Loading...
12-09-09 AGENDA Council/Manager Meeting Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Conference Room December 9,2008 6:30 p.m. 1. 2009 General Fund Budget and Tax Levy 2. 2009-2013 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) 3. 2009 Legislative Policies 4. Pavement Management Program Policy Revisions 5. Special Assessment Policy Revisions 6. Sanitary Sewer Service Repair Program 7. Inflow and Infiltration Inspection Standards 8. Xcel Energy Franchise Fee 9. Comprehensive Plan A. Draft General Land Use. Plan Map B. Housing Chapter C.Transportation Chapter 10.Xenia Avenue/Park Place Boulevard Pedestrian Study Council/Manager meetings have an informal, discussion-style format and are designed for the Council to obtain background information, consider policy alternatives, and provide general directions to staff. No formal actions are taken at these meetings. The public is invited to attend Council/Manager meetings and listen to the discussion; public participation is allowed by invitation of the City Council. Hey Me orandum Finance 763-593-8013 I 763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting December 9, 2008 Agenda Item 1.2009 General Fund Budget and Tax Levy Prepared By Sue Virnig, Finance Director Summary . This is the last workshop before the 2009 General Fund Budget, 2009 Other Fund Budgets and Tax Levy will be approved. Please bring these documents to the Council/Manager meeting on December 9. alley mo ndu Finance 763-593-8013/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting December 9, 2008 Agenda Item 2. 2009-2013 Capital Improvement Program Prepared By Sue Virnig, Finance Director Summary Staff will be present at the December 9 Council/Manager meeting to answer questions on the 2009-2013 Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The Planning Commission reviewed the document at their November 24 meeting and the draft minutes are attached. The document will be presented at the December 16 Council Meeting for approval. After approval, the document will be bound and distributed. Please bring this document to the Council/Manager meeting on December 9. Attachments Planning Commission minutes dated November 24,2008 (1 page) Planning Commission Meeting November 24, 2008 2. Presentation of Capital Improvement Program 2009-2013 - Sue Virnig, City Finance Director Virnig reviewed the 2009-2013 Capital Improvement Program. She discussed a proposed new fire pumper truck, the Pavement Management Program which continues until 2014 and the park improvement fund to pay for park equipment. Keysser referred to the performance area improvements and asked if city bonds will be issued. Virnig said she was not aware of city bonds being issued for the performance area. Keysser asked about the City's bond rating. Virnig said the Ci 1. Eck asked about the recycling fund. Virnig discussed a 0 for the Brookview parking lot. Waldhauser questioned the proposed reconstruct' WinnetkaAvenue near City hall. Clancy explai done are in excess of 10 years old and were to salt and are deteriorating. s along ewalks being re- that are susceptible Waldhauser referred to proposed w asked if there is any way to share th that the portions of the frontag responsibility but that .part of t Waldhauser asked if ther . could provide the Plan . oad south of 1-394 and St. Louis Park. Clancy stated In Iden Valley are Golden Valley's orne from state aid money. ilable f state aid streets. Clancy said she n with a map showing state aid streets. Waldhauser aske versus residential. from the Metr portion of the eps track of the total cost of the III program, City s and added that City receives matching funds laney explained that the City is not taking any nds for the private work being done. rket value for properties is going down. Virnig said re down 1.2% and commercial values are up 7%. ed that the Capital Improvement Programs is a part of the Compre e plan and that it is the Planning Commissioners responsibility to decide if it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. MOVED by Cera, seconded by McCarty and motion carried unanimously to recommend approval of the 2009-2013 Capital Improvement Program as it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. alley Memorandum City Administration/Council 763-593-8003/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting December 9, 2008 Agenda Item 3.2009 Legislative Policies Prepared By Thomas Burt, City Manager Summary Attached is a copy of the 2008 Legislative Policies discussed last year. Staff is requesting the Council review the policies and give direction on policies to include in the 2009 booklet. Attachments 2008 Legislative Policies (19 pages) 1. Fiscal Disparities Issue Since 1971, Fiscal Disparities has required cities to share a portion of their commercial and in- dustrial tax base growth with other jurisdictions. The contribution amount is based on the rela- tive fiscal capacity of each community, which is measured by the market value per capita. Each year the City of Golden Valley receives its share and contributes to the pool. Because Golden Valley has a high fiscal capacity, it contributes more to the pool than it receives. In 2008, Golden Valley will contribute $4,086,734 in net tax capacity. In recent years, changes in classification rates for commerciallindustrial properties have decreased the tax capacity available to cities to deal with the increased demand for services for these uses. At the same time, traffic levels have increased while state funding for local roads has decreased. For cities contributing to fiscal disparities, the burdens have increased while fewer resources are available to address them, creating a higher burden for residential properties in these communi- ties. Commercial properties can contest their taxable market values until April of the current tax year. If there were to be a mid-year adjustment in value, the city pays the abatement of taxes but does not reimbursed from the pool. With more adjustments mid-year and class rates that changed in 2001 on commercial and industrial properties, the burdens for having this type of property in a city are not adequately managed through current fiscal disparities cost sharing statutes. Response The City of Golden Valley supports a comprehensive study of the fiscal disparities program to examine its initial purpose, the extent to which this purpose is currently served or should be amended, and changes in the tax structure that have impacted the program. With the benefit of this information, Golden Valley would support adjustments to the fiscal disparities program that would create a more equitable tax policy for the twin cities metropolitan area. See AppendIX 1-1: Metro Cities (AMM) Legislative Policy I-F Page 4 S}~t"}\H:t.~_.~ Ji , :lllll:.IfII'.JI.tfiJ fi~ 1m J (;I'H!I!' J..'t foll,I,,, :lil..1t I :1-:""'" 2. GroDP Residential Facilities In The Single-FamilvIR-1J Zoning District Issue Numerous citizens have informed the Golden Valley City Council about a concentration of group homes within a Golden Valley neighborhood. In one case, two group homes are located next to each other and two others are located within a block or two. Golden Valley is a city with many small neighborhoods isolated by arterial streets, parks, or other large facilities. Concentra- tion of group homes in such a neighborhood could dramatically change its character. In the mid-1980s, the state decentralized the care of various groups of persons by eliminating larger institutions. The goal was to create smaller, residential treatment homes within neighbor- hoods. The Legislature established a human service licensing law (Minnesota Statutes Section 245A.ll, Subd. 3) that requires cities to permit state-licensed group homes (defined as residen- tial facilities in the Golden Valley zoning code) serving six or fewer persons in single family zon- ing districts. It also allows cities to require conditional use permits for state licensed group homes if they serve seven to 25 persons in R-l, R-2, and Multiple Family Zoning Districts. The Golden Valley Zoning Code is consistent with state law. Response To constrain over-concentration of licensed group homes in Golden Valley and other suburbs, the Golden Valley City Council suggests the state change its laws regarding placement of group homes in single-family residential zoning districts. Current law restricts group homes serving six or fewer persons from being located within I,4-mile of another licensed group home in a city of the first class (Minneapolis, St. Paul, and maybe one or two other larger cities). The City of Golden Valley would like that law extended to cover cities of all sizes. See Appendix 2-1: League of Minnesota Cities Legislative Policy-7 ....,.~IIII:.1fI (lII1. tfi1 Ii 11ITa' F.111;j11.l!lJ 11.1 fill.'. ~ :li1 I III 1 ~ "]i'l'"cc Page 5 3. Metropolitan Council Inflow/Infiltration Surcharge Issue To reduce the volume of inflow and infiltration (clear water) entering its sanitary sewer system and wastewater treatment system, the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) has instituted a program that places a surcharge on cities with excess peak flows. Golden Valley's inflow and infiltration (III) surcharge for peak flow violations is $388,100, or $1,900, 500 for five years. This is based on one peak flow violation in 2005. Hisrorically, the City has had three or more violations per year. Golden Valley must spend more than $388,000 each year in activi- ties to reduce its inflow and infiltration, or the MCES will hold the money until the City spends it. After 2011, the surcharge becomes a demand charge if cities do not meet MCES established goals. Golden Valley has been one of the most proactive communities in addressing public and private property sources of III in the last year. However, the City has found that during its point of sale inspection program, 40% of the properties were non-compliant and the sewer services were in need of rehabilitation. The average cost of rehabilitation is $3,600, but costs range from $500 to $8,595. ResDonse The City of Golden Valley supports the following positions: · the surcharge program should be set at a fixed rate each year and not subject to change based on violations · cities should be allowed until 2018 until a demand charge is put in place · funding should be established to assist private property owners in replacing or rehabilitating their private services · funding should be established to assist cities with public improvements that reduce III See ADDendI13-A: Metro Cities (AMM) Legislative Policy IV -....".:l.IIII:.IflIlIil.ffi1 [i mill' f.11 (:'l'~ 11.'1 filii'." :lillllt I;J; ~ j ~;J_; 'a.. 1 4. Minnesota Department 01 Transportation, Transponation Fundinu and Manauement Issue The City of Golden Valley has following transportation-related concerns: · The City has had to delay street improvements due to inadequate funding for Municipal State Aid projects. Some of these roads are in severely deteriorated condition. · Current State Aid funds are not inadequate to assist with the cost of installing pedestrian im- provements on county roads. · Current State Aid funds are not inadequate to assist with the cost of relocating or burying overhead utilities that are in conflict with proposed pedestrian improvements on county or local roads. · MnDOT has required the City to pay an unacceptable portion (approximately $2 million over the past five years) of utility and roadway improvement costs for state highway and local road intersections (ie, TH 100, TH 55/Boone/General Mills Boulevard). · MnDOT had indicated it lacks funding for the needed improvements on 1-394 to respond to existing congestion and anticipated demand associated with redevelopment of the property along the 1-394 corridor. · The Legislature has failed to provide appropriate funding to MnDOT so that it can maintain its rights-of-way, fences, and vacant properties in the metropolitan area. · MnDOT has been unable to convey rights-of-way and excess properties from past projects to local governments so they can be evaluated for development potential. · MnDOT has indicated it cannot agree to long term maintenance of water quality improve- ments that protect water bodies adjacent to the highway system. Response The City of Golden Valley supports: · legislation that allows local government to put in place a street utility fee · a five-cent-per-gallon gas tax increase with equitable funding to the State Aid system · additional highway bonding · an increase in the motor vehicle sales tax · restoration of license tab fees · additional funding in general so MnDOT can meet the state's maintenance and transporta- tion needs See Appendix 4-A: Metro Cities (AMM) Legislative Policy V-A See AppendIX 4-8: League of Minnesota Cities Legislative Policy- LE- 26 See APpendix4-C: Metro Cities (AMM) Legislative Policy V- P See APpendix 4-0: League of Minnesota Cities Legislative Policy- LE-l1 Page 8 '--'~~~wq:;Iw_wt, ' :11111:.111 11.,1. tfilli mlI' f,] 1.:l'Jll!1J I 1.'1 filii'. ~ ;lil I III I ~:......,.. 