261310 WH17E - CITY CLERK � J����■, �
PINK - FINANCE COl1I1C11 h� R.1
BLUAR'V�M�YORTMENT GITY OF SAINT �PALTL File NO.
T`
r � uncil Resolution
. ^
Presented By '
Referred To Committee: Date
Out of Committee By Date
RESOLVED� Tha.t the Council of the City of Saint Paul does
hereby concur in the recommendation of the Council' s Public
Works Co�nittee and does hereby approve the assessment policy
proposal, dated Ma.y 15, 1973� which is attached hereto and in-
corporated herein by reference.
COUIVCILMEN Requested by Department of:
Yeas � Nays
�
Konopatzki In Favor
Levine
Meredith � Against BY
�mt Re�edl.lr
Tedesco
Mme.President� �pt,
Adopted by Council: Date �
ev 2 21913 Form Approved by Cit Attor y
Certi ' a ed by c tary BY
By
Approve by or: Date � Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council
By �Y
PUBllstlE� MAY 2 6 1973
. ' •� � ��
. , ��`�.
, � • �'J
.�o�.e.�
r eirassaue
s�l�e�•e
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OITY HALL A ND COIIRT HOU8E
PATRICK J. ROEDLER SAINT PAIIL. MINNESOTA 551.02
�'i0llIIC11II18A pHONE 612 \ 298-6289
May 15, 1gT3
Council President Ruby Hunt
713 City Ha11
BUILD ING
Re: ASSESSMEI9T POLICY PROPOSAL
Dear Mrs. Hunt:
This letter is written in regards to the ASSESSMGNT P4�,ICY PROPOSAL. �s you
are aware, the Public Works Committee has been reviewing the proposal report
s�zbmitted by cover letter of Mr. Frank D. Marzitelli, �ity Administrator,
dated April 3, 1973•
I wish to advise that the Committee has unanimously endorsed the recommendations
of the Assessment Review Committee ineluded in said report which are as follows:
1. that the sidewalk proposal be adopted for alT �ralks
constructecl after �"anuary l, 1973• All w�a.lks con-
structed prior to said date to be financed as
originally proposed.
2. that the arterial or collector street proposal be
adopted for the current year 1973• All improve-
ments of this classification passed by Final Order
prior to January 1, 1973, to be financed as approved
by said orders.
3. that proper flulds be provided in 1974 for financing
a local oiled Street Improvement Program and an
Orna.mental Street Lighting Program. Said programs
to include new Local Street Improvements where con-
structed. Estimated additional fla.nding required
amounts to $4.5 million.
4. that all other type improvements continue to be
assessed in accordance with present policy for the
current year. Any proposed revisions to be deferred
at this time.
i��22
. �
. • -2-
In ref�rence to recommendation No. l, the Director of Public Works has advised
that very favorable bids have been received for 1973 r�sidential sidewalk
construction. The costs therefore to implement a fized residential sidew�alk
assessment at $4.00 per assessable front foot for a five foot wide sid�nralk for
1973 could be f�.inded in the amount of $42,000 from the Local Improv�n�nt Aid
Fund.
In regard to recommendation No. 2, the Director of Public Works advises tha.t
the loss of assessment financing in the �stimated amount of $228,00� could be
provided by reallocation of flznds within the 1973 Public Works Pro�ram and
possibly deferring a lower priority pro�eet. Examples of Arterial and�or
Collector Street improvements that would be considered for no assessment �rould
include:
1973 P.rogr�,m
P-0570 Lexin�ton at Larpenteur
P-0366A1 Lexington Pkwy. - I. S. 94 to Sherburne
P-o568 Lexington - St. Clair Ave. to I. S. 9�-
P-0572A Como Ave., E. Camo Blvd. , E. Como Lake Dr.
and Le�ington Pkwy N. - Jessamine to Montana
1974 Program
P-0�+94A Dale St. - Minnehaha. to Simon Ave.
P-0195B&C Miss. River Blvd. - W. 7th St. to Dayton �Ave.
P-0500 Osceola Ave. - Randolph to Grace
P-0�+88 White Bear Ave. - Omaha R.R. to Arlington Ave.
