95-3331
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
ORI��,��qL
CITY
Presented By
Referred To
Committee: Date
CAPITAL ALLOCATION POLICY
WIIEREAS, the Council of the City of Saint Paul is responsible for providing policy guidance in the
annual prepazation of the Capital Improvement Budget; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the policies adopted as part of the 1992-1996 Saint
Paul Capital Allocation Policy, and has revised them; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission released the revised Capital Allocation Policy for public review
and held a public hearing on the document on 6�i��z'`�, and
3�v...,Y��a \ \g�5
WI3EREAS, the Planning Commission approves and recommends adoption of the policies entitled Saint
Paul Canital Allocation Policy: '^^��o for use in the Unified Capital Improvement Program and
Budget Process; �996-acoo
NOW, THEREFORE, BE TT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby adopts the
Saint Paul Capital Allocation Policy: -'�-�°"^ ,^° for use in the Unified Capital Improvement Proa am and
Budget Process; and �99G-ao�a
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council directs transmittal to the Neighborhood Contact
List, the Long Range Capital Improvement Budget Committee and its task forces, the Saint Paul Planning
Commission, and appropriate City staff persons.
Requested by Department of:
�' . . ��- �• -
�� / I�`-%���
�
Form Approved by City Attorney
By:
n...
By:
A t�'\C � � � � council Fi�e # �I� 333
�t���j�s �
Green Sheet #
RESOLUTION
�F SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA o ��'
Adopti nn l'art i fi PA hv (`rnmri l CanraYarv
�j � 33 ,3
DEPApTMENT/pPFICFJCOUNGL DATE INITIATED N_� 312 4 4
Planning and Economic Development 8 Feb. 95 (aREEN $�"�EET __ _ _
CANTACf PER$ON & PHONE � OEPARiMENT DIRECfOR � GITY COUNqL �NfTiAVDATE
Patricia James 66639 ass�cx mpRypT7pq CRVCLEpK
MUST BE ON CAUNqL AGENDA BY (DA'f� NUYBEB FON � BUDGEf DIRECTOR O FIN. & MGT. SERVICES DIR.
ROU7ING
8 Mdt'Ch 1995 °PDE" /MYOR(ORASSISTANn �]Ken Ford
TOTAL # OF SI6NATUHE PAGES 1 (CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE) d Y'l Cl d ames
AC'fION flEQUESTED:
Adopt the 1496-20�0 Capital Allocation Policy. = •
RECOMMENDATIONS: Approve (A) or Rejeet (R� pERSONAL SERViCE CONTRACTS MUST AtiSWER TXE FOLLOWING �UESTIONS:
A PLANNITIG COMMISSIOti _ CNIt SEflVICE COMMiSSION �� ���s pEr50Nfl[[f1 eVCt worked ullder a�ntrHCt for tllls d6p3ffineRt? � �
_ CIB COMMfTiEE _ YES NO
_ STAFF Z. Has Nis personHirm ever been a city employee?
— YES NO
_ DISTRIC7 CpURT _ 3. iJOes ihi5 personftirm po5se55 a skilf not normafl
y possessed by atry current city employee4
SUPPORTS WHIGH COUNCIL OBJECTIVE? YES NO
p � � Expiatn all yes answers on aeparate sheet and atteeh to green ahaet
INITIATING PROBLEM. ISSUE, OPPORNNITV (Who. Whet, When, Where. Why):
City Council is responsible for providing policy guidance in canital budgeting.
Existing policy must be reviewed and uodated every two years.
A�VANTAGESIFAPPROVED�
Witl provide guidance to citizens, city departments, the CIB Committee, and the City
Council in preparing, evaluating, and adopting proposals for the city's capital budget.
DISADVANTAGES IF APPRWED:
��� �������� � F RECF����
None. �a�aa 3 �a`�%-a"
��1R � � ���� �'EB � 3 19�5
ClT� �� € �c��E�
DISADVANTAGES IF NOTAPPROVED:
Lack of guidance to citizens, city departments, the CIB Committee, and the City Council
in preparing, evaluating, and adopting oroposals for the city's canital improvement budget.
TOTAL AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION $ COST/REVENUE BUDGETED (CIqCLE ONE) VES NO
FUNDIHC. SOURCE ACTIVI7Y NUMBER
FINANCIAL INFORMATION' (EXPLAIN)
-At�►��NnM �"�'`
y�a��9S- o}�
ALTERNAT`IVE LANGUAGE FOR CIB COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION FOR A
CITYWIDE MAJOR CAPITAL MAINTENANCE PROGRAM.
For Ciry Council Meeting April 26, 1995. Item # 25 5 s `3 33
�
P-6 ��ix� lt��jjar Capital Maintenance
An objective of the city is to protect its capital investment through reb lar, scheduled
preventive maintenance of its capital facilities, financed through the operating budget.
However, because preventive maintenance activities have not been fully fmanced in past
years, some capital facilities require e��ae�� �a�cir capital maintenance. To
address such �a� �ajs�r capital needs, the city will consider budgeting up to
m2cn nnn :.. �nnn �....a tn�c � .. . .:_. .�... . . _ . .. .
, $I,�tl4,(lI7Q p�x_ �ea� i� -���6 �zut :��7 for
e3�ttae�xa� �jzi� capitai maintenance. Adequately fmanced programs for regular
preventive maintenance would, in time, reduce the need for a� ei� �t��uz
capital maintenance program. It is hoped that preventive maintenance '-�—�'�ni�a�
e��wIll become a high city priority. In the long run, deferred maintenance
is not a cost-effective way of managing scarce financial resources.
€�c��t3F I�j�x capital maintenance is defined as the repair, replacement,
renovation, remodeling and/or retrofitting of the structural parts and/or service system
components of a building, and the man-made components of an unproved site.
1. Structural parts include footings and foundations; beams, joists, columns; load
bearing walls, exterior walls and facade (excluding glass); stairs, floors, decks,
ramps, ceilings; rooPs and roofing.
2. Service system components include piumbing, electrical, communications, heating,
ventilating, air conditioning, security systems and elevators; utility mains.
3. Site components include retaining walls, lighting, stairs, ramps, sidewalks,
railings, fencing, drainage structures, and erosion control. Priority consideration
will be given to those site components whose condition affects building
components identified above.
Except in cases of emergency, work projects financed through the e�� tk[�jcit'
capital maintenance program must have costs that exceed $3,000 and are less than
Any work financed through the e�� ziia;�'t�x capital maintenance program must
have a life expectancy that exceeds the terms of the�bonds used to fmance it, or must be
fmanced with non-bonded fund sources. Ongoing maintenance and routine preventive
care and upkeep of facilities shall be financed through the city's operating budget.
$� Smaller work projects shall normally be financed through the city's
operating budgef. Larger work projects shall normally be financed through the regular
CIB process.
Guidelines � develo ed for administer' the e3
p uig �3= ����r� capital
maintenance program �iII;_ " �: a�"g��i_. T,,o ,...:,;o;:::;;:: �,....,,:..
_.:.: �._..... _::.. �',
1. The project must �`�li�i�Te a� conform to the defuution of e�ae� ��az
capital maintenance.
2. The faciliry must be City owned, or leased to the Ciry on a long-term basis. At
least ten years mt�st remain on the lease and the lease must require the City to be
responsible for capital maintenance.
3. The project must have a useful life expectancy greater than 10 years.
4. Any properry with repairs financed �y will not be in jeopardy of
closing within the next five years.
SA[NT
PAUL
�
AAllll
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
Norm Coleman, Mayor
OFFICE OF TF� MAYOit �� � � �
BUDGET SECIION
Jaseph Reid, Budget Direttor ��� 3,3 y �� t
J
240 Ciry Ha(1 Te(ephone: (612) 266-8543
IS West Ke!loggBoulevard Facsimile: (6/2) 266-8531
SaintPaul, Minnesota 55l02-1631
C��'�.e�..+� �-+��
�-�a P�a-� �
�t�a`y°1s
��
1VIEMORANDUM
TO: Council President David Thune
Councilmember Jerry Blakey
Councilmember Mazie Grimm
Counciimember Dino Guerin
Councilmember Mike Harris
�Councilmember Roberta Megard
Councilmember Janice Rettman
I ��
DATE:
Bruca Engelbrekt, Budget Office
April 18, 1995
/�
RE: CIB Committee Recommended revisions to the Capital Allocation Policy Document
Attacl�ed are proposed modifications to the draft "Saint Paul Capital Allocation Policy (1996-2000)"
currently before the City Council. The CIB Committee approved the modifications at their 3anuary
12th meeting and recommended that the changes be incorporated into the final document to be
approved by the City Council.
The modifications relate to project policy P-6, entitled "Extraordinary Capital Maintenance," located
on pages 16 and 17 of the draft document. The recommended changes are minor in nature and do
not significantly alter the language in the current draft. The specific changes are provided in the
attachment to thas memorandum, along with a copy of the current Capital Maintenance Program
guidelines.
Please consider incorporating these proposed modifications into the finai Capital Allocation Policy
document.
cc: Mark Shields, Mayor's Office
Pamela Wheelock, Mayor s Office
3oe Reid, Budget Office
Thomas Gmeinder, CIB Committee
MayotsOR<c-BudgttSttuon F.\GSERSEYGEL\WPFILES\CAPMAMMEM
CAPTTAL NIATNTENANCE PROGRAM
STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
�5 _�3�
''� The purpose of th.is proa am is to provide for Capital Maintenance of City
� ovmed facilities in an efficient and orderly manner, in accordance wich the
definition and guidelines included herein.
EXZR�ORD iN.4RY CAPITAL M.�L�I"I E�tANCE
a) DEFIti`ITIO�
b) ELIGIBILI7Y GUIDELINES
c) EvIERGE\`CI�S
d) PROJEGT SELECTIO�T PROCESS
e) . PROJECT L.VIPLEMENI'ATIO�t .
a)
��
Definition
Capital Allocation Policy P4, revised
ser�zce sys em p a
of an improved site.
Extraordinary Capital Main[enance is the repair, replacement, renovation,
remodelino, and/or retro;itting of and for the stnictural parts and/or
t com onents of a buildin�', and the man-made components
(1) Structural oarts include footinos and foundations; beams, joists,
columns; load bearing wa11s; exterior w•alls and faca.de (excludino
glass); stairs, floors, dec�;s, ramps, ceilinas; roofs and roofinJ.
(2) Service svstems comoonents include plumbino, electrical,
commun?cations, heatin�, venti?atin�, air conditionina, security
systems and elevztors; utility mains.
(3) Site comaonents includ� retaininJ «�alls, liohtino, stairs, ram?s,
side�valU, rzilinos, fencina, drainaae structures, and erosion
control. Priority co:uideration w be o �en to those site
conponents «'hose condition afiects buildin� components identified
above.
b)
Eli� bility Guidelines (must meet al1)
(1) Project must con,`orm to Definition
(2) F'acitity must be City ow or leas2d to City on lon? term basis.
At least ten years must remain on the lease and the lease must
require the City to be respovible fo; capitat maintenance.
(3) Project must have useful life expectancy greater tnan 10 years•
� (4) Any property «1�h repairs financed �4z11 not be in jeopardy of
closin� w-ichin the n°�� five years.
-1-
C�?TTAI MAINTENANCE PROGRAM
c} Emergencies
' • From each (annual) appropriation an_amount not greater fhan 10% will
' be designated for emergency use at Project Manaaers' discretion.
Expenditures will be subjact to elia bility guidelines but not subject to
selection process. The exact_ amount to be plzced in emergency funr3 will
be established by the selection committee. Any unused monies will be
rolled over to the next yeats budget: All emergency expenditures will be
subject to the budoet directo�s approval.
d) Project �election Process
�>,
c=:
e)
(1) Selection Committee Membecs
(1.I) Executive Secretary of the CIB Corrunittee. (Budget Ofiice)
(1 ?) City Architect's Office representative
(1.3) A member of the Saint Paul Long-Rznoe Capi[al
Improvement Budoet Committee appointed by the
Chairperson of that Cor�raittee.
(2) Selection Committee to meet quarerly (or less frequeatiy if
seleccion can be made with few•er meetinas) wzth proposers.
Project praposals to be submitted, in triplicate, not later tnan two
w•eel;s prior to committee meetino, oa the form provide�.
Project Implementation
(1) Project z�rlana?e: responsible for in�plementing each aoproved
project in accordance « City policies and procedures, i.e.,
purchasina, insurance require.�en�s, etc.
(2) Project tifanaaer will insure no City staff costs other than desio
and inspection services zre_charged to the project.
(3) Project �Sanoer responsible for establishing and maintainin� file on
each project, including:
2.1 Project proposal form - approced
2? project Ioo - date aopro�ed
d
2.3
date bid (or ordere )
date stz�ed
d2te completed
Contract file, includina requisition, bid documents, bid
award, contract, chan�e orders, in��oices, etc.
�
�
L�
-�-
}-� t4 rtY�i s `�'S - 3 3�
AN►�r�nt��►vr
�
4�19 �qS
Three Harris Amendments on page 31 and page 33
F-3 Bond Financing
Guidelines for the use of bond financing are as follows:
� - �4r�n� �►�d �n.� �v T \
ok
1. State law limits the sale of Capital Improvement Bonds to $I.7;�f#4;�£�6�:i�t'=1?��5`:;�i�
�;1.����3(3��1t1��;in�`�;99�. However, " ilie Joint Debt Advisory
Committee
eni�s limiting CIB bonding to $13,650,000 in , ,
in order to stabilize the city's annual debt service cost.
�
� t
2. The city will issue special street assessment revenue bonds as required to finance the assessable
portion of street paving. Debt service on the bonds will be paid by benefitted properiy oaners.
The exact amount of bonding will be deternilned by the specific projects scheduled and will be
contingent on the amount of federal, state and city construction money available for se�i�er
sepazation.
3. The city may issue Municipal State Aid revenue bonds in order to finance Wamer and Shepud
Road reconshuction if a financing plan for completion of these roads is approved by the Mayor
and City Council.
4. The use of revenue bonds to fmance public improvement commitments for hou'siii�;:8i33
economic development projects is preferred over other financing sources. The city may consider
using tax increment, taxable bonds, or tax-exempt revenue bonds for the following projects:
a. Riverfront development;
S�r'.�c.� (� b.��arkingproposals;
� c. Other project-specific public redevelopment costs that leverage significant private,
state or federal inveshnent;;i�t;
d<ticTii�ve`iileniif�cl�' "blic'. `� iis�`i�ti'�cti���'ari�1:"rlAriiies.
.............. �.....:...,..: .:.: .....:.. ..I??!... ..... F?�73............J_. , . �: .. . .. ......,. P
Such bond issues may be general obligation bonds if there is dedicated revenue sufficient to
cover the interest and principal payments and ifthere is additional financing other than property
tax revenues to secure the payment of debt service.
�0
F-4
Clarifies and updates policy.
Tax Increment Financing
Guidelines for the use of tas increment financing aze as follows:
� i. Revenue projections by consultant: revenue projections prepared by City staff and bond
underwriters for all tax increment proposals should be analyzed by the City's fiscal adviser in
s= �
R
i
0
ROBERTA MEGARD
Couac�7member
CITY OF SAZNT PAUL
OFFICE OF T`HE CITY COUNCIL
MEMORANDUIVI
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
April 18, 1995
Councilmembers
Roberta Megard �/�'`�
Capital Allocation Policy
qS 333
�/
M��
ANN D. CIESLAK
Legisiative Aitle
pE - 1't�f`t�e.�rt�cr'�S
y�\��°�5
I suggest the following amendments to the Capital Ailocarion Policy:
(My changes are in bold print) .
page 35:
. , ,�.,,,,.,...v...., K,.;�„
4. Via resolurion, if ��fy'<t�%���it�;;"�����z,,�iz the City Council ims ��.�� identifie
K ro ects reviouslv reviewed. ranked and awaiting fundinL or pro�ects
O �' P J P
which respond to an urgent health or safety hazard, the CIB Committee would also
��,�'�co si er ese pro�ects as part of the reallocahon recommendations of the remaining
�(.c•�..•' dollars. ,
�/ P
page 57:
Regional Parks
��-Complete renovarion of Como Pazk, Zoo and Conservato ,'
r�� 4 -1 C.��w`�.`'J
��
CITY HALL THIRD FLOOR SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55102 612/266-8640
s�<e
Prinred on Aery<Ied Papex
�� �,q,�
�-u -� . _. . .� •.
P-8. Residential street paving Paqe i8
�s-,� 3.�
�
a�
Residential street paving projects will only be financed in
conjunction with the Residential Street Paving program, which
should be finished as soon as possible (in 2008 to 2010). The
areas to be paved will be reviewed and prioritized through the
Capital Improvement Budget Committee, with annual adjustments. An
incremental shift in program financing from Capital Improvement
Bonds to street maintenance assessments, is recommended to permit
tax-exempt properties in city to share in the cost of program.
Street lighting will be installed on Collector and Arterial streets
in conjunction with street reconstruction or when specifically
identified and funded as a safety improvement project external to
a street reconstruction project
ADD Nfi'W AMENDMENT:
��` �j
E-5 District Plans and other Area Plans "'" Page 23
�\
In evaluating capital projects, preferences shall be granted
to projects that are integral to the fulfillment of objectives
in the appropriate comprehensive plan element, district plans,
� small area plans, or other City C\ ncil/HRA approved plans.
� —7 ��
rojects which conflict with District Plans, small area plans,
``t` � Council r HRA approved plans will be penalized.
P .�� AMENDMENT: Delete'the words "HRA".
�r s�► e v c or ►we '
E-7 HOIISING: NOTE: NEW LANGIIAGE: Paqe 24 �
�a��
PROPOSED LANGUAGE:
The city-wide home ownership goal will be identified in the Housing
Action plan, ado�ted annually by the City Council
AMENDMENT:
Delete the proposed amendment
REINSTATE TI3E ORIGINAL LANGUAGE as followed:
"The city-wide home ownership goal will be 70�. The
rental housing goal will be 30%."
O �
�
� 9S'- 333
CFS8 Housing and Economic Development
Proposed language:
Page 61
��..r
O ' �
NOTE: As directed by the City Council, during the 1993 Budget
Hearings, HRA and PED will develop housing strategies and housing
proqrams that will create long term neighborhood stability. The
city-wide home ownership goal will be identified in the Housina
Act?on Plan, adopted annuall� by the City Counc�l.
AMENDMENT:
Delete the proposed amendment
REINSTATE THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE
"The city-wide
housing goal
projects that
Goals."
home ownership goal will be 70�. The rental
will be 30�. Preference will be given to
support these City Council adopted Housing
CF Street Lighting Paqe 52
c.,a �/ � .