5. Education Funding Issue Adequately funded K-12 schools, early education, and after-school programs are critical to a healthy community and productive society. The City of Golden Valley has the following con- cerns: · School districts in Minnesota increasingly must rely on passing surplus referendums to fund basic operating expenses. · Studies show that quality child care and early education programs can cut crime and violence, yet Head Start is so under-funded that it could serve only about six of 10 eligible three- and four-year-olds in Minnesota in 2000. The Child Care and Development Block Grant, to help low-income parents pay for child care, could serve only 6 percent of eligible Minnesota chil- dren in 1999. Minnesota remains far from meeting the needs oflow- and moderate-income working families for quality child care. * · Average child care center tuition for two children can exceed $ 17,800-more than a full-time, minimum-wage earner makes in a year. · Low wages for child care center teachers in Minnesota too often result in high staff turnover, inadequately-trained staff, and low-quality care. · Quality after-school programs can transform hours of soaring crime, drug use, and car crashes into hours of constructive, supervised activities that can build the values and skills children need for school success and job productivity. However, state and federal budget cuts have eliminated programs or reduced eligibility in programs, placing an increasing number of vul- nerable children in unsupervised and risky situations. Response The City of Golden Valley supports: · adequate, fair, and stable funding for K-12 schools so school districts never have to levy for core operating services · increased statewide funding for high-quality early education programs · state investment to ensure that all school-aged children and teens have access to after-school youth development programs *Source: Fight Crime: Invest in Kids -1212 New YOrk Ave. NV<< Suite 300 - Washington, DC 2005. See Appendix 5-A: Robbinsdale Area Schools Legislative Action Coalition: 2008 Session Priorities See Appendix 5-1: Hopkins Public Schools Legislative Action Coalition: 2008 Platform -..,.!.IIII:.IfIIl.il. tIilli rm1I' F.l11<l'a.I!JJ 1..1 filll'l~ iIilll Itl:-J; 1m,;] 'age 9 6. Funding for the Clean Water legaev Act Issue The 1972 Clean Water Act requires all states to develop a list of impaired waters that do not meet state water quality standards (even after measures to address point sources of pollution have been implemented), prioritize them, determine sources of non-point pollution, and formulate a plan for improving the quality of each water body. The following water bodies located in Golden Valley are on the impaired waters list: · Sweeney Lake · Wirth Lake · Bassett Creek Main Stem (two impairments) Golden Valley is tributary to the following impaired waters: · Medicine Lake · Lake Hiawatha · Lake Pepin Other water bodies may be added to this list. Although a list of impaired waters has been required since 1972, very few states have complied with the Clean Water Act. But recent lawsuits filed against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) seek development of these lists as required by law. Based on rulings on these lawsuits, the EPA and the states are under court orders to establish the impaired waters lists. Furthermore, the Clean Water Act restricts additional pollutants from entering listed impaired waters until plans are in place to clean up the waters. As a resu:lt, growth, development, redevelopment, and expan- sion within cities throughout Minnesota would likely be limited or prohibited in the future. ResDonse The City supports providing adequate funding for the Clean Water Legacy Act and Total Maxi- mum Daily Load (TMDL) studies and implementing improvements to protect and improve the water bodies of Minnesota. See "Dendix 6-1: Metro Cities (AMM) Legislative Policy IV- K See "Dendix 6-8: League of Minnesota Cities Legislative Policy-SD-43 Page 10 '" '!~::lf;iillf:lj~;jE: ~ 111I:. ffll'.'I. tfi1 ri f:Ii1l1 F.11 (:I' aI;J! (J. 'f 1'.111 'I" :lillllf I a."", 1-1. Fiscal Disparities Inachment Metro Cities (AMMJ legislative Policv I-F: Fiscal Disparitv Fund Distribution Issue: Metro Cities opposes the use of fiscal disparities to fund social or physical metropolitan programs since it results in a metropolitan-wide property tax increase hidden from the public. Response: Metro Cities supports the continuation of the fiscal disparities program until such time as an appropriate replacement is developed. Metro Cities supports a state conducted analy- sis of the Fiscal Disparities Program to determine whether the program is meeting its original goals and objectives, and whether changes to the program should be considered to better meet those objectives. ....,.~ 1111:. ffI 11.11. rrn Ii 11Ji1l' fill (;l'aM! I 1.'1 filllll.-1li111111 OJ; j II! .flt{t;..ii; P..e11 2-A. Group Residential Facilities In The Single-Familv (R-11 Zoning District Attachment league of Minnesota Cities (lMC) legislative Policv 1: Residential Care Facilities 19rouphomes) Issue: Sufficient funding and oversight is needed to ensure that residents living in residential care facilities have appropriate care and supervision, and that neighborhoods are not disproportion- ately impacted by high concentrations of residential care facilities. Under current law, operators of certain residential care facilities are not required to notify cities when they intend to purchase single-family housing for this purpose; and cities do not have authority to regulate the locations of group homes and residential care facilities. Cities have reasonable concerns about the safety of group home residents, particularly in case of public safety emergencies. Cities also have an inter- est in preserving a balance in residential neighborhoods between group homes and other uses. Response: Cities should have statutory authority to require agencies and licensed providers that operate residential care facilities to notify the city of properties being operated as residential care facilities. The Legislature should also require establishment of non-concentration standards for residential care facilities to prevent clustering. Finally, licensing authorities must be responsible for removing any residents incapable of living in such an environment, particularly if they be- come a danger to themselves or others. Page 12 i:,::mill~m~r~;; ?-, !1111:.1fl (Tn. tfi1 Ii mill' till mTAl!IJ II," mil"" :mIll'll..........,... 3-1. Metropolitan Council Inllow/lnliltration Surcharge Anachment Metro Cities [AMMI legislative Polic, IV: Inflow and Infiltration [1/11 Issue: The Metropolitan Council's Water Resources Management Plan has established an III sur- charge beginning in 2007 on cities that are determined to be contributing unacceptable amounts of clear water to the MCES wastewater treatment system. Currently 44 cities have been identi- fied as excessive III contributors. This number is subject to change, depending on rain events, and any city in the metropolitan area could be affected. Metro Cities recognizes the importance of controlling III because it affects the size, and therefore the cost, of wastewater treatment systems and because excessive III in one city can affect development capacity of another city that lies down pipe. Metro Cities' policies supported the following criteria for a surcharge program: · A data supported definition of "excessive III" that includes data over a five year period with periodic updates that reflect municipal mitigation efforts; · Access to all flow data that verifies that the origin of the III is within a city's collection system and not a MCES interceptor, or not from another jurisdiction; · The amount of the surcharge is commensurate with the cost of solving the problem; · The surcharge is levied as a last resort and will not be charged unless a city fails to develop a mitigation plan in a timely manner; · The surcharge is discontinued when the city adopts a construction schedule to implement their III mitigation plan; · All money collected from an individual city via the surcharge is returned to the city for their mitigation efforts. Issue: The surcharge program provides for a deferral of III surcharges over 25% of municipal wastewater charges and additional metering of MCES interceptors. Metro Cities will continue to monitor the surcharge program, and encourages the Metropolitan Council to support state financial assistance for Metro Area III mitigation through future Clean Water Legacy Act appro- priations or similar legislation. Further, Metro Cities supports state capital assistance to provide grants to metro area cities for the purpose of mitigating inflow and infiltration problems into municipal wastewater collection systems. .....,.,;,. 1111:.1'11 (I1t11.ffi11i 1"i1Ta' EilII;I'aI1I! 1..'1 J:11I'I" :lillII'll ~ __poCO> Z~%nM&1B-'i{ Page 13 4-1. Minnesota Department of Transportation, Transportation Fundinglnachment Metro CitieslAMMJ legislative Policy V-A: Transportation and Transit Funding Issue: Metro Cities strongly supports increased funding for transit and highways, both of which are a critical need in the metropolitan area. In addition, funding for mass transit, including transit ways, light rail or heavy rail in existing corridors, should be dedicated in a manner consis- tent with current highway funding. Funds allocated to the metropolitan area should be flexible so that the most efficient and cost effective transportation solutions may be chosen and the main metropolitan problem of congestion relief can be addressed. Metro Cities supports full funding of transportation and transit needs based on projected growth over the next twenty-five years. The metro area is predicted to grow by one million people by 2030, with funding needs for transportation and transit of over one billion dollars ($1 billion) per year for the next fifteen years. Metro Cities believes it is important to join a coalition of organizations to better address the transportation financing needs of the entire state and will be cooperating with groups with the same mission. Response: For the purpose of accelerating road and transit construction projects in the metro area, Metro Cities supports the following list of revenue raising options in any combination, provided there is no corresponding offset to negate any actual new revenue, that has the political and financial viability to produce improved roads and transit. · Gas Tax · Additional Highway Bonding · License Tab Fee Restoration · Motor Vehicle Sales Tax Increase · Wheelage Tax · Street Utility Fee · Road Access Fee · Sales Tax Metro Cities supports the statutory dedication of MVST on leased vehicles to be dedicated 100% to transportation and transit. Metro Cities will oppose any reduction in existing dollars to fund transportation as a result of the dedication of MVST dollars for transportation purposes. All non-transportation programs should be funded from sources other than currently dedicated transportation funds. Page 14 . .i~1J!jJ!l,t.w '.I1111:.lfll'.,I.tlilli mIll'lilI l;llaIlJJ I I.'! f.lll"~ ;li1111t l~~ 4-B. Minnesota Department 01 Transportation, Transportation Funding Anachment league of Minnesota Cities IlMC) legislative Pollcv lE-26: Adequate Funding For Transportation Issue,: The League of Minnesota Cities recognizes that all Minnesota residents and businesses benefit from a sound transportation system that offers diverse modes of travel. Current funding for roads, bridges and transit systems across all government levels in the state is inadequate, and Minnesota's transportation system is failing to meet needs pertaining to public safety, population growth and economic development. Due to funding challenges, the state has delayed regionally significant road construction and reconstruction projects. Urban areas are experiencing growing congestion and are lagging behind other regions in making transit investments. Rural roads are not being upgraded to meet modern safety standards and are not serving the needs of industries that depend on the ability to trans- port heavy loads. Local roads, bridges, sidewalks and trails are critical components of Minnesota's transportation infrastructure. Cities, like the state, have inadequate resources to preserve and reconstruct aging transportation infrastructure, and to build transportation infrastructure to serve new develop- ment. Existing funding mechanisms such as municipal state aid (MSA), special assessments and bonding have limited applications, making it difficult for cities to address growing needs. Further, as the state funding shortfall has grown, the trunk highway project cost participation re- quirements imposed on local units of government have increased dramatically. This burden has been exacerbated by the state's use of trunk highway bonds as a funding source, because under Minnesota's constitution, trunk highway bond dollars cannot be spent on local components of trunk highway projects, and the bond dollars are not distributed through the Highway User Tax Distribution Fund formula. Cost participation requirements put added pressure on local bud- gets, contribute to property tax increases and divert local resources from the over 39,000 lane miles in Minnesota under municipal jurisdiction. Response: More resources must be dedicated to all components of the state's transportation system, and local units of government must have access to resources and funding tools to meet growing needs. The League of Minnesota Cities supports: · acceleration of the phase-in of the constitutional dedication of 100 percent of the motor ve- hicle sales tax (MVST) to transportation purposes; · MVST distribution of 60 percent for roads and bridges, and 40 percent for transit; · dedication of the sales tax on leased vehicles to transportation purposes; · a permanent increase in the gas tax; · indexing of the gas tax, provided there is a limit on how much the tax can be increased for inflation in a given amount of time; · increases in vehicle registration taxes (tab fees); ....,.