Recomar►endation No. 3 is endorsed by the Committee with some reservation concern-
ing the source of funding for the City's share of a I,ocal Street Improvement
Frograzn. The Coa�ittee is of the opinion that such a pro�ra.m to include concrete
curb and gutter, ornaxnental lighting and street res�arfacin�, si.milar to Census
Tract 9 and 10 on an approximate 1�3 assessment basis is very desirable provided
there is no significant tax increase to ftiind the City's shar� of such a proposal.
Reconunendation No. �+ provides for the retention of present policy for other type
improvements at this time.
It is apparent that the Publie Works Local Tmprovement Fund is the primary source
of f�a.nds providing for the City's share for the impl�entation of this revised
assessment policy. It behoves the City Council to carefli].ly review said flind
allocation in future budgets, to insure the adequacy of said flznd for the con-
tinuation of these revised. policies.
I recommend that the City Council concur with the recommendations above and formal-
ly endorse the Assessment Policy Proposal, a copy of which is attached hereto.
Ver 'truly yo s,
�^L���-- cc: Councilman R. Butler
Pa ric Roedl , irman " D. Meredith
Council Public Works Committee t�
V. Tedesco
PR:REB:dm T' W. Konopatzki
" L. yevine
Attach.
cc: Frank D. Marzitelli
.-,.<
, . � , ,,�,,
' • .;�
• .' ,.
.,,, , _
, . ..� _
• .t! . _ '
c . . . . � . . � � .. � � . .. �.
; .� ' ASSFSBMENT POLICY PROPOSAL
� �
I. SIDEWALK,S: All street elassifications in Residential Districts. ` �,. ��_'
,,
Current Policy - Side�walks are currently assessed e,t ftii7.l aetual co�ts. ' �
City aid i�nds are �rant�d for 50°,� of tree removal and 50�,'of th�
assessment for Longside A & B Residential property. Costs �or street
intersections and alley crossin�s are also borne by the �ity. The
average sidewalk rate anticipa.ted for ig72 �mounts �o $4.50 per assess- �� � �
able foot for 5 foot wide sidewa]1i.
;: �
Proposal
a. Establish the sidewalk rate for A and B Residential properties at
� a $4.00 per assessable foot maximiun rate for ail 5 foot wi.ae w�.lxs�
constructed a.fter January 1, 1973. Other width walks to be pro-
rated accordingly. Commercial, industrial or multi-residence ,
�roperties to be assessed at actual cost.
b. Assume that the side�uralk construction and�or reconstruction program
will continue at approximately 20 miles of new sidewalk per year.
c. Review the costs and assessments for the walk constructed in �.�'T3
and consider establishing fixed rates for aLl types of' xa].ka for
1975.
d. The intersection walk eonstx�a.etipn, alley crossin�s, lon�side aid
etc. , tree removal aid �ri]1 continue to exist as under the eurrent
policy. These costs to be borne by theCity.
Conclusion
,
The additional flZnds required to imple�nent this propos�.l amount to �85,000
for the 1973 budget year and $125,000 �or the 1974 budget year. The latter
could be provided in the Public Works Bud.get under the Local Improvement
Fund. It should be emphasized, however, that the monies stated herein are
additional ftii.nds required over and a,bove the monies already pxavided i.n
the bud.get. On the basis of this proposal, the sidewalks constructed in ;
197�+ will be subsidiz�d by agproxia�a.tely 2g�. An analysis and determination
should be made prior to the adoption o�' the 1975 budge� wh�ther`the per-
centage of subsidy should be 3ncreased or retained at 25� and the rates
established and ftiinds provided 3n th� budget accordin�ly.
.
II. STREETS: (excludes sidew�,lks, sewers, ornamental lights)
A. Arterial and Colleetor Streets:
1. Repaving or Resurfacing �paved streets;
Current Policy - the average cost of a 12 foot wide strip of
repaving is computed and a �ud�ement and determination ;
of benefits and asses�ment rates are raade a.ccordingl,y. General-
ly the "C" Residence, CoAmnercial, and Industrial rate is the
full coat of said 12 foot wide strip and the "A" and "B" Resi.-
dential rate approximately 70y6 of said 12 foot wide strip.
_„
:aa
• . - ��:,�
.• , ,,
, , .
.