PLAIv'NNG COM\(ISSION
David 3fcDonelL Chmr ��_ � �
CI� �� c J�l� �A� 110l1 CiN Hal! Annex
A�ornr Coleman, A9ayor 25 IVes� Four�h Street Telepha�e. 61?-?G6-656�
Samt Paul, 7✓I.�" 5.510? Facsimrie. 61?-128-33/S
February 8, 1995
The Honorable Norm Coleman
Mayor of the City of Saint Paul
347 City Hall
15 West Kellogg Boulevard
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
RE: 1996-2000 Capita] Allocation Poli�y
Dear Mayor Coleman:
I am pleased to transmit to you the I996-20D0 Capital Allocation Policy (CAP), which has been
reviewed, revised, and adopted by the Planning Commission on January 13, 1945. The Department of
Planning and Economic Development staff concurs with a(I revisions recommended by the Plannina
Commission. Upon adoption by the City Council, these documents become part of the City's
Comprehensive Plan and are used in the Unified Capital Improvement Programming and Bud�eting
Process.
I urge you to review the CAP and recommend its adoption by the C:ry Counci] as soon as possible to
help the District Councils, City departments, and CIB Committee with the 1995 capital budget process
now beginning. In the past, these documents have been referred to the CounciPs Finance Committee.
Most of the changes to the revised CAP involve updating language. New policies and major revisions
are described below:
Energy Conservation: In accordance with the Ciry's Environmental-Economic Partnership Project
Report, and City Council Resolution 92-1101, an ener�y conservation goal (G-4) and policy (P-14)
have been added.
Extraordinary Capital Maintenance: The maximum amount to be considered for the 1996-1997
budget has been raised to $1 million per yeaz to reflect the historic lack of preventive maintenance.
(P
Residenfial Street Paving and Lighring: A revised policy in accordance-wiTh City Council direction
has been drafted. A companion poiicy re]ating to street lighting has been added. (P-8, P-9)
Raialeader Aisconnection: In order to meet the requirements of Saint Paul's pe;mit to discharge into
the Nlississippi River, policy P-10 recommends completion of rainleader disconnection for city
Mayor Coleman
Page Two
February 8, 1995
facilities in tre next two years.
Gender Accammodation: A new pcIicy (P-15) authorizes development oi faci?ities to acconcnodate
both genders, where needed.
Levet of Service: The Planning Commission recommends a change to poli�y E-i that wouid :>ice to
second priority ezpanding services to a basic level and move to third prioriry mair.taining existir7g
basic services. Testimony at the public hearing perscaded the Cornm+ssion that i: wouId be better for
maintainin� Tax base, home ownership, and qualiYy of life levels ia the city to have ali neighborhoods
receiviag tIie city's identified basic (evel of services.
The Planning Commission recommeads removing the chapter on future direc.ieas for the capital
budgeting process, because it saems more appropriate to address the issues titis chapter raises in a
more acTion-based vehicte. The studies recommeaded in this chapter are impo: for the Pature
relPvance and success of the capital budget process, and we recommend that t��:� City Council, by
resolution, call for their comptetion.
Fina(ly, the Planning Commission notes tnat the Police Department has not bF�n able to develop a
Capital Fanction Strategy. Because this s�ategy identifies the basic tevei of service to be provided by
the deparhnent, we offer our services to the Police Department to develop this strategy,
We balieve that these and the other changes will help the Capital AIlocation Policy be a more useful
document for the upcoming bi�dget process.
Very truly yours,
/���'�`�-� �
David G. McDonell
Chair, SainT Paul Planning Commission
cc: Larry Buegler, PED
Ken Ford, PED
Allen Lovejoy, PED
Patricia James, PED
g� 333
�
city of saint paul
planning commission resolution
file number 95-04
�te � f n �arv 13 . 1995
WHEREAS, the Plauuing Commission is charged with responsibiliTy for development and
review of policy to guide the Unified Capital Improvement Program and Budget Process
(UCIPBP); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the policies adopted as part of the 1994-
1998 Saint Paul Capital AlZocation Policy and has revised them; and
WIIEREAS, the Planning Commission released the revised Capital Attocation Policy, 1996-
2000 for public review and held a public hearing on the document on December 2, 1994, and
WI-IEREAS, the studies recommended in the sec6on, "Future Directions for the Capital
Improvement Budget Process" of the previous Policy, still need to be done; and
WHEREAS, discussions held during the period of public review have resulted in additional
revisions to the Capital Allocation Policy;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Plauuing Comnnission hereby approves
and adopts the policies entitled Saint Paul Capital Allocation Policy: 1994-1998, as revised;
and
$E IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mayor and Council direct an appropriate agency
(Council Investigation and Reseazch, Budget Office, CIB Committee, or Planning
Comxnission) to analyze past PCPs, recommended capitai budgets, and actual capital
expenditures using priority categories recommended in the 1994-1998 CAP and also to
analyze past interaction between the capital and operating budgets; and
BE IT FURTF3ER RESOLVED, that the Mayor and Council direct an appropriate city agency
to examine whether past and current capital priorities aze appropriately addressing expected
future needs in Saint Paul; and
moved by Treichel
seconded by Maddox
in favor Unanimous
against
�s-3 33
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Plauning Commission supports the efforts of the
Information Systems Task Force in recommending an appropriate Geographic Information
System for the City of Saint Paul; and
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that copies of the document be transmitted to the Mayor and
City Council of the City of Saint Paul for review and adoption.
�
��
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
SAINT PAUL CAPTTAL ALLOCATION POLICY
1996-2000
PROPOSED REVISIONS AND PUBLIC CONIlvIENT
DRAFT FOR CITY COUNCIL REVIEW
I Adopted by the Saint Paul Planning Commission
.7anuary 13, 1995
� Amended and Adopted by the Saint Paul City Council
(dare to be added)
�
�
�
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
Department of Planning
and Economic Devetopment
Norm Coleman, Mayor
l
�S -333
E�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�5
�
The City of Saint Paul does not discriminate on the basis of disability, race, sezc,
� sexual or affectional ocientation, age, color, creed, national origin or ancesriy,
mazital status, religion, veteran status, or status with regazd to public assistance in the
admission or access to, or treatment or employment in, its programs or activities.
�
�
,��
C
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
TABLE OF CONTENTS
� 1.0 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.1 PURPOSE OF SAINT PAUL'S CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
BUDGETING PROCESS .............................
� 1.2 STAGES OF SAINT PAUL'S CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
BUDGETING PROCESS .............................
13 COMPONENTS OF Tf�, CAPITAL ALLOCATION POLICY ...
1.4 WHY HAVE A POLICY FOR CAPITAL ALLOCATION? .....
� 1S HOW IS TF� CAPITAL ALLOCATION POLICY USED? .....
1.6 ORGANIZATION OF THIS DOCUMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
,�
�
�
�
�
�
�
��
�
�
�
�
�
�
2.0 STRATEGIC GOALS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.1 WHAT ARE STRATEGIC GOALS? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.2 WHY HAVE STRATEGIC GOALS? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.3.0 TYPES OF STRATEGIC GOALS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
23.1 PLANNING GOALS ................................
G-I Basic Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
G-2 Neighborhood Management and Housing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
G-3 Businessand Jobs .................................
G-4 Energy Conservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
23.2 FISCAL GOALS ..................................
G-5 FiscalIntegrity ...................................
3.0 POLICIES FOR CAPTTAL ALLOCATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.1 PROJECT POLICIES ...............................
P-1 Plans and Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
P-2 New Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
P -3 Skyways ......................................
P-4 Handicapped Accessibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
P-5 Program Allocations .............................
P-6 Extraordinary Capital Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
P-7 Redevelopment Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
P-8 Residential Street Paving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
P-9 Street Lighting Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. ...
P-10 Rain I.eader Disconnection in City Faci{ities . . . . . . . . . . .
P-I 1 Finaucing for Preliminary Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
P-12 Duplication of Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
P-13 Assessment Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
... .:.....
�?��I�: i:';`;Eri�y'��ri�s�rsx�iftin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
�' 1S . �egd�r::�+��c�adahnn.s�'��.y.��c��t�€s . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.
3.2 EVALUATION POLICIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.21 PLANNING EVALUATION POLICIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
E-1 Level of Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
E-2 Program for Capital Improvements (PCn . . . . . . . . . . . . .
E-3 Departmental Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
,. :
,::;. i:�'s-5 System Integrity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
,..,:,..
��:� �-6 District Plans and 4lf�t�' S�s1! Area Plans . . . . . . . . .
..:...,
E-6 � Aistrict Councii Ranking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
E:=?<�-4 Housing ..................................
iii
1
2
6
6
6
7
8
8
8
9
9
10
10
10
il
11
il
13
13
13
13
14
14
15
16
17
18
18
19
19
19
19
20
20
21
21
21
22
22
23
23
23
24
0�-333
q5-333
�=� �B Historic Preservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
� ::9 � Job CreaHon . . ,
.,:..>.
�';kQ E-}� Business Investment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
...:
E-11 Environment ..................................
3.22 FISCAL EVALUATION POLICIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
E-12 Impact on Operating Bndget . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
E-13 Impact on City Revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
E-14 Grants .......................................
E-15 Private Investment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
E-16 Acquisition ...................................
E-17 Joint Use / Consolidation of Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
E-18 Continuation Projecis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
E-19 Programming and Phasing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
E -20 Use .........................................
�21 Fiscat Impact Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
33 FINANCIAL POLICIES .............................
F-1 Financing Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
F-2
�����.��.� ......................
................. ....
F-3 Bond Financing ................................
F-4 Tax Increment Financing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
F-5 HI2A GeueralFund .............................
F-6 HRA Development Fund . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
F-7 Re6abilitation Loan Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
F-8 Sale/Leasebaek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
F-9 Tax Abatement ................................
F-10 Priorities and Pmcedures for Disbursing Capital
Improvement Project Financiug . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
F-11 Reporting, Review and Reappropriation Requirements for
Capital Impmvement Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
F-12 Project Phasing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
F-13 Out-of-Cycle Appropriatioas for New Pmjects . . . . . . . . .
F-14 Increased Costs for Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
F-15 Multi-Year Projection of Capital Financing Sources .....
��;�:>"��i�a€e:�ti�ic ��c�ities;�at�iaiei#}*:�a: . . . . . . . .
4.0 GUIDELINES FOR CAPTTAL PROGRAM11�1VG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
PCI-1 Conformance to Project Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
PCI-2 Years ' O°� "�� ���-�?�# of the ' nO�� ��#�� PCI ..
,.,..� ::: ....::..... .. .....:.......:..:::.:
PCI-3 Years 1 °°�e 1�����lY��� of the PCL• Tentative
� :..::.:.. : ...�
Commitments ...................................
PCI-4 Years 1°° ��:°� 199�2#� of the PCI: Programming of
.::::.;.:;.,:.».,
Pmjects Other than Tentative Commitments . . . . . . . . . . . . .
PCI-5 Years '^°�� �&���11J of the PCI: Match Between
Programmed Projects and �Expected Available Financing ....
PCT-6 Years 1O �rr�o i�i ��8��� of the PCI: Distribution of
Capital Improvement Bond and Community DeveIopmenf
Block Grant Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
PCI-7 Years ""'�`�o ��;��QQ of t6e PCI: Unknown Financing
..: .: ....: . ... : .:.: .:
Sourees........................................
24
24
25
25
25
25
26
26
26
27
28
28
28
29
29
29
29
30
31
32
32
32
33
33
33
33
34
35
35
35
36
36
37
37
37
37
37
37
38
39
iv
i
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
,�
�
,�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
PCI-g 1'ears '^^�°''�-�� ��j�=;�i� of the PCI: Distributioa of
......:.:: ...,.... ..
Eapected Available Financing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
PCI-9 Yeais , ^o��^'��
���=�Ut��� of the PCI: Unknown
:: ...:.,..,:. :.....
Financing Sonrces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
5.0 DEFIlVITIONS ........................................... 40
APPENDIX A: CITY OF SAINT PAUL NIISSION STATEMENT ....... 43
APPENDIX B: PLANS AND POLICIES RELEVANT FOR CAPTTAL
BUDGETING .................................. 44
APPENDIX C: OVERALL BUDGET GOALS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
APPENDIX D: CAPTTAL FUNCTION STRATEGIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
APPENDIX E: PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT ASSESSMENT POLICY ..... 67
v
qJ - 333
�
��
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�'
�
�
,�;
�
�
�
NOTE ON TEXT MARKINGS: Major changes are identified with s�ee� of deleted
language and t�[����€ii�;s�£�%�� Changes made to update the years covered and
to correct grammar are not mazked. Discussion for the proposed revisions and comments
received about a policy are indicated with the � symbol.
lA INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE O�' SAIN'T PAUL'S CAPTTAL IMPROVEMENT Bi3DGETING
PROCESS
The purpose of Saint Paul's capital improvement budgeting process is to plan, program
and finance capital improvements in a way that is both fiscally responsible and
accountable to the citizens of the city. As such, this process contributes to the fulfillment
of Saint Paul's mission, expressed in a statement adopted by the City Council (see
Appendix A).
To ensure that the purpose of the process is fulfilled, two citizen advisory bodies work
to develop a recommended capital improvement budget:
1) Planning Commission. An important responsibility of the Planning Commission
is to determine what kinds of capital systems aze needed to mvcimize Saint Paul's
potential as a place to live and do business. The city's Comprehensive Plan,
developed by the Planning Commission, provides considerable guidance
concerning desirable future capital investment for Saint Paul. In the capital
improvement budgeting process, the Planning Commission translates the
Comprehensive Plan into focused policies to guide the city's choice and timing
of capital improvement projects. Appendix B is a list of the elements of Saint
PauPs Comprehensive Plan.
2) Long-Rauge Capital Improvement Budget Committee (CIB Committee).
Along with its task forces, this citizen's committee evaluates and prioritizes
capital improvement budget proposals. The priorities assigned by the CIB
Committee are the basis for the capitai improvement budget that the Mayor
recommends to the CiTy Council for it to adopt.
1
q5 - 333
In addition to these advisory bodies, Saint Paul's 17 Citizen Participation Districts provide
important input into the capitai improvement budgeting process. The CIB Committee and
task forces have one representative from each Citizen Participation District. Moreover,
District Council ratings are a criterion for evaluating and prioritizing proposed projects.
�5
� Brief explanation of relationship between sates taY funds and the regutar CIB
process.
1.2 STAGES OF SAINT PAUL'S CAPTTAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGETING
PROCESS
Saint PauPs capital improvement budgeting process has three stages:
1) Capital Allocation Policy (CAP). The CAP is a set of policy statements to
guide capital improvement bvdget proposaIs and their evaluation. The CAP is
related both to the city's Comprehensive Plan and to the city's Budget Goals and
Policies. The Comprehensive Plan idenfifies tke systems and development
patterns needed to maximize the city's potential as a place to live and work; the
Badget Goals and Policies outline principles of financia2 prudence to prioritize
city service delivery activities. (See Appendix C for a summary of Saint PauPs
1991 Budget Goals and Policies.) By articulating city objectives for capital
investment, the CAP functions as a bridge beriveen the Comprehensive Plan and
the Budget Goals and Policies.
The Planning Commission prepares the CAP in consultation with the Mayor's
Office and ciTy departments. Following a period of public review, the Planning
Commission adopts the CAP and transmits iY to the Mayor who reviews ttte CAP
and transmits it to the CiTy Council for their approvaL The adopted CAP has a
five-yeaz time horizon but is revised every two years, prior to the adoption of a
capital improvement budget.
2) Capital Improvement Budget. City departments, District Councils and other
parties submit proposals for capital projects. These proposals aze evaluated and
prioritized by the Saint Paul Long-Range Capital Improvement Budget Committee
{CIB Committee) and its task forces. The primary evaluative too] of the CIB
Committee is a rating sheet based on the adopted CAP as well as other sources.
The CIB Committee and task forces aze composed of representafives of Saint
PauPs 17 Citizen Participation Districts. Based on the recommendations of the
CIB Committee, the City Council adopts an annual capital budget and a five-yeaz
Tentative Program of Commitments, which estimates future appropriations needed
to complete iniriated projects.
3) Program for Capital Improvements (PCn. The ten-year PCI is adopted by the
Planning Commission, reviewed by the Mayor and approved by the CiTy Council
shortly after the capital budget is adopted. The PCI is a list of intended future
capital improvements that organizes important projects according to yeazs of fund
expenditure, estimated cost and expected fmancing source. The PCI also
prioritizes projects and categorizes them within one of 11 capital functions:
Streets, Street Lighting, Traffic Engineering, Bridges, Sewers, Pazks and Open
Spaces, Libraries, Housing and Economic Development, Police, Fire and Safety,
and Special Facility Support.
The first two years of the PCI consist of projects already financed by the capital
2
�
�
�
�
�5 -333
budget. Yeazs 3-5 include phases of projects that need to be financed to continue
commihnents made in the capital budget, and other high-priority projects that aze
affordable relative to expected available fmancing. Years 6-10 include projects
that city departments have identified as being important but are not yet covered
by financing commitments. The intent of this format is to match years 1-5
closely to actual or anticipated finances; it is less necessary for projects in years
6-10 to match expected financing levels. However, projects in years 6-10 aze
categorized according to theu ]evel of priority.
� The PCI is prepared by the Planning Commissian in consultation with the
Mayor's Office and with city departrnents. The PCI becomes part of the
Comprehensive Plan upon its adoption.
�
�
�
�
,�
�'
�
�
�
�
�
Although three stages in the capital improvement budgeting process have been identified,
the process is actually a cycle in which activities in each stage rely on activities in
preceding stages. For example, the CAP requires that proposed projects be evaluated
concerning their conformance with the most recent PCL Thus, a]though the CAP is the
foundation, it also draws from other components of the process. Figure I illush�ates the
stages of the process. Figure 2 e�ibits the roles played by various parties in the capital
budgeting process.
�
q5 - 333
r�cuxE i
SAINT PAUL'S
CAPTTAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGETING PROCESS
Capital Allocation Policy (CAP)
Sets 5-year poficy directioa for the capital
improvement budget proposals and their
evaluaton.
Evaluation of PCI in light
of Comprehensive Plan leads
to revision of CAP
�
Program for Capital Improvemenu (PCn
Sets 10-year program by tying capital
needs to long-range policy of the
Comprehensive Plan.
CIB becomes first
2 years of PCI
Evaluation and prioritization
of proposed capitat projects
Capital Improvement Budget (CIB)
Appropriates funds for capital projects.
