61 $30,27.,8 $8,738
10-00800-030-04
3083 Sibley Memorial Highway 2.09 $6,631.46 $13.859.75 $13,859.75 $31263
10-00900-010-26
3045 Highway 13 23.65 $6,631.46 $156.834.03 179.5 $69.35 $12,448.33 $169,282.15 $52.668
10-22480-010-01
3103 Sibley Memorial Highway* 2.6 $6,631.46 $17.241.80 341 $69.35 $23,648.35 447.00 $15.85 $7,084.95 $47,97.10 $45,769
10-22480-020-01
3107 Sibley Memorial Highway* 3.55 $6,631.46 $23.541.68 226.5 $69.35 $15,707.78 180 $15.85 $2,853.00 $42.102.46 $36.828
10-39900-010-02
Vacant* 1.02 $6,631.46 $6.764.09 56.4 $69.35 $3,911.34 385 $15.85 $6,102.25 $16,777.68 $26,445
10-48100-050-00 3105 Sibley
Memorial Highway* 0.9 $6,631.46 $5.968.31 24.00 $15.85 $380.40 $6,148.71 $12.873
10-78500-010-01
3085 Highway 13 1.23 $6,631.46 $8.156.70 65 $69.35 $4,507.75 $12,664.45 $2,741
TOTALS 38.72 - $256,770.26 957 - $66,347 1,036.00 - $16,421 $339,538 $240,325
* Also have direct D/W access to Alexander Road
ATTACHMENT C
G:PROJCONTRACTS/928/FINAL ASSMT INFO/FinaIRollComparison