~IIII:.IfII'IfI.f(iI Ii r:Ji1Il fill Hl'AI;lJ I 1.'1 fill 1'1" :liI111t 1;1; .L"t't\v.... pue 15 · trunk highway bonding, provided the Legislature implements reasonable restrictions on the amount of debt service the state will incur, and provided the Legislature appropriates funding to assist with local costs related to projects funded with trunk highway bonds; · general obligation bonding for local roads and bridges, particularly for routes of regional sig- nificance; · a sales tax increase to fund transportation needs; · funding to assist cities burdened by cost participation responsibilities imposed by improve- ment projects on the state's principal arterial system and on the county state aid highway (CSAH) system; · funding for transportation components of economic development and redevelopment projects of regional significance; · full funding for all components of state highway projects, including related storm water man- agement systems, through state sources; · funding to build roads to standards that can accommodate the year-round transport of heavy loads; · a sales tax exemption for materials purchased for state and local road, bridge, sidewalk, trail and transit construction projects; · authority for cities to impose development impact fees; and · local funding options that would allow cities to raise revenues for roads, bridges, sidewalks, trails and transit. 'age 16 >tg:tBH' -t;~;,r*lkr!t~{~& ,_ '!IIII:. fIlllIil. ~ Ii r:Ji1l' FlII;}'aM! I U folll'. ~ :lillllt I""'''''''''' 4-C. Minnesota Department 01 Transportation, Transportation Management Anaehment Meuo Cities lAMMJlegislative 'olicy V-': MnDOT Maintenance Budget Issue: The Minnesota Department of Transportation's maintenance budget has been reduced in recent years due to a lack of state funding and as a result state right of ways, roadways, and state owned parcels are not being adequately maintained. As a result, municipalities are spending local dollars maintaining these properties, many of which are deteriorating at an accelerated rate. Response: Metro Cities supports fully funding MnDOT's maintenance budget to relieve the financial bur- den on local units of government and to assure that state highways do not deteriorate prematurely. -..,.,,"IIII:.1f1 (1.11. tfilli [iIill1 f.IIICl'Al.!l! 11-1 f.Ill'l ~ 1li111 it I ~ . rnlffi ;p~:. 'age 11 4-D. Minnesota Department 01 Transpor.tation, Transportation Management Anachment league 01 Minnesota Cities llMCl legislative Policv lE-11: Right-ol-Wav Management Issue: Cities have fundamental responsibility for managing the safe and convenient use of public rights-of-way and hold local rights-of-way in trust for the public as an increasingly scarce and valuable asset. As demand increases for use of rights-of-way for underground and overhead wireless facilities and sites for wireless communications towers, cities must continue to have the necessary authority to allocate and coordinate the use of this resource among competing uses. Local management responsibilities vary and are site specific, underscoring the necessity for main- taining local authority. Response: State and federal policymakers and regulators must: · uphold local authority to manage and protect public rights-of-way, including reasonable zon- ing and subdivision regulation and the exercise of local police powers; · recognize cities have a paramount role in developing, locating, siting, and enforcing utility construction and safety standards; · support local authority to require full recovery of actual costs of managing use of public rights-of-way; · maintain city authority to franchise gas, electric, cable services, and open video systems, and to collect franchise fees and alternative revenue streams; · maintain the courts as the primary forum for resolving disputes over the exercise of such au- thority; and · maintain existing city authority to review and approve or deny plans for installation of ad- ditional wires or cables on in-place utility poles. In the alternative, cities should have broader authority to require the underground placement of new and/or existing services at the cost of the utility or telecommunications entity. Page 18 "~+FThMMWM1tt~,~"": '.11111: IIf1 (TIil. tfilli r:Ji1l' 11111;} 'aI;l! 1..1 folia' I ~ :li1111t a ~:.....,.... 5-1. Education Funding Inachmenl Robbinsdale Area Schools legislative Action Coalition: 2008 Session Priorities Robbinsdale Area Schools Legislative Action Coalition 2008 Session Priorities -...,.!.IIII:.1f1 1l.ll.1fil Ii rn1l' F.l110I'aJ!lJ I J.'i folll'l ~ 1li1111t I;J; ~lJ~I,~;t)' ... .. Page 19 5-8. Education Funding Attachment Hopkins Public Schools legislative Action Coalition: 2008 Pladorm Hopkins Public Schools Legislative Action Coalition 2008 Platform (DRAFT: 12.14.07) Beliefs Whereas, the state is constitutionally mandated to provide public education, Hopkins Public Schools' Legislative Action Coalition (LAC) believes that: - high quality public education, committed to all learners, is the cornerstone of a strong community; - stable and adequate funding sources are essential for providing quality programs; - effective and efficient use of resources is an essential element of accountability; -local control is most effective in meeting community needs; - diversity strengthens our school district; - partnerships among families, educators, and an involved community are essential to our students' success; - curriculum, instruction, and assessment methods that support the unique ways individual students learn are essential components of high quality public education. be it resolved that Hopkins Public Schools' Legislative Action Coalition will advocate for policies that will enhance the quality of public education in keeping with the above stated beliefs. 2008 Priorities As it makes decisions, the state Legislature must focus on the educational development of all children, E-12. Fundin!! Formula Restructuring The state should restructure its general education formula with sustainable funding resources to provide all students with a high quality education through a thorough and efficient public school system and the equitable distribution of resources to all Minnesota public schools, based on factors such as: · Meeting state standards · The unique cost and price pressures affecting public schools · Declining enrollment · Importance of all-day kindergarten · Sparsity and district size · Market-based cost differentials · Specialeducation costs enacting these reforms in 2008 legislative session, and then providing adequate funding for implementation of these reforms in the 2009 legislative session. Local Control/Mandates As laws are enacted regarding educational policies and funding, the Legislature should: · Fully fund all existing and future state mandates · Ensure that the state testing required by the No Child Left Behind Act provides timely instructional and student growth information Page 20 . iif,!~, '?*;. '.(1111:.111 (lIil.~ 11 riTra I iii 1 1<l'Ali:IJ 1..1 iii I 1'1 ~ iI'iIlllIl...."""'" 6-A.Fundingfor the Clean Water legacI Act Anachment Metro Cities llMMJ leuislativePolicv IV-I(: Federal Clean Water Mandate Issue: Recent legal action related to impaired waters poses a significant threat to the development and redevelopment interests of the Twin Cities. However, because the Environmental Protec- tion Agency measures compliance on a statewide basis, and because watersheds and river basins transcend political boundaries, meeting clean water standards is a statewide issue. Clean water requirements will affect both wastewater treatment and storm water systems. Response: The Metropolitan Council should partner with federal and state agencies, as well as Metropolitan Area cities, to arrive at solutions to current legal challenges associated with the federal Clean Water Act that are both financially and environmentally appropriate for cities, the region and the state. ~~IIII;.ffll1.il. tfi11i mill' filllfl'A!ilJ Il.'i filii'." :li1lllf 1;1; ill JI~,3'" PBIe 21 6-B. Funding lor the Clean Water legacv Act Anaehment league of Minnesota Cities IIMC) legislative Policv 50-43: Impaired Waters Issue: Despite the billions of dollars that Minnesota municipalities have invested and continue to invest in wastewater and stormwater management systems and best management practices to protect, preserve, and restore the quality of Minnesota's surface waters, the quality of some of Minnesota's surface waters does not meet federal water quality requirements. The federal Clean Water Act requires that further efforts must be made by the state to reduce human impacts on surface waters that are determined to be impaired due to high pollutant loads of nutrients, bacteria, sediment, mercury, and other contaminants. Scientific studies of these waters must be conducted to determine how much pollution they can handle (Total Maximum Daily Loads or TMDLs). The pollutant load reduction requirements will affect municipal, industrial, and agricultural practices and operations along any river, stream or lake determined to be impaired. While the source of 86 percent of the pollutants affecting Minnesota waters are non-point sources, there will also be new costs and requirements for point source dischargers, like munici- pal wastewater treatment facilities. Municipal stormwater systems will also face increased protec- tive requirements and regulation as part of the state's impaired waters program. Response: The League will work actively with the administration, the Legislature, and other stakeholders in the design and implementation of Minnesota's impaired waters program to: · ensure equitable funding solutions are found, such as the state general fund or bonding, that broadly collect revenue to address this statewide problem; · support legislative passage of revenue streams dedicated to providing at least $80 million per year to these programs; · direct the majority of funds collected by the state for impaired waters into programs that fund municipal wastewater and stormwater projects, and for state programs needed for municipal wastewater and stormwater permitting and technical support, including the Clean Water Re- volving Loan Fund, Wastewater Infrastructure Fund, Phosphorus Reduction Grant Program, TMDL Grants Program, Small Community Wastewater Treatment Grant and Loan Program, and other state programs that provide financial resources for city wastewater treatment facili- ties, septic tank replacement, stormwater management projects, and other city water quality improvement and protection projects; · more adequately cover the current five-year wastewater infrastructure funding need projection of more than $2.1 billion; · recognize and address the upcoming costs of stormwater management infrastructure and op- eration on municipalities from new regulatory mandates and load reduction requirements; · allow flexibility in achieving pollutant load reductions and limitations through offsets or trad- ing of pollutant load reduction credits for both point and non~point load reduction require- ments within watersheds; · recognize and credit the work both underway and already completed by local units of govern- ment to limit point and non-point source water pollutant discharges; · recognize the diversity of efforts and needs that exists across the state; Page 22 '~~~. '''1111:. If 1 (fITI. tfilli~' F.1llil'AHJ 110" FilII'.'" :lillllt I~"""'" · ensure the best science available is used to accurately determine the sources of pollutant load in order to maximize positive envitonmental outcomes and minimize unnecessary regulatory and financial burdens for cities; · the state must assure that the MPCA retain control of the TMDL development process and that all scientific research related to TMDLs is conducted by the MPCA or qualified, objective parties pursuant to state contracting, procurement and conflict of interest laws; and · clarifY state water quality mandates so cities know specifically what they are required to do and what methods of achieving those outcomes are acceptable to state and federal regulators. --.,..:1.1111:. ff. 11.,1. tfi'l1i mill' F.111;}1Al!lJ ,1-.'1 Filllll~ iIi1ll Ii I;J; \_'lb'%HJ .. Page 23 alley e ora dum Public Works 763-593-8030 I 763-593-3988 (fax) Executive Summary Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting December 9,2008 Agenda Item 4. Proposed Revisions to the Pavement Management Policy Prepared By Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer Summary The City adopted its Pavement Management Policy in 1995 to provide an outline for the management of its transportation infrastructure. The policy has been modified periodically in order to stay current with project development, management, and procedural issues. Based upon discussions during development of the 2008 and 2009 Pavement Management projects, the City Council directed staff to make modifications to the policy in 2008. Two versions of the proposed Pavement Management Policy are attached to this memorandum for reference. The first version has the proposed additions to the policy underlined, and the proposed deletions to the policy struck through. The second version of the policy is the new proposed policy without editing. The following changes to the Pavement Management Policy are proposed at this time: 1. Establish the B-618 concrete curb and gutter constructed to industry standards as the City standard. 