Identifies tentative expenditures
needed within the next five years to complete
currendy approved pmjects.
4
�
,�
�
�
�
�
�'
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
i
�5 -333
FIGURE 2
PROCESS OF DEVELOPING THE
CAPTTAL ALLOCATION POLICY
Bud¢et Staff
Proposes: - fiscal goals
- ptoject policies(fiscal)
- fiscal evaluation policies
- financial policies
CIB Committee
Recommends: - fiscal goals
- project policies(fiscal)
- Sscal evaluation policies
- financial policies
nnin Commission
1. Prepazes CAP for public review
2. Holds public hearing
3. Adopts CAP
�1�iavor
Reviews and recommends
'i n il
Adopts CAP
�
1 'n �
Proposes: - planning goais
- project policies (planning)
- planning evaluation policies
q5-333
2.3 COMPONENTS OF THE CAl'TfAL ALLOCATION POLICY
The 1996-2000 CAP consists of a set of Strategic Goals: Planning Goals and Fiscal
Goals and three sets of policy statements: Project Policies, Evaluation Policies and
Financial Policies. The Strategic Goals function as the rarionale for the policies.
1) Project Poticies. Used to determine i� and under what condirions, a proposed
project is eligible for capitat financing. If the proposed pmject does not violate
the limits esbblished by the Project Policies, its meriYs are Yhen evaluated. In
practice, most proposals aze not affected by these policies.
2) Evalaation Policies (Planning Evalaation Policies; Itiscal Evaluation Policies).
Used to evaluate the merits of proposed projects that are eligible for capital
financing. The CIB Committee assigos points and ranks proposed projects using
a mting sheet that incorporates material from the Evatuarion Poticies. Financing
sowces are then sought for the highest rankiug pmposals.
3) Financial Policies. Used to determine what sources of financing can be used for
specific projects. The most narrowly-targeted form of financing is assigned to
each proposal so that financing can be found for as many good proposals as
possible.
The goals and policies lead to a recommended capital badget that consists of the highest-
ranking eligible projects for which capital financing is available.
1.4 WHY HAVE A POLICY FOR CAPTTAL ALLOCATION?
Proposals for capital improvement projects in Saint Pau[ generally have costs that exceed
the amount of availabte capital resources. To provide the greatest benefit to the city, the
Capital Improvement Budget must £nance those projects that address the greatest needs.
For this reason, it is essential to determine the relative priority of proposed projects and
allocate resources accordingly.
The CAP helps ensure that high priority projects meeting city goals aze funded during the
budget biennium. It transforms city goals and priorities into a set of policies that guide
capital improvement budgeting decisions.
1.5 HOW IS TAE CAPTTAL ALLOCATION POLICY USED�
The primary function of the CAP is to provide guidance to the CIB Committee and its
task forces as they evaluate capital improvement proposals and tecommend a capital
improvement budget to the Mayor and City Council. To fulfilI tfris function properly, the
CAP must accomplish two tasks. First, it must articulate citywide goals that relate to
capital improvements. Secondly, it must transfomt these goals into policies that provide
�
�
�
�
�
,�
�
�
�
�
�
�'
�
�
�
�
�
�
clear guidance conceming priorities for the upcoming capital budget. These policies must
enable the CIB Committee to evaluate proposed projects thoughtfully.
Two other functions stem &om the primary function of the CAP. First, the CAP helps
District Councils, city departments and other parties develop capital improvement
proposals. By stating the criteria for evaluating proposals, the CAP indicates what types
of proposals are most likely to be evaluated favorably by the CIB Committee and its task
forces. Secondly, the CAP helps the Mayor and City Council coordinate budget decisions
for capital improvements with long-range operating and maintenance obligations of the
city.
1.6 ORGANIZATION OF THIS DOCUMENT
Chapter 1.0 - Provides a general introduction to this document.
Chapter 2.0 - Presents the Strategic Goals that are the foundation of the city's policies
for capital allocation. Two types of Strategic Goals aze presented: Planning Goals and
Fiscal Goals.
Chapter 3.0 - Contains a discussion of the Project Policies, Evaluation Policies (Planning
and Fiscal) and Financial Policies used to allocate city capital resources.
Chapter 4.0 - Contains a discussion of guidelines for capital programming. These
guidelines aze used by the Pianning Commission and City departments to prepaze the ten-
yeaz Program for Capital Improvements (PCI).
Chapter 5.0 -
��
Ekagte�-6:9 - Provides definitions of some important terms.
� Discussion of future directions for the capitat budgeting process can be better
addressed in tlae resolution adopting this document.
7
q�-333
�'
q5 - 333
2.0 STRATEGIC GOALS
2.1 WHAT ARE STRATEGIC GOALS?
Strategic Goals are statements that provide the direction and framework for the three sets
of policies that are detailed in Chapter 3.0. They create the categories for the Evaluation
Policies, which in turn are translated into a rating sheet used by the CIB Committee to
evaluate individual proposals. Strategic Goals are "goais" in that they articulate what kind
of city Saint Paul should seek to become. They are "strategic" because they aclmowledge
the limitations of the city's capital resources and provide a sense of priority for pursuing
certain types of projects over others.
`--.:- •- .c_: -• •: . =-_'" - _ -:- x :- o •c - - -
_ _ .. . _" ' ' ' " ' ' ""' ' "' _" " ' '
_ . .. ..
.. _ __ Y. _ • _ . . . � _. .. � . .
_ ... �� __'.. .__ _ _ , �....__._. "
. _ � . � _ ' _ � . . _ _ _ . � _ . •. . • . • � _ � . , 11. - • � • • � •
. � .. . � . . .. .. . _ � �". _ _ _ _ _
� _ .. .
� � I � • � .. __ � _ .. _ ' '.
� � � � _ Y. _ • . �
The Strategic Goals (Chapter 2.0) and the Policies for Capital Allocarion (Chapter 3.0)
are stated in sepazate chapters. The intent of this structure is to emphasize that Strategic
Goa1s aze not policy. Instead, they ue guidelines for the development of policy. The
policies articutated in Chapter 3.0 are the authoritarive interpretation of the meaning of
2.2 WHY HAVE STRATEGIC GOALS?
The main reason why Strategic Goals are needed is that the ciTy's capital resources aze
fimited. . Most of the city's non-bonding revenae
comes from state and federal sources and is limited by how much aid these govemment
units make available to Saint Paul, and by limits to uses of variovs financing sources set
by the govemment providing the aid. Beyond that, the city is constrained by state legal
limits on municipal bonding and by a more stringent self-imposed limit on bonding
�lesa�iet}:
� Updates and condenses tangnage.
4:
�
�
�
i
,�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
designed to reduce overlapping general obligation debt. Appendix F displays the
estunated financing sources available for capital projects from 1996 to 2000.
In addition to the limits on revenue sources, the city's financial resources are constrained
by past commitrnents to multi-yeaz projects that have not been completed. �
tH iE� ,...«.. ,...:r.., ..+..r:t,e ...� ..... ...:........«.,... a � �.• a ,a
�r� �
. ,
;�,r.._. i.., i�oc ....�,.,....,.scicn...•n:��.. i�vc a„__
� Reference to sewer sepazation project can be deleted for 1996 policies.
2.3A TYPES OF STRATEGIC GOALS
The Strategic Goals have two complementary foci: Planning and Fiscal. The Planning
Goals (G-1 through 6-3 ��4) relate to the desirability of projects without regazd to cost
or financing. The purpose of these goals is to articulate what kind of community Saint
Paul should become and what kind of public activities can help bring about that type of
community. In contrast, Fiscal Goals (C�-4 £"s.=�j) establish principles of prudent financial
management for the city's capital improvement budget. Both types of goals aze necessary
to ensure that Saint PauPs public investments yie]d the maximum benefits.
The Planning Goals aze based on Saint Paul Tomorrow, a T?t&nrijr3ig:�aia���cin
-... . a.. a .. .�. a i�Qn,. t., .w,.'vi.... :.... � . .
0t1Yt3g1�t� €#2 .198? �-�+� -� - - --- --° - --- -' --° °� _•- - -._.-'••- -_•'•• ............. This
study included a statistical profile of the city (Saint Paui Today) and an extensive survey
process designed to "listen" to the community in a comprehensive way. L�°°"°�;o;
�., ...w:,.w :. ..,,,....,.., :.. , no� gecause the purpose of the Saint Paul Tomorrow project
was to build a foundation for strategic planning in Saint Paul, this study is the most
appropriate source of Planning Goals for the CAP.
The Fiscal Goals reflect relevant "General Budget Goals" from the CiTy of Saint Paul
1991 Budget Goals and Policies, a document adopted by the City Council.
� The Planning Commission is recommending the addition of a new goal, requiring
renumbering. Language can again be shortened.
2.3.1 PLANNING GOALS
The recommendations of the Saint Paul Tomoaow report rest on a consensus:
Saint Paul should mazimize its patential as a place to live and do business.
This consensus has been articulated in a mission statement for the city that has been
adopted by the City Council. Appendix A contains the complete text of Saint PauPs
mission statement.
The following three Planning Goals aze based on this consensus. These goals aze
intended to be su�ciently general to apply to a wide variety of city activities, and
q5-333
�
C��-333
sufficiently specific to be helpful for capital budgeting decisions. The goals ate stated in
order of prionty.
G-1
G-2
G-3
Basic Services
■ Goal: To provide Saint Faul residents and employers with a basic level of city
services.
■ Discussion: This Shategic Goal has three unportant implications. First, it
identifies residenu and employers as the citizenry that the city should serve.
Secondly, it implies that a"basic" level of service can be defined and should
be provided to all city citizens. Finally, by speaking of "city services," this
goal acknowledges that some important services are properly provided by
parties other than city government. City government should focus on the
services that it can most equitably and efficiently provide.
In practice, the city implements this goal especially via adopted city plans and
policies t11at define a basic }evel of services for the city's capital fwnctions.
Therefore, the Capital Function Strategies (Append'uc D) that guide Yhe
preparation of the Program for Capital Improvements are based on adopted
plaus and policies and are related to this Shategic Goai.
Neighborhood Management and Housing
■ Goal: To support the cazeful management of Saint Paul neighborhoods, each
according to its own best poteniial.
■ Discussion: This Strategic Goal has severat implications. First, it identifies
neighborhoods as the focus of community life in Saint Paul. Second, it
highlights the importance of the city as a residential environment. Good
neighborhood management should lead to the provision of attractive housing
opportunities for a broad spectrum of the city's population. Third, it suggests
that alt areas of Saint Paul—ouUying areas and downtown—betong to
neighborhoods. Fourth, it indicates that conscious neighborhood management
is necessary. Such management should involve both neighborhood self-
management and management by city officials. Finally, it stresses the notion
of "potential," suggesting that different neighborhoods have different
poYentials. Policies and projecYS thaY are appropriate in one neighborhood may
not be in another neighborhood.
In pracrice, the city realizes t�is goal especially via District Plans, via small
azea plans that identify priorities for neighborhoods that anticipate sigiificant
changes in the neaz future, and via progrems that identify various geographic
azeas as being eligible for special revitalization projects.
Business and Jobs
■ Goal: To ensure a supportive environment for businesses and jobs.
10
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�!
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
Discussion: This goal implies that city government should not 1'unit its
activities to residential concems but should also promote economic
development. At its best, such promotion should be broad and general. That
is, the city should be most interested in creating a"supportive environment"
for economic development. Aid for particulaz kinds of businesses or for
individual businesses must be guided by this broader framework. This goal
also acknowledges that businesses aze not ends in themselves, but aze
integrally connected to jobs and to other public amenities. The best economic
development will be that which does the most to enhance Saint Paul as a place
for everyone---for businesses and also for city residenu.
As with G-2, this goal is implemented especially via District Plans, via small
area plans that identify priorities for neighborhoods that anticipate significant
changes in the neaz future, and via programs that identify various geographic
areas as being eligible for special revitalization projects.
,.
G»%�,°;: ">�ii��; �ttus�rvatiaiu
■ C"r�rt '�n tti�nag� ���y asseYS �� re�€rc�� �cx�` eff°xc:ei�, �osc savings, lu�h
prztduclivsi3+, aiir3 $nv�roiunen2� safe�
�
2.3.2 FISCAL GOALS
G-5: FiscalIntegrity
■ Goal: To help preserve the fiscal integrity of the city's operating, debt service
and capital improvement budgets by engaging in cazeful and thorough analysis
of each capital imptovement proposal, including the long-range impact on
operating costs and revenue generation.
Discussion: This fiscal goal reflects those general city goals for budgeting
from the CiTy Council adopted "1991 Budget Goals and Policy" that impact
Ii
�i5-333
The addition of this goal strengthens and makes more explicit something that the
City and its Capital Allocation Policies have been encouraging for yeazs. Letters
of support were received from the Environment and Energy Resource Center and
the 5ustainable Resources Center.
��- 333
-<.�
upon the evaluation of specific capital improvement proposals. The complete
list of general goals from that document is included as AppendiY C. This goal
recognizes rivo basic factors. First, proposals for capital impmvements must
be evaluated against basic criteria that measure the fiscal responsibility of the
project as proposed. Secondly, proposals for capital improvements must be
evaluated against criteria that measure their impact on the cily's operating and
debt service budgets. It is essential to recognize the close tie between the
city's operating and capital improvement budgets. New or e�cpanded facilities
financed through the capital improvement budget may increase the need for
operating budget resources. Conversely, appropriate capital investmenYS can
decrease operating expenses. But openting budget decisions, such as deferral
of maintenance, can also affect the capital budget.
.ie..:..:...... ..1�,. ..fF � t1... «:�..1 1.....i....r C i ,i F 1 F
""`__'_' '_ ____ —___" __' _ ' 'a__ '..' ".._.." _"_"... ..'
i za.iaT:.,,._e..« _ _a:,..�,... ,... r ,.:r..:,... a..� _...e .� ....,...._a..
r �r� Y J
C[arifies and condenses language.
12
�
�
�
3.0 POLICIES FOR CAPTTAL ALLOCATION
3.1 PROJECT POLICIES
Project Policies consist of statements that limit or prohibit certain types of projects. These
� policies aze used to determine if, and under what conditions, a proposed project is eligible
for capital financing.
�
�
P-1 Plans and Policies
1. Proposals for projects that clearly conflict with the ciry's Comprehensive Plan
� will not be considered for financing. The Planning Commission shalt review
a11 proposals for capitai improvement fmancing to determine if they aze
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
P-2
Proposals for capital projects must be consistent with approved City plans and
policies.
2. Any project with an estimated cost exceeding $100,000 (with the exception of
projects that can be classified as extraotdinary capital maintenance) must be
based on a plan or policy that has been approved by the Mayor and City
Counc7.
New Facilities
Proposals for certain types of new facilities will not be considered for financing
in 1996-1997. These facilities aze:
1. Facilities to house programs or services that aze not provided by the city.
2. New library or recreational service facilities that wil] increase operating and
maintenance expenses. Expansion, rehabilitation, or replacement of existing
inadequate library or recreational facilities that will require an increase in staff
will be considered if the improvement is consistent with a plan approved by
the City Council that identifies the need for the improvement.
3. Multi-service centers, unless the following conditions aze met:
a.
�
Community need has been demonstrated through a feasibility study;
All conditions of the multi-service center plan, including identification of
tenants, have been met; and
c. There will be no requirement for ciTy fmancing of operating or
maintenance costs at the facility.
� Comment to delete policy P-2 as it is better covered by P-1, plans and policies
and is out of date or not followed. Planning Commission recommends no change.
13
a5 -333
�� - 333
P-3
I�
Skyways
In 1987, the City Council adopted the following policies conceming the fmancing
of skyways:
l. The City may participate in the fmancing of skyway bridges if such bridges
support City priorities for downtown development.
2. The CiTy may participate in the financing of appropriate projects to retrofit
e�cisting skyways with automatic doors and to install electronic security
equipment in the skyways.
3. A City reserve fund may finance the City's portion of major skyway
enhancement or replacement of e�cisting skyways connecting buildings that the
City owns or leases.
4. The City will not participate in the financing of skyway approaches and
concourse corridors.
In addition, the following policy from the city's 1991 Budget Goals and Policies
is relevant:
5. The annual costs of operations, maintenance (both current and preventive) and
roof replacements for skyways should be assessed or chazged to the propezty
owners of the buildings linked by the system. Additionally, a capital
replacement reserve will be estabtished and an appropriate amount chazged to
the property owners.
Handicapped Accessibility
The CiTy Council adopted the following suggestions, recommendations and goals
regazding the priorities, processes and fmancing for handicapped accessibility of
city buildings:
The city should set a goal of five years to make all of its buildings accessible.
The CIB Committee should rewmmend a financing plan to implement this
goal.
2. Designs for al] new construction aud rehabilitation of city buitdings should be
evaluated in light of the accessibility standazds of the Americans with
Disabitities Act of 1990. The standa�ds contained in this document shoutd be
used in city owned buildings.
3. A two-tier approach should be used to determine priorities for use of
handicapped accessibility program money. First, a path model shouId be
applied. That is, higher priority should be given to attaining a basic level of
accessibility at each building rather than 100 percent compliance with adopted
standazds at one site before beginning work at anather site. Secondly, within
the path approach buildings should be prioritized as folIows:
14
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
��
�
,�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
,�
P-5
a. First priority should be to make safe and usable those buildings where
people requiring special accessibility features aze employed or aze using
services;
b. Second priority should be those buildings that have the broadest unpact
in terms of delivery of services to the general public;
c. Thud priority should be those buildings that offer the greatest number of
employment opportunities; and
d. Fourth priority should be those buildings that have the greatest potential
for modification at the least cost.
4. Priorities for nse of accessibility program resources should be developed by
City staff based on the adopted priority framework and submitted to the
Mayor's Advisory Committee for People with Disabilities for their review and
recommendations before being submitted to the CIB Committee.
5. Accessibility improvements to buildings identified in the Program for Capital
Improvements for substantial renovation or reconstruction within the next five
yeazs should be deferred until the major project is financed.
6. Whenever all or part of a city-owned building is scheduled for capital
improvements, the proposal for capital improvement dollars should include
su�cient money to make the entire building, and access to it, accessible unless
strong justification can be given for deferring the accessibility improvements.
Whenever site work is proposed for exterior areas only, the proposa] should
include sufficient money to address pazking, walkway and other exterior
accessibility features unless strong justification can be given for deferring the
accessibility improvements.
7. The survey of city-owned buildings should be reviewed cazefully and
guidelines established to identify what improvements should be financed as
capitai improvements through the Capital Improvement Budget.