' ' 2 ,
: , � Average rates for improv�ments constructed in 1971 and lg"(2
are as follows:
A & B Residence - �5,pp per assess. :ft.
"C" Res. , Co�'1 & Ind. Property - $7.pp per assesg. ft.
'j
Proposal - No assessment f"rom curb to curb in primarily residen�
tial areas. Commercial and Industrial streets to be vi�wed �,nd ;
considered for assessment on an individual project basis.
: 2. Paving Oiled Streeta: (normally includes curb and gutter) `
��:
Current Policy - 'i'he assessment rates are also based an average
cost of a 12 foot wide �trip for the improvement. Gen�.7.1.y,
. the Commercial and Industrial rates are set at the t1.il.l cost af'`
said 12 foot wid@ strip a.nd the residential rate at approx�tel,y
50°,� of said cost. The average rates for the 1971 and 1972 y�.rs
are:
A & B Residence - $ 8.00 to 9.00 per asae�s. ft.
"C" Res. , Comm'1 & Ind. Property - �15.00 to 20.00 per a.ssess.' ft':
Proposal - Establish a fixed assessment rate. Said rate to b� '
adjusted annually on the basis of the Oi1ed Street Improve�►ent
Program proposed below. �he rates recommend�d for the year 19"T4
are;
A & B Residence Property - $ 7.00 per assess, ft.
All Other Property - $10.50 per assess. ft.
The work involved on this type of improvement is �ssentially the
same as the Oi1ed Street Improvement �rogram consisting of regrading,
constructing concrete curb and gutter and construc�tion of a flzl.l
depth pa.ved surface.
3. Paving Ungra.ded Streets: �':
Current Policy - 'z'he asaessment xates are aga.in based on the av�rage
cost of a l2 foot wide �trip which includes: grading, paving, eurb
and gutter� drainage facilities, etc. G�nerally� the. fla.11 eost of
the 12 �oot wide strip is assessed against the "C" Res., Co�n'l and
Industrial pr�perties and the 'A & B Re�idenee praperties are as�essed
at approximate]y 70� of said strip cost. The range of rates applfeable
in 1971 are•
"C" Res., Comun']. & Ind. Property - $24.00 to 30.:00 per assess: ft.
A & B Res. ProPerty - $16.00 to 22.00 ger ass�ss, ft.
Proposal - Assess all costs of rough grading, property aequ,i�itior�,
if neceesary, within the limits of the street ri�ht-of way to the
abutting property as a ne�w street proposal. Said assessment to apply
for a standard street width. In 'aildit3,on, assess the fiae arading,
sur�'acing snd aurb and gutter on th� basis of th� fixed rates a�
establishea annt�al.ly for the Ofl.eel �treet Improvem�nt Progran.
; ' :
. . . . . . ... . . � . .� .. � � � .. 4��'
, ' .. � . � � � . . . . . . ... 5<
� � . � � - , . � � � � � � � � � r3,=
� �.. .. . . . _ .
� . , . . . . '. . .. , .
. • . � � � � . � � . � .� �
� � -3-
B. Oiled Street Imorovement Program:
This is a new proposal to regrade, surface and construct epncrete � �
curb and gutter on all -the existing oiled streets with a part�ci-
pation of 67�f, f�om Public Funds. There is no such cuxrent vro�ram. -
This program would encompass the approximate 550 miles of egisting, <, � "
oiled streets in the City. Assuming about 25 to 30 miles of 're- �
newal per .year, the pro�ram wou]..d require about 20 years to complete. �
. �. �',
Consider fixed assessment rates fox this �rogre,m to be adjustecl. �;,��
annually. Based on 1972 costs for re�rading, the follawing rate,s
would be recommended for 1974 (it is assumed tha.t the program covld� �, ,�" ,�
not be initiated prior to said 197�+ construction and bud.get y�i.r).
A & B Residential Property - � 7.00 per assess. ft. �
All Other Property - �10.50 " " "
These rates are �roposed on the assiunption that the improvemen�s"wouTc� �
_ _ _ _ :W�.
be accomplished on an area basis.
The estimated cost to finance this program for 1974 is �4.0 Million.