2. Include the sanitary sewer service repair and rehabilitation program in street reconstruction projects. 3. Consider alternative styles of concrete curb and gutter, such as drive-over curb (0412), if 100 percent of the property owners on a street petition for the alternate style of curb, and agree that the City wjll no longer repair damage done to lawns and obstructions in the right-of-way that are caused by snow and ice. control. 4. Include language to formalize the City's practice of rejecting participation in the driveway reconstruction program in high liability cases. 5. Remove the option of reconstructing streets with concrete pavement, thus establishing streets with asphalt pavement and concrete curb and gutter as the City standard roadway. 6. Delete the typical schedule for Pavement Management Projects due to changes in project development practices. 7. Delete the Appendix A, Petition Process, from the policy. If Council finds the proposed revisions acceptable, staff will place the policy on a regular Council meeting for consideration. Attachments Proposed Pavement Management Policy, edited version (8 pages) Proposed Pavement Management Policy, clean version (5 pages) Pavement Management Policy for The City of Golden Valley January 17, 1995 Amended October 15, 1996 Amended December 9,1997 Amended June 7,2005 Amended XXX X. 2008 Purpose There are approximately 119 miles of street to be main Valley. Of this total, 23 miles are designated as Mu and the remaining 96 miles are local streets. Ke condition is necessary to provide safe and re the City, to maintain property values and to place to live and do business. the City of Golden A) roadways, good . . ens of irable The goal of the Pavement Manage Program (PMP) that systematically e pavement lifespan, at minimum long-t measure at the proper time. h a Pavement Management t maximize the proper rehabilitation can be expected to have oper maintenance measures (crack e performed at the proper times. Many d more than The average age of the 30 years ago. and did not receive the 'stent with toda 's standards. In general, streets Many of Golden Valley's streets are newer, having been constructed to City standards within the last 20 years. Although the pavement on these streets also exhibits some distress, the Pavement Management Program will include maintenance and rehabilitation of these streets in order to maximize their functional lifespan. methods such as sealcoating and bituminous overlays are usually appropriate for prolonging their usuallifo. G:\Policies and Procedures\Pavement Mgmt Policy\Prop2008Revisions.doc 1 The Pavement Management Program (PMP) The entire street system under the jurisdiction of the City of Golden Valley has been broken into segments which are evaluated by staff and consultants to determine the type of pavement distresses present. Staff then records the severity and extent of each pavement distress as well as the quality of the ride, traffic volumes and structural capacity on each street segment. Using a pavement management computer program, staff analyzes the recorded information and assigns a Pavement Quality Index (Pal) to each street segment. For example, a pal of 10.0 represents a newly constructed street with little or no distress evident; and a pal of 2.0 represents a st t pavement that has completely failed. The pal of each street segment is then inv , and streets are selected for rehabilitation strategies measures based on st inion and the recommendations analvsis of the computer software. Th the City is to maintain a street system with an average PQI of 6.0 to 7.0. Resi s shall be designated for an axle loading of 7 ton. At- r used to extend the life of a ggregate are applied to help seal out e, increase skid resistance and help ng prematurely deteriorating. A properly ximately 6 to 10 years. Se Ci stan street subgr sealcoating pr concrete curb an treets in the system that have been constructed to and do not exhibit distresses indicative of poor . . The de crack sealing, routine patching and limited repair of Bituminous Millin and Overlay Bituminous milling and overlay consists of mechanically removing a portion of the existing bituminous pavement surface, usually up to one and one half inches (1.5"), and placing new pavement. After placement of a bituminous overlay, properly timed sealcoating can extend the life of a street for an estimated 20 to 25 years before another overlay is required. Bituminous overlays will be performed 9Rly-on those streets that have been constructed to City standards and do not have distresses indicative of a poor subgrade. The streets G:\Policies and Procedures\Pavement Mgmt Policy\Prop2008Revisions,doc 2 receiving overlays also will be subject to crack sealing, curb repair, and patching before the placement of the overlays. The pal of these streets '::i11 '.'ary bet\~.(een 6.0 and 8.0, depending on the types of distress present. Reconstruction Reconstruction is defined as any major rehabilitation involving the removal or relaying of all surface material for a particular segment of street. Reconstruction will be performed on streets that have deteriorated to the point where reconstruction is the only cost-effective method of rehabilitation. Sanitary sewer, water ma' and storm sewer systems on streets subject to reconstruction will also be inve "as part of the PMP. Those utilities that exhibit inadequate capacity, maint e problems, and tRat- do not meet specific state or federal requirements for th '11 be repaired or replaced as part of the street reconstruction project. .. . and parking arrangements on to c ge. Variation from existing idth, Will be considered in the following where MSA standards apply. must be ctor cal streets where traffic volumes exceed 500 rda e are sting safety issues unsafe oonditions. ntainlng existing conditions street widths and parking reate undue hardship on adjacent properties or elsewhere ct. environmental impacts such as wetland filling and removal of ant trees. Drainaqe Improvements The City will attempt to improve drainage conditions during reconstruction wherever possible and feasible. Drainage improvements for areas outside of public riQht-of-way will be implemented where feasible and in accordance with the Special Assessment Policy. G:\Policies and Procedures\Pavement Mgmt Policy\Prop2008Revisions,doc 3 LandscapinQ Impacts The City will endeavor to minimize landscaping disturbances whenever possible, and shall consider reasonable replacements when disturbances are necessary. The Environmental Coordinator shall comment on tree and landscapinQ impacts due to proposed proiects and will include this review in proiect feasibilitv reports. Concrete Curb and Gutter Concrete curb and gutter provides structural support for the edge of the paved roadway, aids in snow removal and facilitates drainage of orm water for water quality treatment and minimizing damage to adjacent p . s. Therefore, preliminary design of streets subject to reconstructio nclude concrete curb and gutter. The Cit 's standard for concrete curb r is the Minnesota De artment of Trans ortation's 8-618 desi n co ordin to indust standards. Property Owner Involvement During the preliminarv design phase of any reconstruction project, the City will hold twe open houses for affected property owners. Property owners will be consulted and provided the opportunity to have input in the design process during the open houses. Ono shall be held early on in the process and one to\t\'ard completion of the process. However, tRis-is the open houses are not intended to exclude any other meetings with individual or groups of property owners during the design and construction process. The City will also endeavor to keep property owners informed during the construction phase. G:\Policies and Procedures\Pavement Mgmt Policy\Prop2008Revisions.doc 4 Drivewav Reconstruction The City will work with property owners to improve their private driveway conditions where possible durinQ street reconstruction proiects. Contracts for street reconstruction will include contract unit prices for bituminous and concrete driveway pavement. Residents along streets being reconstructed whose driveways are impacted by the proiect will be given the option of having their driveways reconstructed at these contract unit prices. If a resident elects to have his or her driveway reconstructed, staff will measure the quantities installed. The cost of driveway reconstruction and administrative costs i urred b the Cit will be included in the assessment. and may then be paid i by the resident or added to the assessment against the property as ou' in the S ecial Assessment Policy. by the City no later than August 1 of the ye~u before reconstruction is desired. Maintenance The City will perform major maintenance procedures in a timely and cost- effective manner to maintain condition over the life of the street, including overlays and sealcoating. However, streets that need reconstruction also need maintenance measures beyond what is required for streets built to City standards. These maintenance measures must also be performed more frequently on poor streets, resulting in an increasing burden on General Fund G:\Policies and Procedures\Pavement Mgmt Policy\Prop2008Revisions.doc 5 street maintenance and the need for more taxes to finance them. Therefore, those streets recommended for reconstruction consistent with the Pavement Management Policy but denied by the City Council because of resident opposition will no longer be subject to maintenance measures beyond those deemed necessary for public safety. Maintenance measures required for public safety will include, but are not limited to, repair of large potholes in the driving lanes and patching of utility openings. Sidewalks The construction of sidewalks will be evaluated for eac the goals of the Golden Valley Sidewalk Committee. be financed by the City. in keeping with alk construction will form will be accepted. In addition to the petition process, a neighborhood wishing to have its street reconstructed 'Nith concrete pavement must obtain \I\'aivers of Special Assessment Appeals from 100% of the affected property o\\'ners. G:\Policies and Procedures\Pavement Mgmt Policy\Prop2008Revisions,doc 6 If new concrete pavement is constructed according to this policy, all propertY'Nith frontage on the concrete pavement '....i11 be subject to a concrete street maintenance utility fee that ,-':i11 be adopted at the time the project is ordered. Financing and Special Assessments The City of Golden Valley Pavement Management Program is to be financed through the General Fund and general obligation bonds. The bonds will be repaid through tax levies and special assessments. Sealcoating will be financed completely through the General Fund, with no assessments to adjacent properties. Situ . ous overlays may will be contracted with the reconstruction portion of the progr +tWill be financed through bonding as funding allows. Special assessments w' be levied against those properties adjacent to streets being reconstructed. unt of the special assessments will be set in the City's annual fee resoluf the Special Assessment Policy. JI:IRe .January through March Prepare final design and specifications. Staff revie'J/s and revises plans (State Aid revie'.".' when needed). March ,^,dvertise for bids. G:\Policies and Procedures\Pavement Mgmt Policy\Prop2008Revisions,doc 7 ApRI Bids ore received and a contraot is awarded by t~e City Council. May though Sept-omber Construction begins in May, '/:ith oompletion dates no later than September 30 on eaoh oontract. Appendix A 5. /\ minimum of 75% of the affected property owners must petition for the removal of curb and gutter for it to be removed from the project. 