Language included at the suggestion of the Depariment of Public Works.
Pmgram Allocations
A program allocation is a lump sum amount given to fund a series of capital
projects that aze consistent in nature and implemented sequentially until an
identified objective is reached. An example of a program allocation is the
combined street and sewer prograzn.
Ail requests for capital improvement fmancing of program allocations must be
accompanied by:
15
a�- 333
�5-333
Program guidelines that ate consistent with applicable city plans and capital
aiIocation policies. These guideIines should be adopted if the program has
been financed in prior years.
2. 'Fhe number of years the program is expected to continue to operate, or an
idenrification of the conditions that would result in the termination of the
program.
3. A list of the specific activities that were completed with program money
during the two years preceding the application year, including the cost of each
activity.
4. A list of a[I transfers, whether by resolution or administrative order, out of the
program to other projects or programs during each of the two years prior to
the year of the cumnt reqaest.
5. A list of al] outsYanding balances, by year including the carrent budget year,
if the prograzn has been fmanced previously.
6. Identification of the amount of money that is required each year for prograzn
activities.
P-6 Extraordinary Capital Maintenance
An objective of the city is to protect its capitai inveshnent through regutar,
scheduted preventive maintenance of its capitat facitities, financed througti the
operating budget. However, because preventive maintenance activities have not
been fully financed in past yeazs, some capital facilities require extraordinary
capital maintenance. To addrass such extraordinary capital needs, the city will
ezcn nnn ..,.� _.,,._ :., ionn .,_a .onc
consider budgeting up to , �I;#1Q��:�
�ar:jui;T��J�;;�i�� 1:�� for extraordinary capital maintenance. Adequately
fmanced programs for regular preventive maintenance would, in time, reduce the
need for an extraordinary capital maintenance program. It is hoped that
preventive maintenance--both ordinazy and extraordinary—will become a high ciTy
priority. In the long run, deferred maintenance is not a cost-effective way of
managing scarce financial resources.
Ea�traordinary capital mainteaance is defined as the repair, replacement,
renovation, remodeling and/or retrofitring of the structural parts andlor service
system components of a building, and the man-made components of an improved
site.
Smuctural parts include footings and foundations; beams, joists, columns; load
bearing walls, e�cterior walls and facade (excluding glass); stairs, floors, decks,
ramps, ceilings; roofs and roofing.
2. Service system components include plumbing, electricat, communicarions,
heating, ventilating, air condirioning, security systems and elevators; utility
mains.
16
�
�
�
3. Site components include retaining walls, lighting, stairs, ramps, sidewalks,
railings, fencir�g, dninage structures, and erosion control. Priority
consideralion will be given to those site components whose condirion affects
building components identified above.
Any work financed through the eactraordinary capital maintenance progratn must
� have a life expectancy that exceeds the terms of the bonds used to finance it, or
must be financed with non-bonded fund sources. Ongoing maintenance and
� routine preventive caze and upkeep of facilities shall be financed through the
city's operating budget.
�
�
Except in cases of emergency, work projects financed through the eartraordinary
capital maintenance progratn must have costs that exceed $3,000 et�-ere-less�aa
�5,889. Smaller work projects shail normally be financed through the city's
operating budget. Lazger work projects shall normally be financed through the
regulaz CIB process.
Guidelines have been developed for administering the extraordinary, capital
� maintenance program. The guidelines for this program include the following
eligibility criteria:
�
L The project must conform to the definition of extcaordinary capital
maintenance.
� 2. The facility must be City owned, or ]eased to the City on a long-term basis.
At least ten yeazs must remain on the lease and the lease must require the City
to be responsible for capital maintenance.
�
�
�
�
�
�
,�
�
�
3. The project must have a useful life expectancy greater than 10 .years.
4. Any property with repairs financed will not be in jeopazdy of closing within
the next five years.
� Pubiic Works has recommended increasing the total amount that can be funded,
noting that projects funded in their department in 1994 totailed $844,000. The
Parks Commission supports the increase provided by the revision. There was
another suggestion to increase the potential budget amount to $1.5 million per
yeaz and to delete the upper limit of $75,000. The Planning Commission
recommends the increase to $I million per year and agrees that the upper cap is
inconsistent with other parts of the policy document.
P-7 Redevelopment Activities
In the future, the City will use Capita] Improvement Bonds to finance
redevelopment project activities as defined in Minnesota Statutes, section 469.002,
subdivision 14, in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, section 469.041, clause
(6). In the past, these activities were fmanced with urban renewal bonds. Saint
Paul's authorization to issue utban renewal bonds has been repealed in exchange
for an equivalent increase in the city's Capital Improvement Bond authorization
and the authority to use a portion of this authorization for redevelopment
activities. (Section Chapter 513 of the Laws of Minnesota, 1988.) The
17
q�-333
q�j-333
maximum amount of Capital Iinprovement Bond financing availatrte for
redevelopment projects is $b�5t?��3��;T�x:P��S6�x
P-8 Residential Strcet Paving
� • �• - - - - -
... - - • •••----• ---- -. ... ... . . - •-° -
Y. � .. �\ .. _ " .� .. � __.. ... _. . _._ ' '- . � �
, ��� �� . __. � _ _.' ... ..
1 _ � � _ � � • _ � • _ _
� With the conclusion of the sewer sepazation project, a new policy is needed to
continue paving oiled and old paved streets. The CIB Committee adopted a
resolution on 7une 9, 1994, calling for converting to a pay-as-you-go program.
According to figures developed by the CIB Committee, a pay-as-you-go program
funded through assessments would save property taxpayers money by eliminating
interest and bond sale costs as well as by permitting tax-exempt property to shaze
the costs of the program. City Council File 941427 calls for finishing the street
paving in 13-I S yeazs and calls on the city adminishation and the CTB Committee
to recommend a plan for financing the program on a pay-as-you-go basis for
Council consideration in eazly 1995. The Pazks Commission recommends
including parkways that need reconsYruction when they abut or ate included in a
street paving project area. The Planning Commission believes parkways should
be designed and reconstructed as a unit.
�0
18
Companion policy to ensure both paving and lighting of residenUai streets.
�
�
P-10 Rain Leader Aiswnnecrion in City Facilities
� In order to abate storm water overflows into the Mississippi River, capital
improvement bonds financing will be appropriated to disconnect rain leaders from
City buildings and other facilifies, including recreation fields. � O°=.� -, ^'���
79AR i�n tn �lln nnn ..,.... �., .,_ _,. •.,.a e i a a. :° :'
� rr r �3���X�2
� ae�ds4�i�"� �a�ou� � s�epaz�e�� •� �tuig � �a#a �f si���
�
,�
�
�
��
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
� The driving force behind rainleader disconnection has been Saint Paul's National
Pollutant Dischazge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. This permit expires on
December 31, 1995, after which there can no longer be any bypasses of untreated
sewage to the Mississippi River. Failure to meet this federally mandated
requirement may result in substantial fines and fiirther legal action against the
City of Saint Paul. This language is proposed by the Department of Public
Works to strengthen and raise the visibility of this activity. 'fhe Pazks and
Recreation Commission supports strengthening this policy, noting that pazk and
recreation facilities ar not eligible under the CSSP.
P-I1
P-12
P-13
Financing for Preliminary Studies
The City mav finance studies such as environmental impact statements or
engineering studies that examine altemative designs for a specific project if the
specific capital improvement has been approved for inclusion in the Tentative
Program of Commitments. Needs assessments aze not appropriate capital
improvement budget expenditures. Studies that examine altemative uses for
specific sites or capital facilities are not appropriate capital improvement budget
expenditures unless they are necessary components of a major citycvide project
to which the ciTy has made a virtual commitment. Such a project shall be
included in the Tentative Program of Commitments only upon the
recommendation of both the Planning Commission and the CIB Committee. The
Planning Commission's recommendation shall be based on a preliminary study,
performed by the Planning Commission, which indicates the need for a more
detailed study of altematives. Long-term debt should not be used to finance
studies for such projects.
Duplication of Services
Projects that duplicate existing public or private services that are available to the
same population within the given geographic area shall not be funded.
Assessment Policy
A summary of the city's pu6lic improvement assessment policy is contained in
Appendix E.
�;�- 333
� 19
�5 - 333
�:�� :;.��:�����
� Reflects recent City Council policy decision. Letters in support of this policy
were received from the Sustainable Resource Center and the Environment and
Energy Resource Center.
�! 15 ,: �eadear �cr���riel�iSan ,u ��ly ���iiiises
�
�
Suggested by the Public Works Department.
�i
�
,
�
3.2.0 EVALUATION POLICIES
If a proposed project is eligible for capital financing, its merits must be evaluated. The
CIB Committee evaluates the merits of proposals using a rating sheet that assigns points
based on the Evaluation Policies of the CAP.
The Evaluation Policies aze closely linked to the CAP's Strategic Goals (Chapter 2.0).
� In essence, the Evaluation Policies define indicators that enable the CIB Committee to
determine how well a proposed project fulfills the Strategic Goals.
�
�
�
�
�
�
� Shortens and updates language.
3.2.1 PLANNING EVALUATION POLICIES
The Planning Evaluation Policies aze organized according to which ofthe Planning Goals
(G-1 through fr3 fa-d in Chapter 23.1) they most closely support.
E-1 through �3 �: �.• Policies ReZating to G-1: To provide Saint Paul residents and
employers with a basic level of city services.
E-1 Level oF Service
In evaluating proposed capital improvement projects, the following priorities shall
be observed:
I. First Priority: Prevent Hazardous Conditions
�
�
�
�
�
�
This category includes projects that address immediate threats to life, health,
or safety. It also includes projects that prevent or correct hazardous situations
and/or critical breakdowns, and limit the City's exposure to liability. Most of
the capital improvements in this category aze required to prevent emergencies.
� �e�uit I'rrurity: F'r�anrl �i�s tt�, er �tasic, ��i�e1
21
�5 - 333
tv�cu �n�^..^:....� ^•�... � .t Dl .. /_,...i.. /!_ i .G_,,..,.w i- o :_ n�.__.__ � o ,,. .v_
,a rl •. rc „ n a ., c «w n• i � �,. i� n:., n�..... ��'+� P13Tlrilllg
Evaluation Policies and Fiscal Evaluation Policies shall receive equivalent emphasis.
q5- 333
�: :�'��rd Prie��#�:;�ziit�i�z��z#s�ii�,g Ba��;,;�r"c�s
4. Fourth Priority: Maintain Support System for Basic Services
Maintaining quality basic services requires an adequate support system and/or
set of backup facilities, such as adminisirative offices and facilities for
communication, storage, training and education, and repair and maintenance.
Capital improvements in this category should directly support the ability of
City govemment to provide services efficiently and effectively.
E-2
5. Fifth Priority: Provide Above-Standard Services
The last category peRains to the conslruction of new facilities or additions to
existing capital facilities that result in a level of service that exceeds that
which has been defined as "standazd" for capital functions in an adopted ciTy
plan or policy. Such expansion of services may be advisable in order to
support targeted neighborhood revitalization, It may also be allowed if the
beneficiaries of the project pay for the additional service costs tluough special
assessments. An example of a project in this priority category could be extra
decorative street lights in a commercial azea.
� Based on a comment received, the Planning Commission recommends
switching the second and third priorities to reflect the need to maintain the
quality of life and tax base in all azeas of the city by providing them with
basic service levels.
Program for Capital Improvements (PCn
In evaluating proposals for capital projects, the following priorities shall be
observed:
1. First Priority: Projects that closely conform to the PCI in terms of scope,
timing, cost and/or fmancing.
2. Second Priority: Projects that aze included in the PCI but differ significantly
from the PCI in terms of swpe, timing, cost, and/or fmancing.
3. Third Priority: Projects that are not included in the PCI.
22
�
�
�
E-3 Departmental Evaluation
In evaluating proposals for capital projects, the following prioriries shail be
observed:
� l. First Priority: Projects that departments identify as critical to the fulfillment
of their mission during the upcoming capital budget cycle. The relevant
department must explain why it regazds the proposed project as critical.
�
�
2. Second Priority: Projects that departments identify as high priorities, although
not critical to the fulfillment of their mission during the upcoming capital
budget cycle.
3. Third Priority: Projects that departments identify as low priorities.
� 4. Fourth Priority_ Projects that deparhnents identify as 6eing of questionable
y validity. The relevant deparhnent must explain why it regazds the proposal as
having questionable validity.
� E�4:�5 System Integrity
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
In evaluating proposals for capital projects, preference shall be granted to projects
that contribute to the integrity of capital systems or functions by creating
appropriate linkages between their existing components. An e�mple of such a
project could be a bicycle trail between two pazks. Projects that damage the
integriTy of capital systems or functions by removing important components from
them shall be penalized An example of such a project could be the conversion
of an important piece of pazk land to another use.
�-�re��8 ��:�':�1�tit��?.E�$: Policies Relating to G-2: To support the careful
management of Saint Paul neighborhoods, each according to its own best potential.
E=5 .€s-H District Plans and f�ihelt` S�n}1 Area Plans
, e.�
In evaluating proposals for capital projects, preference shall be granted to projects
�18t rjrmr ••a..�1.1., ......a«l.,.w., f.. �.IC.iI:.... �L.� .. •�.. 1.•,, ti.... ci_x io�caxr',41T£S
J S Po°n'°'°°J�° : �... .
...> ....,_ ._ ............:................... . . � .......,..: ..:.._-:..:..:..:.:..---:-..,::.:.:-:.�: :-.:::.....::;
�leia�; District Plans (as adopted by District Councils)
. .. .
se�eAet3Es-e€� small azea plans� �3s ��i' �3ty �t#Tt�cilll�r"1 xp�'itcz�d pi2tt�.
This preference is followed by projects that �et�eHSi�eb�y c�eai�� contribute to
fulfilling general objectives of �eleva��
�9� plans. Projects that demonstrably conflict with
District Plans or small azea plans iir;��ek`:�i�? ��ii�2riiJtf3l�ti��riii�?ed;�FI�s shall
be penalized. Projects that have a neutral or indeterminate impact relative to this
objective shall neither be penalized nor given preference.
Simplifies and consolidates two previous policies for plans that cover subazeas of
the city.
i 23
q5-333
q5 - 333
�=�',� District Council Ranking
The priorities of District Councils shall be included in evaluating proposals for
capital projecu.
�J
sl.... ��:..«,..�..t «,. .1... G.1�77�.._.. ..r ,.i,•.,,..:.,.� .t... H... n• 1.
a J �nT+
dr*c•iQnnterl — _:... _„a,...,,t,.....,,..,. ., n..:,...:�. .,.a,.. i
� r 7 Y�
Di.... ...7 �.:..�: T T1....
D e.,:�..1: .,d,. A ..t:.... D.. ..a .. �
This policy has been incorporated into E-5, District Plans and Sxi� €�t�iet Area
Plans.
�7?;�9 Housing
��
In evaluating proposals for capital projects, preference shall be granted to projects
that demonstrably support the mainYenance and upgrading of the city's existing
sound housing stock, while seeking to improve deficient housing and to generate
construction of new, affordable housing choices in chazacter with the
neighborhoods surrounding them. Projects that demonstrably conflict with this
objective shall be penalized. Projects that have a neutral or indeterminate impact
relative to this objective shall neither be penalized nor given preference. As
directed by the City Council, HRA and PED will develop housing strategies and
housing programs that will create housing opportunities for all incomes to creaYe
long term neighborhood stability. The city-wide home ownership goal will be
,, ��u�n ... �c.ti�
� �� .,:n e.., snoi ... -..:;:» .
.. .:,. _ ,.. .....
o e B--feii Szab--�v�r-o�vmv 3... . 3�:'. .' ... .,.. . �' :.r :.,
. .
Ptait, acixapt�tl, a�tisiiaily 1� fii� �ity �ot�it. Preference will be given to projects
_ -
that support these City Council adopied Housiag Goals.
Rather than list specific figures, the Planning Commission recommends that the
policy goals incorporate the annually adopted city goals.
� �8 Historic Preservation
In evaluating proposals for capital projects, preference shall be granted to projects
that demonstrably contribute to historic preservation. Projects that demonstrably
conflict with this objective shall be penalized. Projects that have a neutral or
indeterminate unpact relative to this objective shall neither be penalized nor given
preference.
si�
�>:�`.�:�"��Q: Policies Relating to G-3: To ensure a supportive environment for
businesses & jobs.
�� �-}-}- Job Creation
In evaluating proposals for capital projects, preference shal] be granted to projects
that demonstrably support the creation or retention of a substantial number of new
jobs in Saint Paul or job opportunities for Saint Paul residents. Projects that
�
�
�
�
i
�
t
��
�
�
;�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
demonshably conflict with this objective shall be penalized. Projects that have
a neutral or indeterminate impact relative to this objective shall neither be
penalized nor given preference.
�:=:��3 � Business Investment
In evaluaring proposals for capital projects, preference shall be granted to pro}ects
that demonstrably stimulate substanrial new business investment in Saint Paul.
Projects that demonstrably conflict with this objective shall be penalized. Pmjects
that have a neutrai or indeterminate impact relative to this objective shall neither
be penalized nor given preference.
3.2.2 FISCAL EVALUATION POLICffiS
The CIB Committee evaluates the merits of proposats using a rating sheet that assigns
points based on the Evaluation Policies of the CAP. Fiscal Evaluation Policies derive
from the Fiscal Goals (G-5 in Chapter 23.2). Pianning Evaluation Policies and Fiscal
Evaluation Policies receive equivalent emphasis.
E-12 Impact on Operating Budget
In evaluating the merits of each proposai:
1.
2. Projects that will result in an increase in city operating and maintenance costs
will be penalized.
3. Projects that have a neutral or indeterminate impact relative to this objective
shall neither be penalized nor given preference.
25
�5-333
� Changes reflect the renumbering required for the addition of a new goal and
deletion of policy.
��-333
,�
E-13
New language suggested by Public Works Department to strengthen policy.
ImpaM on City Revennes
In evaluating the merits of each proposal:
1. Projects that increase revenue to the ciTy will be given special consideration.
2. Projects that teduce revenue to the city witl be penatized.
3. Projects that have a neutral or indeterminate impact relative to this objecrive
shall neither be penalized nor given preference.
$-14 Grants
The ciTy shatl actively seek grants from other units of government or the private
sector to fmance projects that are consistent with adopted city plans and policies
and the priorities of the city. Special considerarion shall be given to capital
improvement requests that wiil be used as a match for such grants if the project
does not result in an increase in city operaring and maintenance costs and if fhe
project does not reduce revenue to the city. The possibility of a potential grant
should not automatically create special consideration and higher prioriries to act
decisively outside the normal capital improvement budget process. Proposats will
still need to be determined on a case by case basis.