This amount to be increased annual]y based on the annua.l increase in
construction costs. Said monies could be provided in the anrnaal bud�et� =
CIB bonds� or other type flinds such as federal revenue sharing� other
federal aid monies or special band funds. The street renewal program
should be initiated and accomplished in eonjunetion with proposed
storm relief seryrer pro,jects, aueh as the St. Anthony Pa.rk ana r�.ryi&na-
Galtier �ro�jects. The costs currently allocated for street restoration
cos�;s in these se�wer pro�ects could also apply toward the City's aid. .
C. iVew Street InYprovements - I,ocal Strests only
Current Policy - All costs of the improvement to 3.nclude gradings
surfacing, curb and gutter, storcn water drainage facilities ar�
assessed in full. The costs �or intersection work and longaide aid
to A & B residential�property are borne "by the City. The assess-
ment rates for the 1971 and 1972 years have ranged from �16.00 to
�;37.00 per front foot depending on the terrain soil, drainage and
other conditions.
Proposal - Continue to assesa all costs of rough grading,easements,
right-of�,ra.y, drainage faciliti�s in f'u1.1. The fine grading, sur-
facing and curb and gutter work to be �ssessed. on the basis of the _
fixed rate as establi�hed anntaa.Zly for the Oiled Street Improvement
Program.
Conelusion - To adopt the street proposal for art�rial stre�ta abavea
all said type pro�ects approved. to date by Final Order �otald remain
with the assessment and other �'inancing as proposed by said orde�s. BS►'
re-allocation of funds on the Public Works 19''T3 Progra,m and posa3bl.y
deferring a low priority pro�ect, an estima.t�d amount af $228,�0� could -
be provided without any extra or new fltnds.
The proposals for an Oiled S�reet Improvement Program and Newr Street ,
Proposal could be deferred at this time and the program initiated a.t
such time that ft�nds are provided in the budg�t or throu�h band �d�.
;:
. . . : . .. , . � . � � ' _ � .. . .. � . - . r"�:
. �.` . . . . �. . .. . _ .. . . ��.. .
� � y � � . . � . .. .. . . . . �
y � t ^ . .�4� . . . ' .. . . . . . . ,
: , . � . : . . . � .
III. SEWERS: .
A. Sanitary Sewers
Current Policy - Total cost is assessed in �u1.1 against the bene�ited �
properties. Intersection frontage and long�idt aid is borne by the CaL'�y':
Proposal - Establish a fixed maximum assessment rat� for sa.ni.tary se�'era� ,
where constructed under normal soil conditions and reasonable street-grades
(i.e. streets at a minimum have been rough �raded). �aid fix�d. rate tCS '
be �.d�usted on an annual basis as construction costs vary. Where ,un��
usual terrain or soil conditions ar� encountered, the additional eo�t�
for piling, removal an3 repla.cement of poor soil, rock excavation� rc�tgh
. grading etc. to be assessed over and above the fixed rate. Intersec'�3.on
and longside aid to continue to be borne by the City. Based on a xevi;e�w
of the assessment rates for se�wers of this cl.e.ssification for the past
several years, it is reco�nended that a maximum rate of $10.00 per a�sess-
able foot be established for sanitary as�wers for the 1974 year. Funding
for the implementation of this program to be provided in the annua.l budget.
B. Storm Sewer - Relief Sewer and�or C1ear Water Sewer
Current Policy - Relief Sewer systems are currently assessed on an area'
basis, said assessment district being determined along natural str�et or -
other boundaries of the City to coincide as nearly as practical with the
design drainage boundary of the proposed sewer system. The current rates
applicable are:
A & B Residential Property - l� cents per sq. foot
Al1 Other Property - 3 cents per sq. foot
The amount recoverable on the averag� amounts to approximately 20 to 2�
of said sewer costs but may va.ry from as law as 2� on a tunnel pxo�ect to
as high as 90°�� on a small system serving primarily eommercial or industrial
property. _
Proposal - No che.nge from the current poli�y is proposed for sewers o� this
classification. Clear Water Sewer Connections to be allcywed to sub�ect
storm sewers provided a connection charge is made, purauant to Ordinance
No. 1534o C. F. 26O781 approved Mareh 21, 1973•
Conclusion - Financing for storm sewer pro�ects is provided in the annual
budgets as is the current policy. Se�wer construction of this type �.s
therefore per�ormed on a priority ba�is depen�lent on the ava.ilabilif.y
of �nds. Additional ftuids estima.ted for 1974 budget year at $50,000 `
should be provided in the Loca.l Improvement Fund to f�nd sanit,ary s�rers '
that exceed the maximum assessment rate.