6. Staff will tally the responsos and present the information at the public hearing. G:\Policies and Procedures\Pavement Mgmt Policy\Prop2008Revisions.doc 8 Pavement Management Policy for The City of Golden Valley January 17, 1995 Many of Gol within the last distress, the Pave rehabilitation of the Amended October 15,1996 Amended December 9,1997 Amended June 7, 2005 Amended XXX X, 2008 Purpose There are approximately 119 miles of street to be main Valley. Of this total, 23 miles are designated as Mu and the remaining 96 miles are local streets. Ke condition is necessary to provide safe and re the City, to maintain property values and to place to live and do business. the City of Golden A) roadways, good . . ens of irable The goal of the Pavement Manage Program (PMP) that systematically e pavement lifespan, at minimum long-t measure at the proper time. h a Pavement Management t maximize the proper rehabilitation to have an average effective lifespan of ack sealing, sealcoating, and times. Many of the streets in Golden 0, and did not receive the subgrade toda tandards. Many were constructed without tre~~t subgrade, which causes the street to crack, c loading. This breakup of the pavement allows rther accelerates deterioration. ts are newer, having been constructed to City standards ough the pavement on these streets also exhibits some nagement Program will include maintenance and reets in order to maximize their functional lifespan. The Pavement Management Program (PMP) The entire street system under the jurisdiction of the City of Golden Valley has been broken into segments which are evaluated by staff and consultants to determine the type of pavement distresses present. Staff then records the severity and extent of each pavement distress as well as the quality of the ride, traffic volumes and structural capacity on each street segment. Using a pavement management computer program, staff analyzes the recorded information and assigns a Pavement Quality Index (Pal) to each street segment. For example, a pal of 10.0 represents a newly constructed street G:\Policies and Procedures\Pavement Mgmt Policy\Prop2008Revisions CLEAN.doc 1 with little or no distress evident; and a PQI of 2.0 represents a street pavement that has completely failed. The PQI of each street segment is then inventoried, and streets are selected for rehabilitation strategies based on staff opinion and the analysis of the computer software. The goal of the City is to maintain a street system with an average PQI of 6.0 to 7.0. Residential streets shall be designated for an axle loading of 7 ton. Because streets decay at different rates depending on subgrade and pavement conditions, staff will periodically evaluate the pavement and assign PQls. Approximately every fifth year, a consultant will conduct a complete inventory a evaluation of the street system. This will ensure that the baseline data being u ecision making is current and that each street in the system receives appropr' ehabilitation measures when the need for maintenance first arises. Rehabilitatio es will include sealcoating, edge and full-width milling and overlays, v s of in-place reclamation, total street reconstruction and other p t may become available as new technology develops. Bituminous Bitumino existin bitu esti is echanically removing a portion of the ce, and placing new pavement. After placement of a coating can extend the life of a street for an her overlay is required. Bituminous City standards receiving overlay the placement of th erformed on those streets that have been constructed to ve distresses indicative of a poor subgrade. The streets be subject to crack sealing, curb repair, and patching before erlays. Reconstruction Reconstruction is defined as any major rehabilitation involving the removal or relaying of all surface material for a particular segment of street. Reconstruction will be performed on streets that have deteriorated to the point where reconstruction is the only cost-effective method of rehabilitation. Sanitary sewer, water main, and storm sewer systems on streets subject to reconstruction will also be investigated as part of the PMP. Those utilities that exhibit inadequate capacity, maintenance problems, and do G:\Policies and Procedures\Pavement Mgmt Policy\Prop2008Revisions CLEAN.doc 2 not meet specific state or federal requirements for the utility will be repaired or replaced as part of the street reconstruction project. Construction Standards The City will strive to maintain the existing street width and parking arrangements unless there is an over-riding safety reason to change. Variation from existing conditions, including parking and street width, will be considered in the following situations: 1. On Municipal State Aid streets where MSA s 2. On collector and local streets where traffic 500 vehicles per day. 3. Where there are existing safety issue 4. Where maintaining existing street undue hardship on adjacent pro 5. To avoid environmental impa significant trees. conditions create the project. r oval of Drainaqe Improvements The City will attempt to impro wherever possible and feasibl public right-of-way will be imple the Special Assessment Policy. caping isturbances whenever possible, s when disturbances are necessary. ent on tree and landscaping impacts this review in project feasibility reports. qu desig TheCi Transporta G utter . s structural support for the edge of the paved rem I and facilitates.drainage of storm water for water ini izing damage to adjacent properties. Therefore, ct to reconstruction will include concrete curb and gutter. r concrete curb and gutter is the Minnesota Department of 18 design constructed according to industry standards. Concrete cu and gutter designs other than the City's standard, such as D type, may be considered based upon neighborhood input. In order for alternate styles to be installed, 100 percent of the property owners abutting a street must sign a petition prepared by the Public Works Department requesting the alternate curb style. This petition will state that the City will no longer repair damages to turf, landscaping, sprinkler systems, mailboxes or other items placed within the public right-of-way by property owners resulting from the City's snow and ice control measures. G:\Policies and Procedures\Pavement Mgmt Policy\Prop2008Revisions CLEAN.doc 3 Property Owner Involvement During the preliminary design phase of any reconstruction project, the City will hold open houses for affected property owners. Property owners will be consulted and provided the opportunity to have input in the design process during the open houses. However, the open houses are not intended to exclude any other meetings with individual or groups of property owners during the design and construction process. The City will also endeavor to keep property owners informed during the construction phase. Driveway Reconstruction The City will work with property owners to improve t conditions where possible during street reconstru street reconstruction will include contract unit pri driveway pavement. Residents along streets driveways are impacted by the project will driveways reconstructed at these contr his or her driveway reconstructed, st cost of driveway reconstruction and admin be included in the assessment, and may the added to the assessment ag' t the property Assessment Policy. or priv driveway reconstruction e City and/or its contractors truct than a normal driveway, require quality is not possible. Such pes, landscaping impacts, structural ation of eligibility to participate in the t the discretion of the Public Works ice nt str t reconstruction projects will include an opportunity for ffec ed by the street reconstruction to reconstruct their priva r services. This voluntary program will. allow property owners ompliant with Chapter 3 of Golden Valley City Code, and helps the ty reduce the inflow and infiltration of clear water into the sanitary sew ystem. If a resident elects to have his or her sanitary sewer service repa d or rehabilitated, staff will measure the quantities installed. The cost of sanitary sewer service construction and administrative costs incurred by the City will be included in the assessment, and may then be paid in cash by the resident or added to the assessment against the property as outlined in the Special Assessment Policy. G:\Policies and Procedures\Pavement Mgmt Policy\Prop2008Revisions CLEAN.doc 4 Maintenance The City will perform major maintenance procedures in a timely and cost- effective manner to maintain condition over the life of the street, including overlays and sealcoating. However, streets that need reconstruction also need maintenance measures beyond what is required for streets built to City standards. These maintenance measures must also be performed more frequently on poor streets, resulting in an increasing burden on General Fund street maintenance and the need for more taxes to finance them. Therefore, those streets recommended for reconstruction consistent ith the Pavement Management Policy but denied by the City Council bec resident opposition will no longer be subject to maintenance res beyond those deemed necessary for public safety. Maintenance s required for public safety will include, but are not limited to, repair es in the driving lanes and patching of utility openings. Sidewalks The construction of sidewalks will be the goals of the Golden Valley Sidewalk C be financed by the City. e financed through onds be repaid through tax tf completely through the t prope s. Bituminous overlays may f the program and will be financed s ments will only be levied against ucted. The amount of the special resolution based on the Special G:\Policies and Procedures\Pavement Mgmt Policy\Prop2008Revisions CLEAN.doc 5 Hey morandum Public Works 763-593-8030 I 763-593-3988 (fax) Executive Summary Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting December 9,2008 Agenda Item 5. Proposed Revisions to the Special Assessment Policy Prepared By Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer Summary The City adopted its Special Assessment Policy in 1995 to provide an outline for special assessments associated with public improvement projects. The policy has been modified periodically in order to address changes in practice and procedural issues. Based upon discussions during development of the 2008 and 2009 Pavement Management projects, the City Council directed staff to make modifications to the policy in 2008. Two versions of the proposed Special Assessment Policy are attached to this memorandum for reference. The first version has the proposed additions to the policy underlined and the proposed deletions to the policy struck through. The second version of the policy is the new proposed policy without editing. The following changes to the Special Assessment Policy are proposed at this time: 1. Include a discussion on the sanitary sewer service rehabilitation program offered as part of street reconstruction projects. 2. Clarify the discussion on public improvement projects for installation of streets and utilities for private developments. 3. Remove specific percentages of construction costs to be assessed for each land use from the policy. 4. Remove the discussion of special assessments for reconstruction of streets with existing concrete pavement, consistent with the proposed Pavement Management Policy revisions. If the Council finds the changes acceptable, staff will place the policy on a regular Council meeting. Attachments Proposed Special Assessment Policy, edited version (8 pages) Proposed Special Assessment Policy, clean version (7 pages) Exhibit A Special Assessment Policy for The City of Golden Valley January 17, 1995 Amended February 21, 1995 Amended June 7, 2005 Amended July 18, 2006 Amended XXX X. 2008 General Minnesota State Law, Chapters 429.010 to 429.1 make public improvements such as installation sidewalks, and street improvements (includi ,> lighting). The procedures that Cities must folio hearings, are well defined within the laws. 