E-15 Private Investment
Capital irreprovement proposals that ]everage committed private inveshnent will
be given special consideration. Projects designed specifically as incentives to
private development or redevelopment should meet the following criteria:
1_ Leveraee euidelines: Minimum ]everaging is 1:6 (each public dollar should
leverage at least 6 private dollazs). This ratio may be as low as 13 if the
project:
a. is directly associated with neighborhood/city partnership effoRs;
b. creates permanent jobs for city residents;
c. is d'uectly related to development of low and moderate income housing;
d. is directly �elated to conservafion of nonrenewable energy resources or
development of energy altematives; or
e. includes adequate space for a licensed child caze center as part of the
project.
2. Return on investment: A project associated with a numbered exceprion to the
Ieverage poIicy is subject to the following minimaI retum policies:
26
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
��
�
�
�
�
�
O
�
�
a. The retum in terms of tax revenues cannot be less than the cost of
addirional services required by the project; and
b. Additional taz revenues generated from the project must be sufficient to
repay the city's inveshnent over the lifetime of the asset provided.
� A comment was received that "The leverage guidelines given...do not appear to
correspond to guidelines in use for other ciTy prograws. In addition, it is
appropriate to assess all projects, not just redevelopment projects involving private
inves�nent, to show leverage or at ]east a long term positive impact on tax base
or surrounding properry values." The Planning Commission recommends no
changes to the policy.
�16 Acquisirion
A project that involves acquisition may be given the same priority as a project
that does not if:
1. The acquisition is related to public development or reuse and:
a. Right-of-way of easements are necessary;
b. The parcel(s) have been previously identified for conversion to pazk use
if they become available; or
c. The pazcel(s) have tax exempt status and a use that is consistent with city
plans, policies and priorities has been cleazly identified.
2. The acquisition is related to private development or reuse and:
a. The proposed reuse is consistent with city plans, policies and priorities
and:
1)
2)
There is a reasonable expectation that development will occur in
the immediate firture; or
There is an economic advantage to the city to acquire the
property and the city can dispose of it within the reasonably
foreseeable future.
� A comment was received that the rating sheet used for CIB projects appeazs to
conflict with this policy. The following changes were recommended to clarify the
policy:
The acquisition is related to development or reuse, and a use that
is consistent with policies and plans has been identified. EYamples
include:
a. Right-of-way of easements aze necessary;
b. The pazcel(s) have been previously identified for conversion to pazk use
if they become available; or
27
��-333
q5-333
a The pazcel(s) have taz exempt status and a use that is consistent with ciry
plans, policies and prioriries has been cleazly idenrified.
d. The proposed reuse is consistent with city plans, policies and
priorities and:
1) There is a reasonable eacpectation that development wili occur in
the immediate future; or
2) There is an economic advantage to the city to acquire the
properiy and the city can dispose of it within the reasonably
foreseeable future.
The Planning Commissions recommends no change to this policy.
�17 Joint Use / Consolidation of Facilities
E-18
E-19
Proposals that consolidate e�sting city facilities and proposals for facili$es that
will be financed and operated by tfie city and anotfier agency, or by more than
one operating department or division within the city, will be given special
consideration if tfie proposed facility:
1. is consistent with city plans, policies and priorifies;
2. can be constructed and operated more efficiently and effectively at less cost
to the city tUan separate facilities;
3. does not result in an increase in city operating or maintenance costs or reduce
revenue to the city; and
4. will result in shared operating and maintenance support of tlte facility if jointly
used.
Continuation Pmjects
The funding needs of a capital improvement project that received a prior budget
appropriarion for construction plans or a consYruction phase normally have priority
over a new project or program allocation. Feasibility studies are not prior
commitments. Acquisition and preliminary design do not constitute prior
commitments unless financing for construction plans has been approved and
included in the CIB Committee's schedule of tentative fuhue commitments.
Annual programs are not considered continuation projects.
Programming and Phasing
A proposed project should be adequately programmed and phased. This means
that:
1. A proposal that is justified by city plans, policies and priorities and is
coordinated with other improvements at a cost saving to the city will be
encouraged.
28
�
�
�
i
�
2. A project must be timed with other improvements planned for the area within
the nea�t five years.
3. Only the amount that can reasonably be expected to be expended in the budget
yeaz will be budgeted. Money required t4 complete the project will be
identified in the schedule and will constitute a tentative commitment subject
to CiTy Council adoption of a budget appropriation for each yeaz of the
project.
E-2� Use
The extent to which a project will be used will be taken into consideration. Also,
� efforts shall be made to ensure that projects meet the needs of the economically
disadvantaged. This means that:
� 1. The greater number of people served by a project, the greater the consideration
that should be given to a project. Administrative units shall be considered
separately from neighborhood facilities.
�
�
2. Projects used yeaz-round will be given greater consideration than projects used
primarily on a seasonal basis.
E-21 Fiscal Impact Analysis
� Proposals that involve a new service or expanded level of service must include
as part of the proposal an analysis of the impacts of the project on the city's
operating costs and revenues.
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
3.3 FINANCIAL POLICIES
Financial Policies are used to determine what source of fmancing should be used for
particulaz projects. Numerous financing sources for capital projects are available to the
city. However, many of them are eannarked to be used only for certain types of projects.
By assigning the most narrowly targeted financing sources to the best projects, the CIB
Committee is able to recommend financing of the optimal package of projects.
F-1 Financing Sources
Determination of which financing source is most appropriate for each of the ciTy's
capital improvement budget priorities will be made as follows:
Recommended capital improvements that are subject to assessment will be so
assessed under the city's Special Assessment Policy. The policies currently
in effect were adopted on December 23, 1976 as Council File No. 268302 and
amended June 17, 1980 by Council File No. 275110; May 17, 1984 by
Council File No. 84-632; at� February 11, I986 by Council File No. 86-162;
��°�ebrttar�;;"�, ���4;�Zy_�rtt�l f�9t�.N�3 �±4-�3�. The policies that
determine the assessmentrates on storm sewer, lighting and sheet assessments
are modified by Council Files 90-1459, 91-1733 and similaz resolutions which
29
15- 333
���333
will occur yearly thereafter. These escalate the assessments based on the
previous years Minneapolis/Saint Paul Urban Consumer Price Index.
2. Recommended capital improvements located on Municipal State Aid, County
Aid or Minnesota Trun[c Highway routes and eligible for one or more of these
fmancing sources wiil be fmanced to the extent altowable with money
allocated Yo the city specifically for these routes.
3. Recommended capital improvements that aze eligible for metropolitan, state
or federal programs or private grants should be so Snanced. If appropriate,
CDBG or CIB money may be used to provide local matching funds.
4. Recommended capitat improvements that can be financed with specific
bonding authority may be so recommended if CiTy Council has ittdicated its
intenfion to use such authority. Recommended capital impmvements that can
be fmanced with revenue bonds or revenue from an existing Tax Increment
District should be so financed.
5. Recommended capital improvements or portions thereof and prograzus eligibte
for CDBG financing should be so financad.
6. Recommended capital improvements that cannot be financed with money
govemed by paragraphs 1. through 5. will be considered for Capital
Improvement Bond Financing.
� Adds policy dealing with existing brick streets and granite curbs. A comment
was made that "CDBG funds are intended to be supplemental to rather than a
replacement for 1oca1 CIB dollars, so F 2.5 should be revised or eliminated." The
Planning Commission finds that the golicy ensures the supplementing of CI$
funds with CDBG and recommends no change.
>:... .. . ... . .
F-2 ' �E►�is�i��i� If�I
�'ripgra�us
.: : .. ..........:. ..:
meet the federal guidelines issued by HUD. This means that:
Projects must be included in the list of eligible activities contained in the
federal regulations.
2. Projects must either principally benefit low and moderate income persons,
eliminate slums and blight, or meet a community need having a particulaz
urgency.
. ..
- •-•- -- •-- ----• - - -• �-• - - •- - ------ •- - -- -�
30
�
�
�
�
�J
�
�
�
��
��
F-3
Changes take into account new consolidated planning requuements. A comment
received objected that the 'special consideration' for top priority capital projects
in the consolidated plan should be no different than that given to projects that
carry out district and small area plans. Those federally funded projects should be
required to demonshate that they aze consistent with relevant district and small
azea plans. The Planning Commission agrees and recommends deleting the new
last sentence of ¶ 3.
Bond Financing
Guidelines for the use of bond financing aze as follows:
1. State law limits the sale of Capital Improvement Bonds to $1?;��3t�;0�T�'att
:.:
1:�:`�tir�"�1`�,�t?4sQQ(1' iii;::t99�. However ;.. ..,.,.,._a....,.,. __.:.,. .,.,. , n�, ��
,
. ... .. . ....... ...... .... . :;,
Joint Debt Advisory Committee r°°'LC........ u,..,,... .,,e rro �,.� ...:...... ....
' te��i�iiae€�t€� limiting CIB
bOnding to $13,650,000 in �nnn _„a rin acn nnn ::: innc ����:� ���� in
order to stabilize the ciTy's annual debt service cost.
2. The city will issue special street assessment revenue bonds as required to
finance the assessable portion of str�et paving. Debt service on the bonds will
be paid by benefitted property owners. The exact amount of bonding wili be
determined by the specific projects scheduled and will be contingent on the
amount of federal, state and city construction money available for sewer
sepazation.
3. The city may issue Municipal State Aid revenue bonds in order to finance
� Wamer and Shepazd Road reconstruction if a financing plan for completion
of these roads is approved by the Mayor and City Council.
�
�
4. The use of revenue bonds to finance public improvement commitments for
��insin� ant2 economic development projects is preferred over other financing
sources. The city may consider using taY increment, taxable bonds, or tax-
exempt revenue bonds for the following projects:
a. Riverfront development;
r�
�
b. Downtown parking proposals;
c. Other project-specific public redevelopment costs that leverage
significant private, state or federnl investment�;tir;
i1 Aehi�ve ��€��ii �avbi� p3i�se�j�vs;xand'pP�it�s
�
�
Such bond issues may be general obligation bonds if there is dedicated
revenue sufficient to cover the interest and principal payments and if there is
31
�5 - 333
� :: : ��_ . -�' Y . '� �:_ : :: ' - `
q5 -333
additional financing other than properiy ta�c revenues to secure the payment of
debt service.
0
F-4
F-5
�
Clarifies and updates policy.
Taa Increment Financing
Guidelines for the use of tax increment financing aze as follows:
I. Revenue projections by consultant: revenue projections prepazed by City staff
and bond undenvriters for all tas increment proposals should be analyzed by
the City's fscal adviserin order to determine reasonableuess.
2. Debt service from bond sale proceeds: capitalized interest will be used for the
payment of debt service for tas increment fmancing bonds only when tas
increment revenues are insufficient. Capitalized interest for bond-financed tas
increment projects will be limited to no more than the first three years after
the sale of bonds. �
3. Other costs funded from bond sale proceeds: all other costs relating to any tas
increment proposal may be 6nanced with bond proceeds and incladed in the
justification of each proposal. These costs include, but aze not limited to:
design, acquisition and relocation, construction, bond counsel fees, fiscal
adviser fees, credit enhancement costs, reserve funds, other costs of
insurance, and staff time.
HRA General Fund
The HRA General Fund wil] be used to provide loans for redevelopment and
economic development activities throughout tke city including acq¢isition,
clearance, relocation, rehabilitation, public improvements, project loans, working
capital loans, and fmancing a public or privaYe pazking facility or a child care
facility.
The use of the FIRA General Fund is govemed by the state municipal housing and
redevelopment law (Minn Statutes, Chapter 469 and supplemented by Chapter 376
relating to tocal housing and economic deve[opment programs).
HRA Development Fund
The HRA Development Fund was established in 1983 in the resoluUon
authorizing the sale/leaseback of the Civic Center (HRA Resolution 83-10/13-2).
Like the F3RA General Fund, the purpose of the HRA Development Fund is to
provide loans to finance redevelopment and economic development acrivities
throughout the city including acquisition, clearance, relocation, rehabilitation,
public improvements, project loans, working capital loans, and financing of a
public or private pazking facility or a child care facility.
However, at least 50% of the HRA Development Fund must be used for
redevelopment activities within the boundaries of the 7th Place Redevelopment
Area and Ta�c Increment District (roughly bounded by St. Peter and Market St.
32
�
�
�
F-7 Rehabilitation Loan Funds
to the west, l lth St. and 9th St. to the north, Robert St. and Jackson St. to the
east, and Sth St. and 4th St. to the south).
� City bond money used to provide residenrial and commercial rehabilitaYion loans
shall be recycled for addirional loans as the original loans aze repaid according
to the guidelines adopted by the Saint Paul City Council. CDBG money used to
provide residenrial and commercial rehabilitation loans, which return to the
� CDBG program as program income, shall be appropriated from the program
income line item to provide new loans as the original loans aze repaid.
�
F-8
Sale/Leaseback
�
�
[.:
�
�
�
�
F-9
0
F-10
Before any sale/leaseback agreements will be approved by City Council
resolution, the following canditions must be met:
1. The feasibiliTy of the proposal must be analyzed by an independent fiscal
consultant chosen by the city. Costs for such analysis must be borne by the
initiator of the project if other than a city agency.
2. The advice of the Long Range Capital Improvement Budget Committee must
be obtained.
3. If the repurchase of the facility is part of the proposal, the package should be
structured to minimize repurchase costs and financing must be feasible.
Tax Abatement
The city will not consider pti��tty tax abatement as a developmenU
redevelopment tool unless so defermined by the Mayor, and by CiTy Council
resolutlon- °°a ..,:,,� .,.., ..., _.: _r..._ w • a , •
""r
�..«.:: ::�»�:.... a„ .,,i,..,...�... ir,,....,.:i c:i,, wr,. ��<on�� [�:
.:;... .- :......::.... ...: .. ,.. ,
..,.. ..,� ,.., 9,�,... . . � u[,:ac�tfxc���e`"R?Ii}i
,... .. , ... :...... . ....:..
sta€e'tai5. "
Clarifies policy.
Priorities and Procedures for Disbursing Capital Improvement Project
Financing
In order to maximize allowable interest earnings on cash investments, fund and
� activity managers and the departmental accountants will conform with the
foliowing when paying bills for capital projects:
�
An interdepartmental invoice for transfer of money between funds will
accompany each pay voucher that equals or exceeds $50,000;
� 2. An interdeparhnental invoice for transfer of money between funds will be
completed at the end of each month to cover all pay vouchers that totalled less
than $50,000.
�
� 33
�5-333
�5 -333
3. If a capital project has multiple sources of financing availahle, spending will
be chazged against funds in the following order, subject to the qualifications
listed below:
a. Reimbursable grant funds--these funds should be spent first with prompt
request for reimbursement;
b. Bond funds sold in 1987 or after;
c. Cash grants that have interest limitations;
d. Bond funds sold prior to 1987;
e. Cash grants that do not have interest limitarions.
The following qualifications should also be applied:
Grants with time restrictions should be spent within the allowable period.
If the budget for a project exceeds the projecYs final cost, cash grants
should be used to the full extent allowable, leaving other financing
sources available for reappropriation.
F-11 Reporting, Review and Reappmpriation Requirements for Capital
Improvement Projects
The following reporting and review requirements will be used to monitor all
capital improvement projects to help ensure that federal azbitcage requirements for
bond proceeds are met and to derive maYimum benefit from capital financing:
1. Each department shall prepare an annual capital improvement project status
report and present it to the Saint Paul Long Range Capital Improvement
Budget Committee and City Council by'°° ,`°°a �.a.. ic ����;��
of each calendaz yeaz. The report shall indicate the current status of each of
the deparhnent's capital improvement projects including e�cpenditures,
encumbrances and outstanding balances �si�rg-set�rse•
2. Financing from all sources for capital improvement projects or programs may
be subject to reappropriafion if the project or program has not shown
substantial progress towazd completion at the end of the calendar yeaz in
which the ��Fesee�s-weFe �2i�'g;�;i!�s received.
3. When adequate progress is not being made on a project, the responsible
departrnent or agency must justify continuation of the pmject to the Saint Paul
L,ong Range Capital Improvement Budget Committee. The CIB Committee
may then recommend to the Mayor and City Council appropriate action on a
project-by-project basis. Recommendations may include: 1) to allow
additional time for implementation; 2) to abandon the project and reappropriate
the financing; or 3) to rephase the project's financing and reappropriate a
portion of the cnrrent financing.
34
�
�
�
�
0
F-12
4. Via zesolution, if c":-; ': .
�.��z#ts�;��erx�� the City Council �as �
identified any new projects, the CIB Committee would also consider these
projects as part of the reallocation recommendations of the remaining
dollars.
Revisions to clarify policy recommended by Budget Office.
Project Phasiqg
� Proposals must be reatistically phased if the conditions of Po]icy F-11 aze to be
met. In order to assist deparhnents in their phasing, approved construction
projects that are phased over several years shall not be required to submit more
than one proposal application for task force review unless the original
� appropriation specifically indicates that the appropriation does not constitute a
commihnent to future fmancing.
!_�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
LJ
�
�
�
F-13
0
F-14
Multi-yeaz projects will be required, however, to present estimated construction
costs to the CIB Committee after design is complete and before bids aze let to
have continuation of project financing included in the capital improvement
budget.
Out-of-C�cle Appropriations for New Projects
Requests for out-of-cycle appropriations for new projects shall not be considered
individually unless an urgent health and safety hazard exists. All requests for
new projects shall be held and considered in compazison with each other, and
with the next priorities identified during the last proposal review cycle before any
recommendations aze made by the CIB Committee. It shall be the responsibility
of the CIB Committee to identify a time line and procedures for reviewing such
proposals.
A comment received questioned if policies F-11,F-12,and F-13 aze being
foliowed, and if not, suggested deleting the policies, following them, or revising
and following them. The Planning Commission believes the policies aze being
followed and recommends no changes.
Increased Costs for Projects
If detailed estimates for a project as proposed exceed the amount budgeted and
programmed, or if actual bids exceed the budgeted cost, no part of the project
shall begin until financing for the entire project has 6een budgeted or
programmed.
If detailed estimates or bid costs exceed the budgeted and programmed project
cost by more than 25 percent or $100,000, whichever is less, the project must be
reevaluated by the CIB Committee in light of all e�sting priorities. The CIB
Committee may recommend that additional fmancing be appropriated for the
project, that the scope of the project be reduced, and/or that the project be
deferred until the next proposal review cycle to determine whether the project is
warranted, given increased costs.