,
,.,. �.�
. � . . � . . .. . . . ., . y �F.�t,�i.
. �'
..� :� .. . . . . . . .. . . ... .. <... .. � ��.. .;'q..:
� . �. � . � � . . . . r.
�� � .. � . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . .. . ., . ..
� � � . . .. . . . .. . .
� . � _5_
• , ;,
N. ORNAMENTAL LIGH'I'S: � �
Current Policy - Ornamental Lighting assessment� rates are curren�ly d�- "`" ' '' `
termined on a benefit basis for each improvement. GeneralYy, when Ci�Gy ; `'
subsidy ftiandin� is ava,ilable, the assessments accounted �or approxima���r, . ;. � '�
60°l� of the fundin�. The City flinds have been provided fro� various .;,,
sources.
� �;
Proposal - Establish a fixed assessment rate �'or Ornamenta.l �treet S,igh�-
ing recommended for installation with the 0iled Street I�provemerat FrQ�m.
Rates suggested for the 197�+ construction season are;
A & B Res. - �2.00 per assess. ft.
. All Other Property - �+.00 per a,�sess. ft.
The rates above to be adjusted. annually or bi-annua.11y to prov3.de �'or� con-
struction cost increases. It is empY�asi�ed that these rates are propos�d
�'or coordination with the Street Program on].y. Arterial or Collector 3treet
Ornamental Lightin� Im�rovements are to be assessed at actual costs to the
benefited Cor,�mercial and Industrial properties. The A & B
Residential rate to also be at $2.00 per assessable foot. Where unusual
type fixtures or short spa,cin� is provided at desires of the area resid�nts�
adjustments are to be made in the rates accordingly.
Conclusion - The Ornamental Stree-t Lighting Program should be undertaken
along with the Oiled Street Improvement Frogram since the conduit and lights
standards should be placed at the. time when the area is still disturbed
because of the curb and gutter construction. Adequate al,location of fu.nds
should be provided prior to the initiation of any project. The estima�ed
amount of additional funds required to implement this proposal amounts to
$500,000 for the 1974 budget year.
V. ALLEYS:
Current Policy - alleys are cu.rrently assessed at f�,iLl actua.l costs. City
aid is granted only for longside A and B. Residential property.
Proposal - No change fram the current policy is anticipa.ted at this time.
Conclusion - A fta.rther study should be ma.de to consider the implementation
of an Al1ey Improvement Progra,m similar to the Oiled Street Program at a
f.tiiture date.
VI. MISC. ITEM,S - DRIVES:
Current Policy - Direet benefit improvements to individua.l properties are
assessed as nearly as pra.etical at actual co�t to the benefited prop�rty.
Said i�ems include:
l. Driveway Construction
2. Utility Connections
3. Service or Carriage Walks ' -
�+. Asphalt between walk and curb app�.ies to ec3mmercial and
industrial areas.
Proposal - No �hange f`rom current policy is proposed at this time.
I . . .. . . .. . . . .. t L�. � � � �4u,`..
� , �� w
ri , .. , , .. , � ,�
� ,�" • � � . . . . . . . , :, � , � . �. .. .'� �. .��' � z .��, ..;� .. , �.
� , , .. . . . . �, .�., . . ".�:�.. " . , ... . v ..,: . : ����..
. � . • . . . . .. . . . . ,t. '�.�.. ' . ..� .
.. � .^ . . �� .
-1 ��� � .. . . , , ' .. ' . . .
a � v � . � � � � � . . . .. � � �
� i � . . - . �.. .. . � ., . - . .. �,.
�.. � • .. . � . . ��.� . ,� . . . � .. . .-" .. ,.�
:, � DEI�INITIONS A3 USED IlY As�E�8ME1Vfi PROCI�AA4 PROP03AL
I. STREETS ,�
„
, .�
1. Arterial - A atreet or thoro hfare whose ri � � ,.}'
,. � P m�: fi�.ti��:c�� �
��.