'es the ability to rm sewer, ng,and nd public The Statute allows municipalities to improvements to property owners bas Statute is not specific regarding the det apportion the costs to the benefiting pro responsible for developi quitable m property owners. he costs of any "'from the project. The benefit a property, or how to aw makes the municipality aring among the benefiting provide a guide, to be used by City I by the City Council. This policy is ent to all properties within the City as Th Special under this p will be determ cover all possible assessment situations. of s ndard cases that are not specifically discussed ated during preliminary project studies, and assessments t violate the benefit principles as required by Statute. No special assess will be levied against designated floodplains, municipal storm water ponds or wetl d areas on private property as determined by criteria in the Wetland Conservation Act of 1991 and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. The limits of wetlands will be determined by the City on a case-by-case basis at the time of preliminary project design and feasibility report preparation. No special assessments will be levied against railroad, county highway or state highway rights-of-way. Properties fronting County Roads and County Highways will be subject to special assessments for reconstruction projects based upon this policy. G:\Policies and Procedures\Assessment Policy\2008ProposedRevisions.doc 1 Special assessment rates f<>r properties '.*.lith zoning classifications other than residential 'NiII be determined on a project speoific basis based on the surrounding zoning, land uses, and development potential. Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Assessments Reconstruction and Repairs No special assessments will be levied for repair and reconstruction of existing sanitary sewer and water main systems, except for properties that have not been previously assessed for these utilities. For properties not previously assessed that are adj water main reconstruction projects, the amount calculated on a case-by-case basis at the tim feasibility report preparation, The City is respo services from t or valve on repair and pipe to the valve replacement of water r main to and including the curb stop owner is responsible for maintenance, from the connection of the service . Ing being served. erty is developing or redeveloping, public sanitary av need to be installed, The construction of City ains and storm sewer to serve these ro erties will be im rovement ro'ects unless the Ci 0 ts to have the CI construct the im rovements. The developer of such esponsible for the entire cost of public utilities, including construction ministration and other indirect costs whether construction is performed as a City Improvement Project or by the developer. At the time such a development project is proposed, the City Engineer will determine if the project is to be constructed publicly or privately. If the utility installation is to be constructed privately, the developer will be responsible for preparing construction plans and specifications consistent with City standards. These construction plans and specifications must be reviewed and approved by the EngiReering Public Works Department. The utility installation must also be inspected by the Engineering Public Works Department during construction. The developer will be responsible for 100% of the costs of City construction G:\Policies and ProcedureslAssessment Policy\2008ProposedRevisions.doc 2 observation and plan review, which will be billed directly to the developer. Any unpaid costs incurred for these services will be assessed against the developing properties. An irrevocable letter of credit must be posted by the developer in an amount equal to 150% of the estimated construction costs to ensure timely completion of the project. If a public sanitary sewer or water main project is to be installed as a City Improvement Project, the developer will be responsible for 100% of the direct and indirect costs incurred by the City. These costs may include, but are not limited to: feasibility report preparation, preliminary surv eliminary design, final design, construction staking, construction observ , built surveying and drafting, and administrative and legal costs. T loper may elect to have these costs assessed against the property oped or pay the costs directly to the City. Storm Water Drainage is necessary in rear yard areas to correct staff will visit such problem areas at the request If a property or owners cannot remedy the rear yard drainage problems, they may per n the City for installation of storm sewer. Upon receiving a request for petition for rear yard storm sewer, engineering staff will determine the properties that contribute storm water runoff to the problem area. The petitioner must then circulate the petition to the contributing property owners for signatures. Each contributing property owner must be made aware that special assessments will be levied against their property for the corrective storm sewer work. A minimum of 35% of the contributing property owners must sign the petition for the City Council to consider the project. Upon receipt of the petition and after a public hearing, the City Council may either deny the request or order the storm sewer improvements. If the improvements are ordered, the contributing property owners will be assessed for 100% of the construction and indirect costs for the G:\Policies and ProcedureslAssessment Policy\2008ProposedRevisions.doc 3 storm sewer installation. The method of assessment and the pro-ration of costs will be determined on a project-specific basis. Affected property owners in rear yard drainage projects will also be required to dedicate all drainage and utility easements for the installation of the storm sewer at no cost to the City. If the City must purchase or condemn in order to obtain the easements, the entire acquisition costs will be included in the project costs for assessment or the City may decline to undertake the project. Street Improvements Development/Redevelopment Proiects When property is developed or redeveloped that roadways that are scheduled for construction will be required to pay an escrow for the fut shall be based upon the assessment me policy, and shall be based on the ass development is approved. The prope not be specially assessed at the time street rontage on the development n. The escrow 'ned in this he pment will tion that is in ity of Golden Valley ned by residents on a or 100% of the project costs. be determined on a project ts of Golden Valley on a petition basis tion City velops or redevelops, it may be necessary to install y Engineer will determine if the project is to be installed he procedures, policies, and requirements for street e same as discussed for new sanitary sewer installations. SealcoatinQ No special assessments will be levied for street sealcoating. Bituminous MillinQ and Overlavs No special assessments will be levied for bituminous milling and overlays. G:\Policies and ProcedureslAssessment Policy\2008ProposedRevisions.doc 4 Street Reconstruction Special assessments for street reconstruction proiects will be in accordance with this policy and Minnesota Statutes. Chapter 429. The total amount of the special assessments will be a minimum of 20% of the street reconstruction costs not to exceed the benefit received by each property. Special assessment rates for all land uses and street classifications will be determined annually by ordinance. rks and other City- o a per-unit basis, has the potential to City subdivision shall be assessed e property may to multiple at the til such sessments 2. Special assessments against p on a front-foot basis, with 100% assessment. ing land use will be roved subject to 3. tax exempt land uses will be assessed ge being improved subject to mercial, industrial, business and offices will be , with 100% of the frontage being improved subject concrete roadway is selectod, the special assessment rate.will be a standard residential unit assessment plus 100% of the cost difference ben,\'een bituminous and concrete pavement. This cost difference will include construction and indirect costs. To reconstruct an existing concrete street as a new concreto street, 100% of the abutting property ml'mers must sign a petition requesting the concrete pa'Jement, including the additional special assessment for the concrete pavement as outlined in the Pavement Management Policy. In addition, 100% of the proporty G:\Policies and Procedures\Assessment Policy\2008ProposedRevisions.doc 5 owners subject to the 3dditional assessment must sign a 'Naiver of Special Assessment .^.ppeal for the conorete street construction. 6. Residential properties adjacent to local streets being reconstructed will be given the option of having their driveways reconstructed and sanitary sewer service repaired or reconstructed at contract unit prices. Residents will be notified of these tRis-programs at informational meetings for each street project. If a resident participates in these tRi6 programs, staff will coordinate construction with the contractor and will measure the quantities of p3'Jement installed. The cost of . . . . . 9. and a state or county ity for state highway will be assessed the rontage along the local t. 7. When a corner residential lot has frontage on assessed for one-half unit assessment for No more than one total unit assessment street reconstruction. Corner properti will be charged one-half of the appro a reconstruction of each street. 8. Corner residential properties roadway will not be subject to or county road reconstruction. appropriate number of unit asses streets when reco ction occurs ge roads of state highways will be Aid streets and will be assessed perties not specifically covered in any of the above eel-specific basis at the time of the feasibility State A 1. Prope ntial and duplex residential land uses that have frontage on a Municip Street will be assessed on a per-unit basis. The per-unit assessmen ill be approximately 25% of the standard residential rate for properties on cal streets. Assessments for oversized parcels with the potential for subdivision are to be consistent with the previously discussed policy for local streets. 2. Properties with Multiple Dwelling land use that front on a Municipal State Aid Street will be assessed on a front-foot basis for the frontage being improved. The assessment rate represents 37% of the oosts of oonstructing the State .'\id Street. 3:- Properties with church, school, and other tax-exempt land uses that front on a Municipal State Aid Street will be assessed on a front-foot basis for the frontage G:\Policies and Procedures\Assessment Policy\2008ProposedRevisions,doc 6 being improved. The assessment rate represents 45% of the oosts of oonstruoting the State Aid Street. ~ All other land uses, including commercial, industrial, business and offices that front on a Municipal State Aid Street will be assessed ona front-foot basis for the frontage being improved. The assessment rate represents 45% of the costs of constructing the State Aid Streot. 5. Special assessments for properties not specifically covered in any of the above cases will be addressed on a parcel-specific basis at the of the feasibility report. , , business, and tax-exempt sis, wit 00% of the frontage being sessment rate shall be the rates used ance. 6. Residential properties adjacent to State Aid stre given the option of having their driveways and or reconstructed under the same terms dis reconstruction portion of this policy. 2. All other land use . uses will be as improved su for State A G:\Policies and Procedures\Assessment Policy\2008ProposedRevisions.doc 7 Low Income Senior Citizen and Disability Deferments As required by Minnesota Statute, the City has a special assessment deferral policy for low income senior citizens and disabled persons meeting all of the following criteria: 1. The property upon which the assessment is deferred must be homesteaded; 2. The property is owned by a person at least 65 years of age on January 1st of the year in which payment of the first installment of the subject assessment is due; or is owned by a person who is retired due to permanent and total disability. 