35
q5-333
�5-333
F-15 Multi-Year Pmjection of Capital Financing Sources
Appendix F is a projection of all capital improvement financing sources for the
years �994-�ee�gk-�498 :T?<� ��iti�s2�. T'he five-yeaz tentative program
included in the biennial capital budget shaIl not �ceed these funding projections.
�:=�_-'.�::��e<��i�sF'ae�'�`it��s;�l�p'.' ::�'� "....:::>:.::.:,;
.:.... ::.: .. :.. � . ,::. �:.: .:. .. ..... . ,: .. ... ... :.. :. ,... . :.,. ,...: ..
,.,.,._�€3`. ............... ...:,... ._...,.:,:..
� Recognizes a new fund source and authorizes its use.
36
�
�
�
�
�
�
�_ I
�
�
�
°�-333
4.0 GUIDELINES FOR CAPTTAL PROGRAMDIING
Guidelmes for Capital Programming aze used to determine what types of projects aze to
be included in the ten-yeaz Program for Capital Improvements (PCn. The PCI is the
City's detailed plan for future capital investment. The guidelines that govern the PCI aze
not, strictly speaking, "capital allocation policies" because the aetual allocation of capital
resources is recommended by the CIB Committee and adopted by the City Council.
Akhough conformance with the PCI is an unportant criterion for determining the aetual
allocation of capital, it is not the only one.
The intent of the following guidelines is to ensure that the PCI reflects a reasonable and
prudent initial assessment of the City's capital priorities over the next ten years.
PCI-1 Conformance to Project Policies
All projects included within the PCI shall conform to the Project Policies of the
1996-2000 Capital Aliocation Policy.
PCI-2 Years ' nnz "�' °�°� �99�sw:1i197 of the � no��� �995: ��3 PCI
Yeaz -1-934 :I��S of the PCI shall consist of budgeted projects; Yeaz -1s19-5 ;I�;7
of the PCI shall consist of projects recommended by the CIB Committee for
financing in -1-g9-5 1�?.
PCI-3 Years '°^-�-'�S 1`��98=244#S of the PCI: Tentative Commitments
� Projects that are listed as tentative commitments for yeazs ' O°z��;1�$;2��lQQ
in the adopted �994 1��?� capital budget shall be included in the PCI at the
indicated level of financing.
�
�
�
�
�
PCI-4 Years '°O��-'�^^o I�$::��Q of the PCI: Programming of Projects Other thaq
Tentative Commitments
The Mayor's Office, Budget Section shall provide estimates of the amount of
money expected to be available from Capital Improvement Bonds, Community
Development Block Grants, and other resources that can be estimated accurately
for yeazs '^"�-' 1^�"o I�9$.:2QQ(2 of the PCL If the tentative commitments for
yeazs '°^��-'rS",o }��$=2(�G€� do not exceed the amount of available resources
estimated by the Mayor's Office, Budget Section, departments may identify new
projects to be included in years' ^°�o :��$=2�t4Q of the PCI.
PCI-5 Years 1°° :nviT°o 1:9�,�Zi� of the PCL• Match Between Programmed
Projects and Expected Available Financing
For each of the financing sources identified by the Mayor's Office Budget
� Section in accordance with PCI-4 above, the total amount of money needed to
finance tentative commitments and new projects shal] not exceed expected
available financing.
�
� 37
q5-3�3
PCI-6 Years' °^�� I����tNM of the PCI; Distribution of Capital Tmprovement
Bond and Commanity Devetopment Btock Grant Resources
The following guidelines sball apply to the use of Capital Improvement Bond and
Community Development Block Grant resources:
Except as noted in 2. below, the total percentage distriburion of Capital
Improvement Bonds + Community Development Block Gcants for each
department in � 1998 `;3t� shall be determined in one of the following
ways: .. .....
a. Past Usage: Distribution equal to the total departmental percentage of
Capital ImprovemenY Bonds+CommunityDevelopmentBlock Gtaats for
1988 - 1994, except for those capital functions comprising the former
departrnent of Community Services. For purposes of calculating CIB +
CDBG distributions, Pazks and Open Space, Libraries, and Special
Facility Support will each be considered like any office or department.
b. Future Need: The Planning Commission may modify the percentage
allocations described in l.a. above if it determines that future needs for
the � 1998 ::��tiE) period differ significantly firom past usage. The
Planning Commission shall present findings Yo justify such modificarions.
2. The PIanning Commission shall consider exceptions to 1. above under the
following conditions:
a. If tentative commitments for any given department in �99H-- 1998 -
28�t� already exceed the distribution calculated via the methods described
in 1. above. In this situation, the departmenYs tentative commiffients
shall be honored, no additional projecu may be proposed by the
department, and the Planning Commission sha11 rednce Capital
Improvement Bond + Community Development Block Grant distributions
proportionately for other departments, and shall require other departments
to revise and resubmit proposals as necessary to eliminate aggregate
overprogramming. If the department cannot program the tentative
commitments in the PCI as they appeaz in the adopted capital budget, the
CIB + CDBG allocations for each departrnent will be recalwlated using
method described in l.a. above.
b. Upon approval by the Mayor and Ciiy Council of a plan or policy that
supports a project requiring a lazger fhan normal use of CIB and/or
CDBG resources by the departrnents of Finance, Police, and/or the
Division of Public Health , the Planning Commission may allow those
departments to exceed their normal distribution of Capital Impzovement
Bond and/or Community Development Block Grant resources. If this
situarion occurs, the Planning Commission shall reduce Capital
Improvement Bond distriburions proportionatety for other depattments,
and shall require other departments to revise and resubmit proposals as
necessary to eliminate aggregate overprogramming. No more than one
such project sha11 be programmed for any single year.
38
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
��
�
�
��
�
�
�
�5-333
PCI-7 Years ' ^^�-'�
��2�f�Q of the PCI: Unknown Financing Sources
The Planning Commission shall not include projects with unknown financing
sources in the Progrun for Capital Improvements for the '°°�o ��$-Z�4fl
period. .. .. _ .
PCI-8 Years '^^��,�^^,� ��itf€tl���� of the PCI: Distribution of Eapected
.....: ........:: ...
Available Financing
The Planning Commission shal] not place limits on the amount of financing or
number of projects indicated as needs by departments for the ' nn�^w� �{#Qp;�
2t#�4k� period. However, the Mayor's Office, Budget Section shall review
pretiminary departmental submissions for the '^^r, ^�,� �{��� ��(� period
and shall note situations where the total level of proposed financing will likely be
unavailable. In these situations, the Planning Commission may direct the
responsible departments to provide justification for their proposals, and may
include such justification in the text of the '^O�—^�, ,t�?�b _�:2�lETt}5 program
,. :..:..:...,....
for Capital Improvements.
PCI-9 Years �nn�� :
1 2ttfl45 of the PCI: Unknown Financing Sources
The Planning Commission may allow projects with unkciown financing sources
to be included in the Program for Capital Improvements for the '^°�^�
2QQ£�1-��1t1(1$ Period.
If this occurs, the text of the Program for Capital Improvements should include an
explanation of why the source of financing is unknown.
39
a��33�
5.0 DEFINTl'IONS
Capital Expenditum - A one time expense required to upgrade or add to the physicai
assets (tand and buiidings} ofthe city. In addition, capital expenditures include incentives
to the private sector to develop or re-develop assets not owned by the ciTy.
Cap'ttal Function - A set of capital facilities and/or programs that together provide a
basic type of service. Saint Paul currently categorizes capital expenditures according to
eleven capital functions: Streets, Street Lighting, Traffic Engineering, Bridges, Sewers,
Pazks and Open Space, Libraries, Housing and Economic Development, Police, Fire and
Safety, and Special Facility Support.
Capitat System - A set of capital functions that aze necessarily coordinated in order to
ensure that the services that each provides are effectively achieved. Saint Paul cuirently
has one capital system - Transportation - composed of four capital functions: Sireets,
Street Lighting, Traffic Engineering, aad Bridges.
Capital Improvement Budget - The annual capital improvement budget shall include
appropriations for all projects to be funded during the budget year that have an estimated
useful life in excess of three years, other than the acquisition of office or mechanical
equipment, vefiicies or mobile equipment, and minor remodeling or repairs of e�cisting
structures. The annual capital improvement budget shall include the proceeds of general
obligation or revenue bonds of the city authorized by law, all aids, grants, and special
revenues received by the city for funding capital improvements, all monies appropriated
by the City Council in the Geneml Fund and Special Fund budgets for capital projects,
and all specia[ financing methods such as tax increment financing, long-term lease
agreements, and sale-leaseback financing. A five yeaz program that identifies the future
costs associated with multi-year capital projecTS and any additional capital projects that
aze scheduled for implementation during the time of the program shall accompany each
annual capital improvement budget.
Capital Maintenance - The replacement, renovation, remodeling and/or retrofitting ofthe
strucYccral parts aad/or service system components of a building, and the man-made
components of an improved site. Structural parts include footings and foundations;
beams, joists, columns; load bearing walls, exterior walls and facade (excluding glass);
stairs, floors, decks, ramps, ceilings; roofs and roofing. Service systetn components
include plumbing, electrical, communications, heating, ventilating, air conditioning,
security systems and elevators; utility mains. Site componenfs include retaining walIs,
lighting, stairs, ramps, sidewatks, railings, fencing, drainage structures, and erosion
control. For maintenance purposes, the most important site components are those whose
condition affects the identified structural parts or service system components.
Operating Budget - The annual operating budget is a 12-month financial plan that
provides for delivery of city services; support and planning for service delivery; routine
maintenance; minor remodeling and repairs of e�sting structures; acquisition of vehicles,
mobile, mechanical, and office equipment; and other activities having an estimated useful
life of less than three yeazs. Primary financing sources for the operating budget are
property taYes, federal and state aids, dedicated revenues, user chazges, and grants.
40
l,
a5-333
� Program Ailocation - A prograzn allocation is a lump sum amount given to fund a series
of capital pro}ects that aze consistent in nature and aze implemented sequentially in time
� until an identified objective is reached. An example of a program allocation is the
combined street and sewer program.
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
Subsidy Allocation - A subsidy allocation is assistance that the city gives to the private
sector as incentive for development or redevelopment of physical assets now owned or
operated by the city. Subsidy allocations include loans, grants, matching funds, or
acquisition and clearance.
Tentafive Program of Commitments - A section of the Capital Improvement Budget
that estimates future annual appropriations needed to complete projects that have been
initiated.
� 41
�
�
APPENDIX A
q5- 333
, CITY OF SAINT PAUL MISSION STATEMENT
(FI20M THE "CTfY OF SAINT PAUL
1991 BUDGET GOALS AND POLICIES")
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
4.1
�
�
�
Ensure the provision of high qualiTy services, which meet the people's priority needs and
which enhance the long term common good of the community within the constraints of
available financing sources and reasonable tasing policies.
CiTy services must:
be responsive to citizen needs and requests;
produce effective results that aze measurable and quantified;
be delivered efficiently, in a manner that is timely, courteous, and cost effective;
be in conformance with applicable laws;
be delivered within the context of high moral and ethical standazds;
foster neighborhood livability, assist in job training job creation, and job
retention; and
involve citizens in the decision making process.
Service delivery includes those that provide public safety, health and general welfaze.
Services are to strengthen all the neighborhoods as places to live, work, play, be educated,
and raise families.
City employees aze essential to the delivery of quality services. The City is committed
to providing a quality work place and quality services to the citizens, business community,
and employees of Saint Paul.
� 43
�5 - 333
APPENI3IX B
PLANS AND POLICIES RELEVANT FOR CAPTTAL BUDGETING
GENERAL ELEMENTS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (Date of Adoprion)
■ Overview of the Plan (1980-81)
■ A Ptan for Land Use (1980-81)*
■ The Implementation Strategy (1980-81)
* Plans now being updated
CAPITAL FUNCTION PLANS AND POLICIES
■ A Plan for Streets and Highways (1980-81)*
■ Transit Plan (1980-81)*
■ A Plan for Bicycles (1978)*
■ Saint Paul Street Lighting Policy (1989)
■ Comprehensive Sewer Plan (1980-81)
■ A Plan for Pazks and Recreation (1985)
■ A Plan for Multi-Service Centers (1976)
■ A Plan for Libraries (1982)*
■ Saint Paul Housing Policy for the 1990s (1990-91)
■ Economic Development Strategy (1990-91)
■ Plan for Fue and Emergency Medical Services (1990-91)
■ Program for Capital Improvements (1992)
* Plans now being updated
DISTRICT PLANS
■ District I Plan (1985)
■ District 2 Plan(1988/92)
■ District 3 Plan (1981)
■ District 4 Plan (1986)
■ District 5 Plan (1979)
■ District 6 Plan (1979)
■ District 6 Land Use Amendment (1981)
■ District 7 Plan (1979)
■ District 7 Plan Update (1983)
■ District 8 Plan (1980)
■ District 9 Plau (1980)
■ District 10 Plan (1980)
■ District I1 Plan (1979)
■ District 12 Plan (1983)
■ District 13 Plan (1978)
■ District ]4 Plan (1979)
■ District 15 Plan (1980)
■ Highland Village Plan Amendment (District 15) (1984)
■ District 16 PIan (1989)
■ Downtown Development Plan (District 17) (1982)
m
�
�
,
�
q5-333
■ Downtown Development Plan—Miller Hospital Site Land Use Amendment
(District 17)
■ Staius of District Plans as Part af Comprehensive Plan (1980-81)
SMALL AREA PLANS
(Ivcludivg ptms wmpiaed for Iimi[ed meas not folmalTy desi�azed'smell mea plms7
FAS ivd�cates Forty-Aae Smdy
� ■ Etna Bumingham Land Use Study (1980)
■ Grand Avenue East Design Guidelines Amendment (District 16) (1983)
■ Grand Avenue West Pazking and Zoning Report (District 14) (1983)
� ■ Grand Avenue Design Guidelines Amendment (District 14 & 16)
■ YOUniversity Avenue Plan (District 11 & 13) (1982)
■ River Corridor Plan (1980/87)
� ■ Downtown Fraznework (1986)
■ Summit Avenue Plan (1986)
■ Smith Avenue Plan (1984)
■ Selby Avenue Plan (1989)
� ■ Lower Cathedral Hill Plan (1988)
■ Lower Dayton's Bluff Plan and FAS (1990)
■ University Avenue Comdor Study (Council Resolution 1990)
� ■ Grand/L,exington Pazking Report
■ Highwood Plan
■ Near East Side Neighborhood Improvement Strategy (1989)
� ■ Fort Road Design Guidelines
■ West Seventh/Chestnut Plan and FAS (1991)
■ White Beaz/Ruth Plan and FAS (1991)
� ■ Wheelock Bluff/Rice Street Plan and FAS (1991)
■ South Saint Anthony Park Plan and FAS (1993)
�
O
��
�
�
�
�
■ Concord/Robert Plan and FAS (1492)
■ Jackson/Arlington Plan (1991)
■ East Grand Avenue Plan
■ Fast Consolidated Area Plan and FAS (1993)
■ Selby/Snelling (1993)
■ Lexington/Hamline
■ Shepard/Davern (1993)
■ Railroad Island and FAS (1994)
Small Area Plans Underway
■ Thomas/Dale Plan and FAS
■ Phalen Village and FAS
■ I,owertown Projects
■ Grand/Avon/Dale Pazking Study
■ Midway Pazkway Plan and FAS
■ Brewery RanView Plan and FAS
■ Franklin/CJniversity Plan and FAS
� 45
�5
APPENDIX C
OVERALL BUDGET GOALS
(FROM THE "CTfY OF SAINT PAUL
1991 BUDGET GOALS AND POLIC'IE5")
GENERAL BUDGET GOALS
GGI Maintain the fiscal integrity of the City's operating, debt service and capital
improvement budgets in order to provide services and to wnstruct and maintain
public facilities, streets and utilities.
GG2 Maintain a responsible and prudent fiscal condition and high bond rating in order
to minimize long-term interest expense when financing capital improvements with
an ongoing systematic bonding prograzn that spreads the cost of the improvements
to benefitting citizens.
GG3 Prepaze and annually refine written goals and policies to guide the prepazation of
financing spending and performance plans for the City budget.
GG4 Coordinate decision making for the capital improvements budget with the
operating budget to make effective use of the City's limited resources for
operating and maintaining faciIities. Require departments, divisions, and offices
to prepaze life-cycle maintenance plans as part of operating budget.
GGS Present budget data to cirizens, City managers, and elected officials in a form that
will facilitate annual budget decisions based on a malri-yeaz s�ategic planning
perspecrive.
GG6
��s�rl
Prepaze and evaluate activity performance plans that relate to financing and
spending plans in the City budget.
Encourage citizen involveraent in the budget decision-making process through
public hearings.
SERVICE LEVEL GOALS
SGl Budget decisions Yo increase a service level or add a new program will be
financed with either a new revenue source or taz increase, or by a deliberate
reduction in, or elimination of existing services.
Base decisions to reduce seroice levels or eliminate programs on citywide
priorities and needs if revenue sources aze inadequate to maintain existing services
at current program levels.
Maintain programming flexibility to address priority user needs based on
historical usage and demographic trends within service areas if a service is
provided at many facilities throughout the city and a service level reduction is
46
�
�
LJ
�
�J
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
q5- 333
necessary.
SGZ Incorporate self reliance in both the day to day operations of the city and the
development of its long range plans.
SG3 Avoid duplication of services and foster cooperation with other units of
govemment. Seek joint use opportunities for public faciliries with both
govemmental units and non-profit organizations when effective service delivery
can be provided at less cost to the City to enhance services.
SG4 Recognize that City employees aze City govemmenYs most valuable asset, and,
as such, their concerns, participation, and morale are crucial to delivering high
qualiTy, efficient services to the residents and taxpayers of Saint Paul.
SGS Employ good management practices when planning for service delivery by
including in budget requests money to pursue activities, such as:
■ office automation and computer applications that increase productivity;
■ equipment modemization;
■ work-flow simplification;
■ risk managemenUemployee safety, and wellness;
■ preventive maintenance;
■ energy conservation;
■ life cycle costing and purchasing of equipment;
■ lease-purchase options for high cost equipment purchases that reduce operating
expenses;
■ performance planning, reporting and evaluation;
■ employee training;
■ employee well being;
■ employee child care; and
■ competitive bidding for certain services.
SG6 Modernize the physical and organizational structure of CiTy deparhnents and
offices to facilitate better management of resources. Create an environment that
encourages innovative problem solving and pursuit of opportunities to improve
service delivery within existing budgets.