: is to carry through traft'ic prefer�bly fraa 1�;:' ; '
distanc� travcl arid may provid� limit�cl aa����` :
to abutting land.
2. Collector - A street xho�e �'unetion is �o col.l:ect t�at'`!`3�
from loc�l :tr�eta and move it to the mfn4r:`
and principa;l arterial systems. �:
3• Local - A street whose funetion i�$ to �
provide �:ecea� �
� to land rath�r than to carry tha�ough° txa'ffic.
4. Paved Street - A street with a prepa.red subgrade, bs�se i�ux�F�,cing
and drainage facilities generally includes cpn� '
erete curbs and gutters and eith�r cpzacx�t�, -
..
: asphalt or brick surfacing. -
5• Graded Street - A street offieially and p2�yaically improved at
a minimum to a prepared subgrade.
6. Oiled Stre�t - A �treet that has been graded and who�e surfac�
has been oiled over the years for dust control
and ma.intenance purpos�s.
7. Ungraded 6treet - A d�dicated street that has not been d�'t'icia].7�y
improved. It .may or may not have been p�rsically
improved.
.
8. Reconstruct and�or - To remove the existing pavement and r�place w3.t�
Repave Street new pavement surfaee. May inelude new curb �,nd
gutter and drainage facilities.
9. Resurface Street - To surfa.ce or overlay the existing pavement s�rface.
II. SEWERS
l. �anitary 3ewer - A s�rer w�ieh carries s�wwa.ge and to which storm,
surface, and ground waters axe not intentiona�ly
• a�ittea; aiso referred to as"aeparate sanitary
sewert�.
2. Storm Sew�r - A sewer �rhich caxries stor� Arater and surface
water, street waah and drair�.ge, but exclude�
aewage and induatrial wastes; also called "storm '
clrain".
3. Combined Sewer - A sewer reeeiving both surface runoPf and sevte.ge.
4. Relief Sewer - A se�rer built to carry the flcsws in exc�ss o�' the
capa.city of an existing sewer.
.r' �, s��
,;,, ,a=
�t a . : , .. . . �. � � . . . .
. YF� ''. . � . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . � .. , _ .
` „ .. ~" �. . Clear T�e.ter Sewer = A sew�r buil.t to carry industrial wa.stes of' such
`�' ' qual.ity that no treatment is necessary before
. digchargir�g into a storm aew�r or receiving waters.
` 5: Utility Connection - A g�a, wr�ter o� aewer servic� eonnection from the
�. inain in the street to the property line.
III. LIGHTII�
' 1. Standard 3treet - refera to the atreet lighting on wood poles g�neral-
Lighting ly axisting on the local residential streets. In-
: ' �talled at no ass�ssment and no direct energy expense.
2. Ornam�ntal Lighting - ref'e,ra generally to lighting installed on sp�cial
orne.mental type poles With mercury vapor lamps lo-
cated prima.rily on arterial and collector streets
or in axeaa o� local street renewal. Installed with
fti.11 or partial asse$sment except in NDP areas.
_ 3. Alley Lighting - - re�'er�s to�mercury va.por type lighting installed on
wood poles. Installed privately and energy paid
for pxiva,tely on monthly basis.
N. ZOIVING ,
1. "�" & "B" Residential - Property zoned or used for one or two family dWe11-
Property ing purposes only.
2.. "C" Aesidential - Property zoned or used for mzzlti-residentia]. use
Property o�' three family dwellings or more.
3. Coannercial Property - Property zoned or used for business purposes and
excluding most Manufacturing enterprises as more
f�a.11y defined in Sec. 60.05 of the St. Paul Legis-
lative Code.
�. Industrial Property - Property zoned or used for Ma.nufacturing purposes
^ Light & Heavy as more fu11y defined in 8ec. 60.06 and 60.07 of
i,.
the St. Paul Legislative Code.
< �. Institutional Property - Property used for institutional purposes, i.e., .
ehurches, hospitals, schools, and others aa listed.
� in Sec. ."60.�2 of the St. Pa,ul Legislative Cod�.
f,
t . . .. - ... ;. . . . � . . . . . .
b . �, . . .. � � � .. . . .. � . . . . ,
r ;
� a,.
E