3. The applicant must have a "financial hardship" defined as: a) An annual income at or below a level established annua b) The aggregate total of all special assessments levies half percent (1-1/2%) of the applicant's annual inco More information is available at General Services 0 ordinance and; d one and one- Street Reconstruction Special Assessment Special assessment rates as discussed in thi Annual Fee Resolution. The rates will be b indirect costs as discussed above. Indirect costs construction costs and include administration, engin and legal fees. These rates will be s . t to revision e construction costs in the City from the year and f ENR Index for construction costs. ith the G:\Policies and Procedures\Assessment Policy\2008ProposedRevisions.doc 8 Exhibit A Special Assessment Policy for The City of Golden Valley January 17, 1995 Amended February 21, 1995 Amended June 7, 2005 Amended July 18, 2006 Amended XXX X. 2008 General Minnesota State Law, Chapters 429.010 to 429.1 make public improvements such as installation sidewalks, and street improvements (includi Ii . lighting). The procedures that Cities must folio hearings, are well defined within the laws. s the ability to rm sewer, ng,and nd public The Statute allows municipalities to improvements to property owners bas Statute is not specific regarding the det apportion the costs to the benefiting pro responsible for developi quitable m property owners. e costs of any rom the project. The benefit a property, or how to aw makes the municipality aring among the benefiting provide a guide, to be used by City I by the City Council. This policy is ent to all properties within the City as Th Special c under this will be determ cover all possible assessment situations. of s ndard cases that are not specifically discussed ated during preliminary project studies, and assessments t violate the benefit principles as required by Statute. will be levied against designated floodplains, municipal storm water ponds or wetl d areas on private property as determined by criteria in the Wetland Conservation Act of 1991 and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. The limits of wetlands will be determined by the City on a case-by-case basis at the time of preliminary project design and feasibility report preparation. No special assessments will be levied against railroad, county highway or state highway rights-of-way. Properties fronting County Roads and County Highways will be subject to special assessments for reconstruction projects based upon this policy. G:\Policies and Procedures\Assessment Policy\2008PropRev CLEAN.doc 1 Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Assessments Reconstruction and Repairs No special assessments will be levied for repair and reconstruction of existing sanitary sewer and water main systems, except for properties that have not been previously assessed for these utilities. For properties not previously assessed that are adjacent to sanitary sewer or water main reconstruction projects, the amount of special assessments will be calculated on a case-by-case basis at the time of prelimi design and feasibility report preparation. Property owners are responsible for maintenanc sanitary sewer services from, and including th building being served. Pavement Manage include an opportunity for property owne sewer services. All costs, including co costs, will be specially assessed to th sewer service. d replacement of he main, and the 'on projects will eir sanitary r indirect nitary lacement of water . eluding the curb stop sible for maintenance, nnection of the service erved. evelo' or redeveloping, public sanitary sewer d. The construction of City sanitary m sewer to serve these properties will be nt projects, unless the City opts to have the the improvements. The developer of such development project is proposed, the City Engineer will determine if project is to be constructed publicly or privately. If the utility installation is to be constructed privately, the developer will be responsible for preparing construction plans and specifications consistent with City standards. These construction plans and specifications must be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department. The utility installation must also be inspected by the Public Works Department during construction. The developer will be responsible for 100% of the costs of City construction observation and plan review, which will be billed directly to the developer. Any unpaid costs incurred for these services will be assessed against the developing properties. An irrevocable letter of credit must be posted by the developer in an amount equal G:\Policies and Procedures\Assessment Policy\2008PropRev CLEAN.doc 2 to 150% of the estimated construction costs to ensure timely completion of the project. If a public sanitary sewer or water main project is to be installed as a City Improvement Project, the developer will be responsible for 100% of the direct and indirect costs incurred by the City. These costs may include, but are not limited to: feasibility report preparation, preliminary survey, preliminary design, final design, construction staking, construction observation, as-built surveying and drafting, and administrative and legal costs. The developer may elect to have these costs assessed against the property being d ped or pay the costs directly to the City. Storm Water Drainage development and o the property being er Main Assessments sary in rear yard areas to correct ill visit such problem areas at the request the situ tion and provide engineering assistance to medy the drainage problems without City If a owners cannot remedy the rear yard drainage problems, they m ity for installation of storm sewer. Upon receiving a request f r rear yard storm sewer, engineering staff will determine the properties t tribute storm water runoff to the problem area. The petitioner must then ci ate the petition to the contributing property owners for signatures. Each contributing property owner must be made aware that special assessments will be levied against their property for the corrective storm sewer work. A minimum of 35% of the contributing property owners must sign the petition for the City Council to consider the project. Upon receipt of the petition and after a public hearing, the City Council may either deny the request or order the storm sewer improvements. If the improvements are ordered, the contributing property owners will be assessed for 100% of the construction and indirect costs for the storm sewer installation. The method of assessment and the pro-ration of costs will be determined on a project-specific basis. G:\Policies and Procedures\Assessment Policy\2008PropRev CLEAN.doc 3 Affected property owners in rear yard drainage projects will also be required to dedicate all drainage and utility easements for the installation ofthe storm sewer at no cost to the City. If the City must purchase or condemn in order to obtain the easements, the entire acquisition costs will be included in the project costs for assessment or the City may decline to undertake the project. Street Improvements Development/Redevelopment Projects When property is developed or redeveloped that has str roadways that are scheduled for construction or reco will be required to pay an escrow for the future stre shall be based upon the assessment methods a policy, and shall be based on the assessment development is approved. The property or not be specially assessed at the time str ontage on , the development ilitation. The escrow contained in this the time the evelopment will ts of Golden Valley on a petition basis evelops or redevelops, it may be necessary to install . e r will determine if the project is to be installed dures, policies, and requirements for street as discussed for new sanitary sewer installations. nts will be levied for street sealcoating. Bituminous nand Overla s No special assessments will be levied for bituminous milling and overlays. G:\Policies and Procedures \Assessment Policy\2008PropRev CLEAN.doc 4 Street Reconstruction Special assessments for street reconstruction projects will be in accordance with this policy and Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429. The total amount of the special assessments will be a minimum of 20% of the street reconstruction costs not to exceed the benefit received by each property. Special assessment rates for all land uses and street classifications will be determined annually by ordinance. 4. rks and other City- ~fu:_~ 6" a per-unit basis, y has the potential to City subdivision shall be assessed e property may to multiple at the 2. Special assessments against p on a front-foot basis, with 100% assessment. ing land use will be roved subject to 3. Properties with on a front-f assessme ai, industrial, business and offices will be is, with 100% of the frontage being improved subject R adja nt to local streets being reconstructed will be given the eir driveways reconstructed and sanitary sewer service repaire ted at contract unit prices. Residents will be notified of these pro formational meetings for each street project. If a resident participates e programs, staff will coordinate construction with the contractor anw ill measure the quantities installed. The construction costs, along with an administrative, established annually by ordinance, will be assessed to the property owner. 6. When a corner residential lot has frontage on two local streets, it will be assessed for one-half unit assessment for each street subject to reconstruction. No more than one total unit assessment will be charged against a parcel for street reconstruction. Corner properties adjacent to State Aid and local streets will be charged one-half of the appropriate unit assessment at the time of reconstruction of each street. G:\Policies and Procedures \Assessment Policy\2008PropRev CLEAN, doc 5 7. Corner residential properties adjacent to a local street and a state or county roadway will not be subject to special assessments by the City for state highway or county road reconstruction. However, these properties will be assessed the appropriate number of unit assessments for the entire frontage along the local streets when reconstruction occurs on the local street. 8. Residential properties adjacent to frontage roads of state highways will be considered to be on local or Municipal State Aid streets and will be assessed consistent with this policy. 3. Properties with Municipal S being impr unicipal State Aid tage being improved. 9. Special Assessments for properties not specifically co cases will be addressed on a parcel-specific basis report. State Aid Streets 1. Properties with residential and duplex re . a Municipal State Aid Street will be as assessment rate will be approximatel properties on local streets. Assessments f for subdivision are to be consistent with the pr streets. 2. Properties with Multiple Dwellin Street will be assessed on a front 4. ai, industrial, business and offices that 'd Stree will be assessed on a front-foot basis for the for pl1 erties not specifically covered in any of the above d on a parcel-specific basis at the time of the feasibility 6. Residential ies adjacent to State Aid streets being reconstructed will be given the op of having their driveways and sanitary sewer services repaired or reconstructed under the same terms discussed in the local street reconstruction portion of this policy. County Roads 1. Properties with residential and duplex residential land uses adjacent to county roads will be assessed according to the previously discussed methods for local streets, except for corner lots with local streets, which will be assessed in full at the time the intersecting local street is reconstructed. Special assessments to residential properties will be at State Aid street rates. G:\Policies and ProcedureslAssessment Policy\2008PropRev CLEAN.doc 6 2. All other land uses, including commercial, industrial, business, and tax-exempt uses will be assessed on a front-foot basis, with 100% of the frontage being improved subject to assessment. The assessment rate shall be the rates used for State Aid streets as established by ordinance, Low Income Senior Citizen and Disability Deferments As required by Minnesota Statute, the City has a special assessment deferral policy for low income senior citizens and disabled persons meeting all of the following criteria: 1. The property upon which the assessment is deferred must b 2. The property is owned by a person at least 65 years of a year in which payment of the first installment of the sub' owned by a person who is retired due to permanent 3. The applicant must have a "financial hardship" de' a) An annual income at or below a level establ' nually b) The aggregate total of all special assess ts levies will exce half percent (1-1/2%) of the applicant' al inc e. More information is available at General Services ished yearly with the ges of construction and d to be 30% of the construction observation, eVISlon ch year based on the actual year and for inflation based upon the G:\Policies and Procedures\Assessmenl Policy\2008PropRev CLEAN.doc 7 alley emorandu Public Works 763-593-8030 I 763-593-3988 (fax) Executive Summary Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting December 9, 2008 Agenda Item 6. Pavement Management Sanitary Sewer Service Repair Program Prepared By Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer Summary Based upon previous discussions with the City Council, the Sanitary Sewer Service Repair Program offered as part of the Pavement Management Program has been expanded to offer homeowners the ability to have all sewer service repairs outside of their home performed under a contract with the City. This update to the City Council is a summary of the procedure and communication with homeowners regarding this program. Attachments The following items are attached for reference: Item 1 2009 Pavement Management Procedures for Sanitary Sewer Service Repair Program. This is an internal document used by staff that outlines the steps followed for this program. (2 pages) Item 2a Letter sent to homeowners inviting them to have the III inspection performed (2 pages) Item 2b Follow-up letter sent to homeowners that have not had III inspection performed (2 pages) Item 3a Letter outlining defects identified during III inspection (2 pages) Item 3b Attachment to Item 3a, outlining the program (2 pages) Item 4a Cover letter sent with construction agreement for property owners who have requested an estimate (3 pages) Item 4b Sample construction agreement (1 page) Item 4c Draft contract terms and exclusions to be the appending pages to the construction agreement (2 pages) Item 4d List of contract pay items for sanitary sewer service repairs (1 page) Item 5 Construction completion notice posted in doors following service repair (1 page) Item 6 Compliance letter sent to homeowners following initial or final inspection (1 page) Item 1 2009 Pavement Management Procedures For Sanitary Sewer Service Repair Program 1. Send letter inviting residents to have I & I inspection of their sewer service. a. Follow up with additional letters of invitation as needed. 