� SG7 Provide adequate budget resources to address the long-term program needs for
essential human service delivery coordination, better neighborhoods and economic
development.
�
�
�
�
�
FINANCING GOALS
FGl Finance essential city services or public services under contract that have a
citywide benefit in the budget with revenue sources that aze generated from a
broad base, i.e. property tases, state and federal aids, annual service charges and
franchise fees. Finance responsive services (where the individual served controls
the use of the service) with dedicated revenue and user fees that directly relate to
the level of service provided. Minimize General Fund fmancing assistance to
47
�5�333
those responsive service activities thaY have a common good community benefit
but cannot totally finance expenses with user fees.
FG2 Minimize the impact and use of property taY financing by controlling costs and
by seeking alternative financing for city services that focus on user fees for
responsive services and by the upgrading and/or enhancement of the properiy ta�c
base and aggessive applicarion for state, federal, and other funds as approved by
the Mayor and City Council.
FG3 Refine existing assessmentfinancing formulas and user fee rate structures to more
accurately charge the costs of service provided to the benefitting property owners
and customers served, while being sensitive to the needs of low income people.
FG4 Support federal and state legislarion that provides properiy taz relief and direct
aid to cities, without reliance on regressive forms of taxarion. Strive to eliminate
local funding of regional and state responsibilities. Oppose legislation that
imposes local service mandates without federal, state, or regional funding.
FGS Seek reform of Minnesota property ta�c laws to target property ta�c relief to cities
to reduce tax base disparities, and to more fairly reduce the taz burden disparity
among the different classes of property.
48
�
�
i
�
�
IJ
�J
�
a5-333
:•� �► r�
CAPTfAL FUNCTION ST'RATEGIES
� NOTE: The Planning Commission believes the purpose of these strategies is to help
ciry departments coo�dinate their plans and projects with citywide goals and policies.
Therejore the Commission has not recom�nended changu bared on con:ments seceived
from the public unless the department concurred
CFS1 STREETS
The capital program for streets primarily contains street overlay or reconstruction projects.
Tr�c signal work and street lighting aze included when specified.
'I7ie basic service ►e�el for Saint Paul streets is'ci�r�y defined in "A Plan for Streets
and Highways" (1979), one of three components of the City's Transportation Plan (the
other two transportation components deal with bicycles and mass transit).;;::'�'��s���;a�5
u�lE �e" r�j�erI.by i3�e n� �'�ar�s�r��tr�zi� i�at#�,� ;�'l�en eagecY�cE i�r 1� aifc��€i �n e�ji
� The overall goal of Saint Paul's Transportation Plan is to provide for adequate, convenient
mobilily in transporting goods and people, while conserving energy and protecting the
environment. The basic strategy for accomplishing this goal is to use existing streets and
� highways as effectively as possible, minimizing new roadway construction and putting
greater emphasis altemative modes of transportation including mass transit, pazatransit,
bicycles, and pedestrians. Where feasible and safe, new road construction and major
� street repair on arterial and collector streets and pazkways shall include provision for
__...... ...,.
appropriately marked bicycle lanes, sidewalks, or off-street paths 3�# ��'t�3ii�E,`�'itti #1�
b�� y s� .
a s€�ss;in�p �d:s�c�wal�s:tt�s�altat�c�;�c�t����'�elu�d:i�.t1s� 3�t�aspu�^tatzs�ri
� I'�7��,P1urt The C�ty wants to encourage these altemative forms of transportation. The
Bicycle Advisory Boazd will work with the Admmistration m considerat�on of street and
other cap�tal projects as they affect the current Drafr Bikeway System map.
�
��
�
�
The City relies on a standard functional classification of streets as principal arterials,
, minor arterials (A & B), collectors,;_pASliiqC:�ii�i�zs� and local
streets. The City of Saint Paul is in the process of updating its functional classification
of streets in conjunction with the Metropolitan Council. ![�ifi�r?i�Ye:ii��i°fe�s:y�&TS,:�+3e�
_ ... . __ .. ...... ..... ............ .........::.
aze established on a system basis, i.e., trunk highways aze
to standazds set by the Minnesota Department of Transportation and streets on the state
aid system are subject to state aid standards. Most of the remaining streets aze residential.
The standard residential street width is 32 feet, although this width is modified by
availabte right-of-way, the policy for trees, and other physical features.
Three principal criteria are used to determine if a street is functioning well:
Does the roadway adequately handle the volume and type of traffic expected
to use it?
�
� 49
� � - 333
2. How does the traffic flow affect adjacent land uses?
3. How does the "streetscape" look? Is it a pteasant place to walk, bike or drive?
Because of a slrategic emphasis on the beauty of the streetscape, uees are also an
important component of City street work. Funds for boulevazd tree plan6ng may be
included in pmject proposals, both for reconshucfion projects and for overlay projects.
Pazkway projects aze included under this capital funcrion, although they are also govemed
by the principles stated in CFS6.
Above standard street features such as granite curbing, �sI�-gaviag, exposed aggegate
concrete, and tree grates may be installed if the requesting property owners are willing
to pay the addirional cost to install and maintain these systems as well as the additional
liability involved.
The streets capital funcrion wntributes to neig66orhood management and housing
because area street improvements lead to more maintainable boulevazds. E�cperience has
shown that residents do take increased pride in yazd and even home maintenance
following street improvement. The increasing neighborhood improvements have and aze
having a positive impact.
Street reconstruction contributes to business and jobs as jobs are created by the capital
projects themselves. Beyond that, street projects improve neighborhoods and in turn
foster a supportive area for businesses and jobs. An efficient and welt maintained
transportation system will support Saint Paul businesses who depend on the transportation
system to move goods and services in a cost efficient manner.
The street program conttibutes to the City's fiscal integrity by making maximum use of
the existing street system, providing adequate maintenance and making minor changes.
New routes aze to be added when necessary and with as little disruption as possible. In
practice, most Ciry street work cunently occurs in four situations:
1. Street reconstruction in conjunction with federal, state and county road
projects.
Z. • >
�r#e1'l�;- ;_$Aa� :�:Ci3lt�ftr;:;;(�i�: :;TZ�u�'s�: Street rehabilitation (overlay) or
,.: .... :: ..:>. .. _ . . :. ,
reconstruction resulting from the Department of Public Works Street Condition
Analysis System. This system involves the monitoring of arterial streets on
a two-year cycle and the scheduiing of overlays to proIong the life of the
existing serviceable pavements, and to schedule street reconstruction for
projects for pavements that have failed. The smaller overlay projects are
complete by Public Works Street Maintenance forces. Complerion o€overlays
saves money for the City because rehabilitation is much less expensive that
50
�
, total reconstruction.
� 4.
�5- 333
5. Upon the completion of Wamer and Shepazd Roads and the Sewer Separation
� Program, more emphasis will be placed upon reconstruction, in addition to
rehabilitation, indicated by the street condition survey.
� � Comment received that #5 could be deleted in view of revised #4. (See note at
beginning of Appendix D.)
�
�
E�
�
�J
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
� 51
q5- 333
CFS2 STREET LIGHTING
The capital program for street lighting is comprised of individual lighting projects and
citywide street lighting unprovement programs.
The basic service level for Saint Paul street lights is defined in the "Saint Paul Street
Lighting Policy" (1989).
Standazd street lighting systems consist of high-pressure sodium fixtures, spaced to meet
the Public Works Department lighting standazds for traffic safety (based on the standazds
of the National Illuminating Engineering Society). For reasons of aesthetics, Single
Redesigned Lantern Systems aze standard throughout most of Saint Paul. Bent Straw
£ixtures aze defined as standazd in the downtown/river&ont area, and on expressways and
sh-eets more than 50 feet wide. Above-standazd lighting systems may be installed if the
requesting property owners are willing to pay the extra costs to install and operate these
systems.
Findings of the Saint Paul Street Lighting Policy conclude that historic lantem street lights
contribute significantly to Saint PauPs identity as a community that is aestherically
sensitive and proud of its past. The street lighting program conh to neighborhood
management and housing goals by strengthening each neighborhoods community
. ,..
i entitv and enhancine safetv for residents. 3"4re�:�'tliaf"are°:i�aierni�ri�:t�i:�r�Ri3=is`L4i�
The street lighting program contributes to the business and jobs goal as jobs aze created
by the capital projects themselves. Street lighting projects contribute to improved
neighborhoods and in tum foster a supportive environment for business and jobs.
The street lighting program wntributes to the CiTy's Sscal integrity in that lighting
systems are normally installed in conjunction with street paving projects (and thus,
normally in conjunction with sewer separation). Such coordination reduces wsts
significantly and minimizes the disruption associated with the project. If needed for
safety purposes, less expensive "wood pole" lighting may be installed in needed azeas on
a temporary basis. Energy efficient fixtures are used for all new projects, and to preserve
or improve the quality of existing infrastructure.
52
�
�
�
�
�J
'
,
�
�
�
�
CFS3 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
The capital program for traffic engineering includes projects such as traffic signais, traffic
channelization, and street signage. The program indudes financing for projects that are
created through the traffic engineering section, and also for projects that are done by other
agencies where the City is required to participate in the costs. When traffic engineering
work is required as part of a street reconstruetion or sewer project, the financing is
normally included with the lazger project.
The basic service level for Saint Paul traffic engineering projects is defined by the
Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Based on this manual, the
Departrnent of Public Works implements projects to help improve the safe and efficient
movement of pedestrian and vehicular tr�c through the city, and to maintain the
. . .........:.... ...:..:.:.....;..:..: :;.,:...,. .,:....
integnTy of the existing traffic control systems. `f'#1e';tr.�z�1e �t�g�i��in.g:p�5�,n8[Tt.�i�iie�s
The capital program for traffic engineering contributes to neighborhood management
and housing in two ways. First, it implements traffic improvements designed to improve
safety for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists. Second, the haffic engineering program
enhances efficiency and reduces congestion and improves tr�c flow throughout Saint
Paul neighborhoods.
By enhancing efficiency, reducing congestion, and improving traffic flow throughout Saint
Paul neighborhoods, the traffic engineering capital program contributes to a supportive
environment for business and jobs. An efficiently functioning transpoRation system links
workers with jobs and customers with goods and services.
� The traffic engineering program contributes to the City's tiscal integrity in that
appropriate tr�c engineering projects can extend the life of other components of the
City's infrastructure.
�
�
�
�
r
�
� 53
�5- 333
�5-333
CFS4 BRIDGES
The capital program for bridges includes replacement and rehabilitation projects for
bridges in the city that require such projects. The Public Works Bridge Division is
responsible for inspecting and maintaining approximately 300 bridges in Saint Paul to
protect the safety and welfare of the traveling public. In addition, the Bridge Division is
responsible for inspecting and maintaining atl retaining walls, fences, stauways and guazd
rails in the CiTy's street right-of-way. The primary goal of the Bridge Division is to
eliminate all structura] and geometric deficiencies in bridges and strvctures in Saint Paul,
whether they be City, �uz�t3; State, Raikoad, or privately owned. The Bridge Division
designs new bridges and works with relevant agencies and owners to coordinaYe
maintenance and reconstructions efforts.
The basic service level for Saint Paul bridges is established by state and federal
regulations.
Minnesota state law requires al] municipalities to inspect and rate all public bridges
annually. The Bridge Division staff inspects and prepares a Bridge Inspection Report and
a Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDO"I) Structure Inventory Sheet for each
bridge in the city. These reports are submitted to the MnDOT Bridge Engineer for
MnDOT's inventory and to determine the sufficiency raring. The sufficiency rating is a
number from 0 to 100 that is based on a formula incocporating the structure conditions,
deck geometry, underclearances, safe load capacity, and approach aligrunent. This rating
is used to prioritize bridges in the state for Federal Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation
Funds. A bridge with a rating under 50 is eligible for replacement funds and a bridge
with a rating under 80 is eligible for rehabilitation funds. A requirement of the use of
these funds is that the project rid the bridge of all structural and geometric deficiencies.
The annual allotment of federal funds is limited so that even though a bridge is eligible
for funding it may not receive funding allocation for several yeazs.
The bridges, stainvays, retaining walls, guud rails and fencing in City right-of-way is part
of Public Works' transportation system. The transportation system, consisting of bridges,
streets, lighting, and traffic engineering is the primary reason why neighborhoods,
businesses, and factories eacist. Without these services there would be no neighborhoods,
no businesses, no jobs. Public Works has always and continues to provide the basic
necessities for neighborhood management and housing and business and jobs in the
city of Saint Paul.
The bridge program contributes to the City's fiscal integrity in that the timety repair or
repiacement of bridges can extend the life of other components of the City's
infrasVUCture. (If a bridge must be closed, traffic must be rerouted onto streets that were
not intended to receive such traffic.)
� Comment received to review this strategy in light of Phalen Comdor needs. (See
Note at beginning of Appendix D)
54
LJ
,
J
�
r
CFSS SEWERS
The capital prograni for sewers includes sanitary sewer, storm sewer and ponding projects.
The Sewer Division of Public Works capital program is a comprehensive construction and
rehabilitation of the CiTy's sanitary and storm water sewer system, and storm water ponds.
� The facility maintenance and upgade of this basic service is outlined below. The
program also allows a number of basic infrastructure needs to be addressed that have been
identified and incorporated into the small azea plans developed throughout the City.
'
�
�
,
�
,
i
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
The basic service level for Saint Paul sewers is defined in the City's "Comprehensive
Sewer Plan" (Part I: Storm water Management Plan--1984; Part II: Sanitary Sewer Plan---
1985), and in a detailed amendment to the Storm water Management Plan (1986). The
new Highwood Small Area Plan also addresses important sewer issues.
Based on these plans, there aze three major service-level objectives relating to sewer
projects in Saint Paul:
1. To maintain and replace components of the existing sewer system, thereby
ensuring reliable service.
To fulfill this objective, the Sewer Division operates a comprehensive sewer
inspection program involving walk-through inspections of large sewers, and
television inspections of small sewers. Minor problems found during these
inspections aze handled by City crews while major problems ue developed as
proiects and nut out to contract. '�'ti�;S�v�Y:Di�isiiSri ittteni�s::'tii::�leveliiii:�
2. To separate sanitary and storm sewers, thereby meeting state and federal water
qualiTy requirements for the Mississippi River.
The CiTy is currently in the midst of an accelerated ten-yeaz program for sewer
sepazation, scheduled for completion in 1995. The ten-yeaz project list for this
program is contained in the 1986 amendment to the CiTy's Storm water
Management Plan. This project list reflects the objectives of achieving
maximum impact in a minimum amount of time, and of coordinating sewer
separation with other construction projects. I#��3.fC�ti�Sri-�ri�:li�ftu�*eltiTti3�titr�3
...,....... . _ ..::....:..:..:..:..:_ ...:_:...: ,: ,,..<..,:,:.:
I���c�5 5�?�Il; €es�nti�iiie?ihrai��i l�"7?
3. To provide new sewer service to developing azeas of the city.
This objective applies primarily to the Highwood area of the city. A recent
Small Area Plan for this neighborhood details places where sewer projects aze
most needed. This plan was approved by the Planning Commission and
adopted by the City Council in 1992.
This capital program, which enables the City to meet both state and federal mandated
55
q5- 333
�5-33�3
This capital program, which enables the City to meet both state and federal mandated
requirements for water quality, also reduces dangerous street flooding and eliminates the
serious heaith hazards associated with sewer backups into homes and businesses, thereby
contributing to the neighborhood management and housing goal.
Through the division's ongoing prograni of inspection, infiltrarion and inflow removal,
rehabilitation and facility replacement that allows the City to maintain the basic sewer
infrastructure in a cost effective manner, this capital function contributes to bnsiness and
jobs. The sewer program insures the community a level of service that provides a healthy
living environment and also allows the CiTy of Saint Paul to assist in the development of
under ufilized land.
The sewer program contributes to the City's 5scal integrity through a concerted effort
to reduce the cost of sewer service in Saint Paul. An important component of this effor[
is a recently-implemented program to determine the numerous sources of extraneous flows
into the CiTy's sanitary sewer system. These surface and groundwater flows cause sewer
capacity problems and excessive treatment chazges to the City from the Regional
Wastewater Treatment Facility. Projects are being recommended to reduce or elnninate
these flows.
� Comment requested that an objective be added to impmve water quality through
additionat and altemative stormwater management systems. The strategy should also
reference and endorse the Phalen Chain of Lakes Watershed Project's long range natural
resources plan. (See Note at beginning of Appendix D)
56
,
�
,
�
�5- �33
CFS6 PARKS AND OPEN SPACES
The capital program for parks and open spaces includes pazks, recreational facilities,
capital maintenance, and tree planting. Pazkway projects aze guided by principles that
apply to pazks and open spaces, although they aze categorized under the "Streets" capital
function (see Section B.i.l).
The basic service level for Saint Paul pazks, open spaces, and recreational facilities is
, addressed in a number of adopted plans and policies. As resources become available, the
City should pursue the following development priorities:
�j
■ Regional Pazks
- Complete renovation of Como Park, Zoo and Conservatory, including
, construction of a pazking deck
- Systematically develop riverfront pazks to preserve and enhance this resource
- Include trails in and between regional facilities
�
�
,
■ City-wide Recreation
- Renovation of Highland Park
- Tree planting in parks, on pazkways and boulevazd azeas
■ Neighborhood Recreation and Open Space
� - Improve and upgrade recreation centers to identified community needs
- Acquire, preserve and develop, where feasible, passive pazk land and natural
resource ateas to fiil critical gaps
�
Neighborhoods are a focus of community life in Saint Paul. Parks, open spaces,
� recreation facilities, trees and other amenities are all components of the residential
environment and contribute to the quality of life . Several themes relevant to
neighborhood management and housing aze:
�
,
�
�
,
�
1. Develop and maintain high quality recreational facilities in neighborhoods.
2. Provide improvements to support neighborhood priorities in a manner
consistent with the chazacter of the neighborhood.
3. Coordinate pazks, open space and similaz improvements with other
neighborhood improvements to masimize the impact.
4. Provide basic improvements that contribute to the livability of the City.
Quality public facilities are an element in providing a supportive environment for
business and jobs. Parks and open spaces can be used as a tool to enhance the City as
57
�,�-333
a site for business and tourism. In addition, capital improvements provide jobs in Saint
Paul.
To accomplish this:
Parks and open space projects that can support business priorities should be
identified and phased with economic development projects.
2. Facilities that draw or support tourism to Saint Paul should be given special
attenrion for maintenance and improvement
3. Recreational facilities that aze or can be self-sustaining or revenue generating
should be given prioriTy considerarion for funding.
The CiTy's plan for Parks and Recreation (1985) addresses ways in which the program for
pazks and recreation contributes to the City's 5sca1 integrity. Three general policy
themes aze presented that are relevant to the fiscal dimensions of capital budgeting:
Additional land or facilities will be acquired and/or built only if it can be
demonstrated that a significant need e�cists that cannot be met by other city,
school, or private facilities.
2. Acquisition, construction or renovation of facilities should only be undertaken
when the commitment of funding needed for programming and maintenance
operations is available.
3. Efforts to make efficieat use of all eacisting resources should be continued.
� The Parks Commission is concemed abaut the lack of soccer fields in the city and
requests that, under the 'Neighborhood Recreation and Open Space" section, the
following be added: "Acquire, if necessary, and develop soccer fields to meet
identified communiTy needs." The Planning Commission recommends adding this
language based on a favorable response from the Division of Pazks and
Recreation.
Another comment requested statements supporting preservation and restoration of
wetlands and other natural azeas throughout the city, and emphasizing
coordination of open space and natural resource elements with other
recommendarions of redevelopment plans. (See Note at beginnmg of Appendix
D)
58
,
�
�
�
�5-333
CFS7 LIBRARIES
The capital program for libraries includes projects to rehabilitate and renovate the
buildings in SainY Paul's library system.
The basic service level for Saint Paul libraries is defined in "A Plan for Libraries" (2984).
, This plan defines two features of a basic level of library service that relate to capital
budgeting. However, the plan recommends that the basic level of services be financed
primarily by the City's annaal General Fund Budget altocation:
1�
�
,
�
A strong Central Librazy and four azea tibraries (Highiand Pazk, Lexington,
Hayden Heights, Sun Ray) which serve as the core of the library system.
2. Basic maintenance of library facilities. This may include major repairs of
�
A second set of features is provided to define activities that will substantially enhance and
improve the qua[ity of library service delivered in Saint Paul. This set includes the
following items that are relevant to the capital budget:
1. An automation system, including circulation control and an on-line catalog
�, has been installed in coordination with the eight other Metropolitan Library
Service Agency (MESLA) libraries. MESLA is prepared to fund up to
$507,290 by fiscal year 1996, to assist the Saint Paul Public Library in
� acquiring hardware and software for replacement, addition or improvement to
the automation system.
!J
�
,
�
�
i
,
�
2. Rehabilitation and renovation of existing library facilities.
Neighborhood libraries, we11 maintained and accessible for all, are an extraordinary
feature of each neighborhood. A library is seen by neighborhood residents as the major
source of information and reading materials for all ages and is a vita] neighborhood
component that represents life-long leaming and a source of power. Good neighborhood
management and housing grow and develop with an informed society.
Well maintained librazies contribute to a supportive environment for business and jobs
by offering information and services to individuals and 6usinesses working and doing
business in or interested in doing business or expanding operations in the City. Libraries
support the information needs of businesses throughout the City, through neighborhood
branch libraries and the centra] library downtown. Employees of businesses may visit the
nearest ]ibrary facility to obtain necessary information for day-to-day business activities
just as neighborhood residents seeking employment may visit any City library facility to
get information 4e�e}fl on how to find a job.
Tl�e capital program for libraries contributes to the City's fiscal iutegrity by addressing
rehabilitation and renovation needs before they become so serious as to require new
consiruction.
59
g�-3�3
CFSS HOUSII�iG AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
The capital program for housing and economic development includes housing activities
consisting of rehabilitation incentives, cons�ucrion subsidies, partnerships to itnprove
housing conditions, and homestead assistance. Econom9c development aetivities in this
program include in&astructure improvements in commercial azeas, financing programs and
rehabilitation incentives. The overall program also includes the Urban Revitalization
Action Program, which focuses on blight removal and redevelopment in areas of the city
that most need revitalization.
Two plans define the basic semce level for the housing and economic development
capital function: "Economic Development Slrategy" adopted by the City Council in July,
1990 and the "Saint Paul Housing Policy for the 1990s" adopted by the City Council in
September, 1990.
The capital program for neighbor600d management and housing includes housing
activities consisting of:
■ physical rehabilitation of single family and multi-family buildings that are
owner and rented occupied
a gartnerships with a variety of interest goups including nonprofit development
entities and other neighborhood organizafions to provide financing of
neighborhood initiarives including treatment of vacant housing ���
i�ez��i� ..: �rif
...-
>.: ...::: P�...:.:>,
■ home buyer assistance; and
■ infrastructure improvements in targeted neighborhoods and adjacent to housing
developments
Two adopted policy documents recommend a series of actions related to the management
of neighborhoods that requ'ue financial resources firom Saint Paul's capital budget.
Saint Paul Housin2 Policv for the 1990s
1. Strengthen neighborhood quality: The City and others must commit to multi-
year action plans for meeting improvement and maintenance needs of
neighborhoods.
2. Find the money to do it: The City must pmtect e�sting resources, find new
resources and make sure all resources are being applied to the priority needs
for neighborhood maintenance and 'unprovement.
3. Meet housing needs: The CiTy and others must e�cpand housing opportunities
for low income households. The City must continue its efforts to increase
.�
[�
��
,
L'
�
q5- 333
available housing assistance resources. The City must develop a strategy to
address the needs of its lazge and growing refugee population.
4. Preserve home ownership: The City must expand its efforts with
neighborhoods and others to support home ownership in city neighborhoods
for ail income groups.
5. Improve management of rental buildings: The City and others must support
efforts to overcome serious management and maintenance problems af�ecting
some of the rental buildings in Saint Paul neighborhoods.
6. Remove blight of vacant buildings and neglected land: The City must ensure
� that action on vacant buildings is adequate to ensure a continuing reduction in
the number of such properties. The City must fmd creative ways for
maintaiuing vacant land.
,
�
�
�,
�
�
�
NOTE: As directed by the City Council, during the 1993 Budget Hearings, HRA
and PED will develop housing strategies and housing programs that will create
long term neighborhood stability. The city-wide home ownership goal will be
�icria�i FI�;; as�pte� �i�i��I}� 1�� €tie ��y �aun�3l.
Saint Paul Comnrehensive HousinQ Affordabilitv Strateev (CHASI
Fiscal Yeazs 1992-1996 Priorities for allocating investment:
l. Rental assistance, acquisition, conversion of existing units, rehabilitation, and
new construction where necessary for lazge renter families.
2. Rehabilitation assistance for existing homeowners and rental properiy owners.
3. Home buyer assistance for low income families.
4. Rental assistance for homeless persons and other special needs.
Economic development activities in this program include business financing programs,
� infrashvcture improvements in commercial areas, rehabilitation incentives and support for
Saint Paul's cultural sector. The following strategies will be pursued in order to ensure
a supportive environment for business and jobs. These strategies may require financial
' resources from Saint Paul's capital budget.
1. Retain and recruit business with an emphasis on increasing the size and
�
E�
�
�
strength of the CiTy's economy.
2. Facilitate small business growth through fmancial and technical assistance.
3. Maintain high quality job training programs.
4. Create and manage pazking as a vital economic amenity, both downtown and
in neighborhood commercial azeas.
61
q�-333
5. Invigorate neighborhoods commercia] strips through targeted renovation, new
construc6on and mazketing.
6. Reinforce Saint Paul's role as a regional center of historic, educationaI and
cultural activities.
7. Invest in the public infrastructure necessary to fulfill the future objectives of
the river&ont plan. Such infrastructure includes completion of the levee and
flood wall improvements, design and construction of the esplanade and
reconstniction of Harriet Island Pazk.
8. Continue to inscall public improvements in the downtovun in order to enhanoe
and economically reinforce investrnent. These public improvements include
open space amenities, entry ways, streetscapes, skyways and other pedestrian
connecrions and pazking.
The capital program for housing and economic development contributes to the City's
Sscal integrity by strengthening the housing and commercial stock that foims most of the
City's property tax base.
� The strategy has been changed to conform with proposed new Policy E-7.
62
'
�
,
,
l �
�
'
�
�5-333
CFS9 POLICE
.__ . _,�.. - - -- - --- -• ::•- -- . . ..
. .. . _ . . •- - - - • - • - --• -
-- -
� __ �". . _ . ._:.� Y. _ _. ::
Y . . ,. . . . . . . .
' � _ _
�"."" ' �" _"' . .. .- . •� " 'I""' "' � �. •-_ _ '
1 � � � � � . _ _
�� ��� — � • _
,
�
__ �� _ •._•'...-. . _ �. .. '.��.. � .. .. .... :::: ....
«..I:.... ��..a A�C.«,... �I... 1.....:.. i....,.1 .,F ..,.1:,...
� ................y.....V...N,.vu..vfs...nrv:cTY..«..� ' �
....P,,...,-o�,..s.,.. �
TMe..eF ... A...A:«.. C .. eL... �....«1 ..,J ....A:,. ,....,�.,«. ..«A
Ee� b�}�di�g-�gre3ee�s-is eens��ere� s�gesu�aE:Te D-r _, ..:a.e_ ,.a .,.,..... .. _.,.,.... :..
r ..., :e .es r _ a...a:..� : .�.,...e.,, `Tn ,. .,.�,. _ ....:........a.. n.._:t in�z ., r:.. _i _
' _ :'._,. .... .»...... .. ........... ..j.� �1.i..v....a.u...�:7 `P": � � .
Y J y el ..F..,.1: e F ..:t..l 1...A..,.F...
'
�
�J
�
� 63
Q 5- 333
CFS10 FII2E AND SAFET'Y
The capital program for fire services consists of building renovation and construction
projects.
The basic service level for fire services is defined in "A Plan for Fire Services" (1976).
This plan was recently updated as the "Plan for Fire and Emergency Medical Services"
which was recommended by the Fire Plan Evaluation Committee to the Planning
Commission in January, 1990. The Planning Commission adopted the new plan in June,
1990. The City Council adopted the plan in December, 1991.
The new plan makes the following recommendarions relative to capital needs:
1. Budget for the following improvements:
a. Renovate Station 20 (2179 University Avenue) with a new addition on
the west side of the building and instatlation of two overhead doors on
the north side of the building to allow fire apparatus to enter frnm that
side.
b. Install a new roof on Station 6(33 Concord).
c. Renovate the training tower during the ne�ct five yeazs.
d. Install ventilation equipment for apparatus euhausts in the stations that
need them.
e. Equig station apparatus bay doors with door closing graemption devices
that would reverse their travel should a vehicle or person enter the
doorway as the door is closing.
f. Adapt sleeping and restroom faciliries in all stations to accommodate
female fire fighters.
g. Install monitoring devices on underground fuel tanks.
2. Develop an incremental five-year capital improvement plan to begin with
the 1992-1993 CIB ptanning process.
The capital program for fire services contributes to neighborhood management and
housing through capital repairs. Fire stations are located in the City's neighborhoods.
It is imperative that they are maintained and aze a source of pride in the neighborhoods.
The capital program for fire services contributes to basiness and jobs by using contracted
labor for many of the projects and insures the community a level of service that provides
a healthy living environment.
The capital program for fire services contributes to the City's Sscal integrity by
addressing rehabilitation and renovation needs before they become so serious as to require
new construction, and by proposing new construction only when it is absolutely necessary.
�
lJ
�
�5-333
CFSll SPECIAL FACILTTY SUPPORT
, The capifal program for "Special Faciliry Support" consists of two types of projects:
' 1. Projects that aze too specialized to fit into one of the other capital functions.
Examples of ffiis include the remodeling of City Hall, and the rebuilding of
the Public Health Center.
i 2. Projects that aze too general to fit into one of the other capital functions. An
e�mpie of t[iis type is the Capital Maintenance Program, administered by
� Pazks and Recreation, a program applying potentially to a varieTy of capital
functions within the city.
, There is currently no adopted City p]an or policy that defines the basic level of services
for this capital fitnction.
' The capitai program for Special Facility Support allows City owned facilities throughout
the City to be properly maintained, enhancing the quality of life that in turn promotes the
goals of neighborhood management and housing and business and jobs.
L'
�'
�
�
�
,
'
�
�
�
� 65
,
�
,
�5 � 333
Reconsh (when done as part of the city-wide street improvement prograzn
such as the Combined Sewer Separation and Street Reconstruction Prograzn)
Residential and Commercial
'
�
,
25% of total cost to be assessed. The assessment rates for gading and
paving 9°� �^^'•�a�^rt °*-°�� '��'�'� is escalated each year based on the
Minneapotis/Saint Paul Urban Consumer Frice Index.—�tr�9S�e�
in�n .....,... .. ,, ci n _e.. ,. ,...�.t,. F ... :., inni :« ..,..., ci� o� ...,a :..
. ,
i�o� :.:� e�n nn ..,..:.,..t..a:.,,...«..,,e. r.Rw«..
��:��7� �,fi�P�.`!.;�:�':�
..: :. .....:. .::....:......... <... :............. ....,.:..,.,
j�::�SSESS��%��' �;
ARTERTAL STREETS
New Construction
' Variable percentage of cost to be assessed taking into account the special
benefits received by the abutting properties as well as the generat benefit
received by the city at luge.
�
(�
Reconstruction
Arteria] streets meeting certain criteria are to be reconstructed with no
assessments being levied against abutting properties. The criteria that must be
satisfied is:
� 1. The street must be a street eligible for and receive its major funding from
either County Aid, Municipa] State Aid, or offier funding not originating
in the City of Saint Pau1.
�
,
�
�
�
,
'
,
2. The street must be a street serving as an arterial street providing capacity
for through traffic and thus providing a substantial benefit to the general
public.
PARKWAYS NOT ON Tf� STATE AID SYSTEM
Pazkways that aze not on the state aid system and aze reconstructed in connection
with the Combined Sewer Separation Program are assessed at the CSSP rates for
paving, provided the street has noT been assessed for paving within the last 20
yeazs. If it has, there is no assessment.
EXTRAORDINARY MAINTENANCE
All extraordinary maintenance and major repair items that, in the discrefion of the
Director of Public Works does not constitute reconsUUCtion wiil be funded from
the Street Maintenance Fund and will not be assessed to specific properties.
Asphalt overlays are to be considered as extraordinary maintenance.
67
g5 � 333
SEWERS - SANITARY
New Consuuction
100% of cost to be assessed, except for city aid because of Iong side subsidy
or other design constraints.
Reconstruction
Sewer repair and maintenance is currently financed througki the sewer service
fund and therefore not assessed. The Departrnent of Public Wotks reports that
there is no urgency in the foreseeable future for major replacement of sanitary
sewers. The Comprehensive Sewer Plan, adopted by the CiTy Council
recommends ultimately assessing 25% of the costs of major reconstruction.
SEWERS - STORM RELIEF
(CONIBINED SEWER SEPARATION PROGRA1t�
New Conslruction
Continue present policy o£ assessing a portion of the cost against benefitted
properties. This is a one time assessment and is ttow escalated according to
the MinneapolislSaint Paui Urban Consumer Price Index. Approximately 20%
of the cost for storm re]ief systems is recovered by assessment. �-�999-aac}
:.1, ��� na FIP. e C ,.s F ....,...:.1,...a:..i _ ..�h:,... ...i N !1'!G F �
c J� r �1 y
e..:.7e..�:.,1 ....,.....h:e.. T« t(lnt al... �..�,_ .,.. C n'S t'1 C '.i ' t C n'lo�l
........... . i....i..�.«..�. i.rvnzac � .
£26�F�:
STREET LIGHTING
New Construction
1 �0% of cost to be assessed for all lighting consuuction costs associated either
with the construction of a standard or abov�standazd lighting system or the
upgrading of an existing wood pole system to a standazd or above-standatd
system, except when done in connection with a City Street Improvement
Progam such as the Combined Sewer Separat3on and Street Reconstruc6on
Prograzn, in which case the assessment rate will 6e based on the following:
Residentia] and Commercial
30% of total cost of a standard system (residenrial eqnivalent) to
be assessed: -1 I�94 rates �°'�'.-`.,o �€€c ,,�8'� er assessable
_. _ . �:.:::. P
68
�
,
'
l J
�
,
'
�
��'-3�J
foot for redesigned historic lantems; $�.48 $�:d� per assessable
foot for bent straw.
The assessment rate is escalated each year starting in 1991 based upon the
Minneapolis/Saint Paul Urban Consumer Price Index. 7° ,°°^ °°a 'nor .s.,
..,.,, . ,. c� cn .. ....�.�., a.,.. a _ �.�«L «..:a....«:..i .,..a ,. •..i
ALLEY - GRAI)ING AND PAVING
New Construction and Reconsh
100% of cost to be assessed against benefitted properties.
CURB AND GUTTER
New Construction and Reconstruction
100% of cost to be assessed against benefitted properties when constructed on
, a separate basis. Long side aid applies to residential properties. When the
entire street is being reconshucted, curbs and gutters aze incladed in the
overall paving cost.
��
�
'
�J
'
'
'
�
'
LOCAL DRAINAGE PR�BLEMS
New Construction and Reconstruction
100% of cost to be assessed against benefitted properties.
WATEIt MAINS
New Construction
100% of cost to be assessed against benefitted properties.
Reconstruction
� 69
..r.n!�s���t
�5-333
UTILITY SERVICE CONNECTIONS
The utility setvice connection referred to in this report is that portion of the service
connection running from the street main to the property line. The por[ion running from
the property line to the building is the exclusive responsibility of the property owner,
New Construcfion
100% of cost to be assessed against benefitted properties.
Replacement
The cost for replacing -°°..�� sewer service connections to be the
responsibility of the affected property owner.
_.. . . . _... .. _ ..
��ittt��i�
LONG SIDE SUBSIDY FORMUI.A FOR SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION AND
RECONSTRUCTION
RESIDENTIAL PROPER'I'IES
New Construction and Reconstruction (Aid and Non-Aid Sveets)
Long side subsidy only for the first 150 feet.
COMMERCIA.L PROPERTIES
Commercial properry is given no ]ong side subsidy.
70
'
'
,
,
�
�
'
u
,
(�
�
APPENDIXF ��- ���
ESTIMATED FlNANCING SOUfiCES FOR SAINT PAULCAPRAL IMPROVEMENTS
1996 — 2000
Note: Amountfa Capital Improvement Bonds refers to the maximum allowed by State Law. Lower Iimits may be established by the
' Joint Debt Advisory Committee and the City Council.
�
,
'
�
'
'
' �1
* Beginning in Y994, the City must compete with other municipatities in Ramsey Countys capital allocation process.
*`Amount for capita( projects only. Fundirg fw maintenance is not incfuded.
**' 1996 funds will be spend in � 996 and 1997.
'" Estimated