2. Property owners have inspection performed on sewer service. (At no charge to 2009 PMP area residents. Residents must schedule and have inspection completed by April 17, 2009.) a. Certificate of Compliance mailed out. b. Letter, with defects identified, mailed to all residents who had inspection informing them of the opportunity to get on a list for an estimate. c. If inspection was not completed, property owner must address the issue, i.e., access, blockage, etc. and get new appointment to have inspection completed. 3. Property owner calls Public Works to get on estimate request list. 4. After 2009 PMP bids are opened, Public Works prepares sewer service repair estimate worksheet for use by contractor/subcontractor; prepares estimate/contract document form. 5. Provide individual resident service defect letters and inspection reports to contractor for use in preparing estimates. Forward additional letters and reports to contractor as individual resident inspections are completed. 6. Forward list of residents requesting estimates with resident contact information to appropriate contractor/subcontractor contact who will: a. Confirm type of repair (liner or excavation or combination) based on letters, inspection report or video, and input from Golden Valley Utility Maintenance Supervisor. The primary purpose from the City's standpoint is to bring private sewer services into compliance with City code. However, residents whose service has an obvious sag or sags indicated should be notified of this by the contractor, and if desired by the resident, repair of sags should be included in the estimate worksheet. Repairs affecting the outside wall, foundation, or anything inside the home are to be addressed by private contract if desired by the homeowner. b. Visit resident address and prepare estimate worksheet. (If repair and estimate is complex and a meeting with a resident is necessary, make appointment with resident to include a member of city staff. Coordinate this appointment with a Golden Valley Public Works Administrative Assistants.) c. Forward completed estimate worksheet to Golden Valley Public Works for processing. d. Request, in writing to the Public Works Department, elimination of repair to any service that may expose the contractor to additional liability . The final decision is at the discretion of the Public Works Department. 7. City staff will process and mail estimate to resident with cover letter which will include deadline to return signed contract to City. The deadline shall be established by the Public G:\PROJECTS\2009 PMP (09-01)\Sanitary Sewer Repairs\Sewer Service Repair Procedure.docx Item 1 Works Director and Engineer and coordinated with the contractor to fit anticipated scheduling. The repair estimate when signed and returned by the resident to the City constitutes a contract for the sewer service repair. 8. Homeowners mail back contracts. Public Works Administrative Assistant emails a PDF of contract to appropriate Public Works staff and to contractor for distribution to appropriate member of their staff. If email is not available to contractor, make copies of contract documents available to contractor. 9. When necessary, contractor makes appointments with homeowners for repairs. Contractor must provide City with schedule each week at construction meeting. 10. Contractor performs repairs. a. If repair is located within City of Golden Valley ROW only: i. Contractor contacts project staff for visual inspection of c1eanout and repair (Engineering staff first, Utility as backup) ii. Staff takes swing ties for tie card. iii. Public Works, Engineering or Utility staff leaves "Notice of Construction Completion" at affected residence indicating homeowner will need to schedule the CCTV inspection in order to receive Certificate Of Compliance, if all defects within private property and the home have also been repaired (if applicable). iv. Homeowner contacts Public Works to schedule CCTV inspection of repair (includes entire length of service). v. CCTV completed by City consultant staff with DVD and inspection report. vi. DVD and report to Public Works Administrative Assistant (Maintenance Division) for database/letters and Certificate of Compliance. b. If repair is located within City of Golden Valley ROWand on private property; or only private property repair: i. Contractor must obtain appropriate permit from Inspections. ii. Contractor schedules inspection with Building Inspection Department/Public Works Department for visual inspection of cleanout and repair. iii. Inspec tor takes swing ties and forwards to Engineering staff. iv. Engineering staff leaves "Notice of Construction Completion" at affected residence indicating homeowner will need to schedule the CCTV inspection in order to receive Certificate of Compliance if all defects within the home have also been repaired (if applicable). v. Homeowner contacts Public Works to schedule CCTV inspection of entire line. vi. Follow up includes standard procedure for POS .inspections. 11. Contractor to provide updated list of completed repairs each week at construction meeting. 12. City pays prime contractor for completed repairs on next pay estimate. G:\PROJECTS\200S PMP (OS-01)\Sanitary Sewer Repairs\Sewer Service Repair Procedure.docx Item 2a March 4, 2008 Name Address City Zip Subject: Sanitary Sewer Service Inspections 2009 Pavement Management Project 09-1 Dear: At its February 19, 2008 meeting, the Golden Valley City Council approved reconstruction of the streets near your home as part of its 2009 Pavement Management Program (PMP). This street reconstruction project will begin in the spring of 2009. The City is offering residents in the project area an opportunity to have their sanitary sewer service inspected as part of the PMP project. This inspection is part of the City's ongoing Inflow and Infiltration (III) Reduction Program. III is the discharge of clean ground water and surface water into the sanitary sewer system. The clean water discharged into the sewage treatment system not only increases the City's costs to treat the water, but also results in environmental issues including the discharge of raw sewage into our lakes, rivers and surface waters. The most common sources of III include improper connections of sump pumps and foundation drains into the sanitary sewer system, as well as infiltration of ground water into the system through defects in the below ground sewer pipes. The voluntary inspection program will include a closed circuit television (CCTV) inspection of your sewer service pipe, from inside the home to the City's sewer main in the street. This CCTV inspection will look for the presence of cracked and broken pipes, root intrusion into the system, mineral deposits, and improper connections to the sewer service. In addition, the inspection includes checking for the presence of sump pumps, and if they are present, making sure they are properly discharged outside the home. G:\PROJECTS\2009 PMP (09-01 )\Correspondence Project 09-1 \SwrSrvclnspect1 022908.doc Item 2a Those property owners who complete the voluntary inspection that do not have evidence of III and are compliant with City Code will be issued a Certificate of Sewer Service Compliance, which is needed in order to sell your home. If your sewer service shows signs of infiltration, you will receive a letter outlining the defects, and what you would need to do to become compliant with City Code. The results of the sewer service inspection program can also be used to make an informed decision regarding maintenance of your sewer service, including possible participation in the Sewer Service Rehabilitation Program offered as part of the PMP during the 2009 project. You will receive additional information regarding this rehabilitation program in the future. The voluntary sanitary sewer service inspection program is being offered to you at no cost ($200 if you are selling your home). However in order to complete the inspection we ask that all sanitary sewer cleanouts, inside and outside of the home, as well as other access points to the sewer service, are operational and accessible at the time of the inspection. If you are interested in participatina in the voluntary sanitary sewer service inspection program. YOU may call the Golden Valley Public Works Department at 763.593.8030 to schedule an appointment. This inspection will take approximately 90 minutes to complete, and an adult must be present during the inspection. Sincerely, ~ Jeff Oliver, PE City Engineer Enclosure C: Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Bert Tracy, Public Works Maintenance Manager Dave Lemke, Utility Supervisor Alva Rankin, SEH Kirby VanNote, SEH G:\PROJECTS\2009 PMP (09-01)\Correspondence Project 09-1\SwrSrvclnspect1 022908.doc Item 2b December, 2008 Subject: 2009 Pavement Management Program Sanitary Sewer Service Inspection and Repair Program Dear Property Owner(s): In February of this year, you were mailed a letter inviting you to call the Golden Valley Public Works Department to schedule an appointment to have an inspection of your sanitary sewer service performed. This inspection is part of the Pavement Management Program (PMP), and the City's ongoing Inflow and Infiltration (1&1) Reduction Program. The goal of the 1&1 program is to reduce the amount of clear water discharged into the City's sanitary sewer system. As of today, we have not heard from you regarding this inspection. This inspection of your sanitary sewer service is voluntary and will be performed at no cost to you. The results of this inspection will let you know if your sanitary sewer service is in compliance with the City Code, and can be used to help you determine if you want to participate in the sanitary sewer service repair program offered during the PMP project, or plan to have your service rehabilitated by a different contractor. Because the inspection program and the repair program are optional, you are not under any obligation to make repairs to your sanitary sewer service following the inspection. The City is encouraging all property owners to have the inspection performed so you can make an informed decision regarding your sanitary sewer service. If you are interested in having a sanitary sewer service inspection performed at your home, please call the Golden Valley Department of Public Works at 763.593.8030 as soon as possible. Due to time constraints. the City will not schedule any sanitary sewer service inspections after April 17. 2009. G:\PROJECTS\2009 PMP (09-01 )\Correspondence Project 09-1 \SwrSrvclnspect2 12-08.doc Item 2b If you have any questions regarding this sanitary sewer service inspection program, please feel free to call me at 763.593.8034, or Dave Lemke, Utility Maintenance Supervisor, at 763.593.8075. Sincerely, Jeff Oliver, PE City Engineer C: Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Bert Tracy, Public Works Maintenance Manager Dave Lemke, Utility Maintenance Supervisor G:\PROJECTS\2009 PMP (09-01 )\Correspondence Project 09-1 \SwrSrvclnspect2 12-08.doc Item 3a Date Name Address Gelden Valley, MN 554_ Sanitary Sewer Service Inflew and Infiltratien Inspectien 2009 Pavement Management Pregram Address, Gelden Valley, MN Dear Preperty Owner(s): Subject: The City ef Gelden Valley recently perfermed a clesed-circuittelevisien inspectien ef the sanitary sewer service at yeur heme. Fellewing the televi$e(:f inspectien ef the sewer lateral, staff reviewed the neted defects in the lateraf~~a sourc~ ef infiltratien during spring thaw and summer rain events. The revie'vVpf toe inspectiOn determined that the sewer service at yeur heme is net in cemplian~~'vVjth City Cede.ll'lerder to' receive an inflew infiltratien certificate ef cempliance thefollewing items need to be repaired: . pipe jeint defects/reet intrusiens frotn_ feet to' _ feet . pipe jeint defects/mineral depesits from _ feet to' _ feet . bleckage at _ feet . missing pipe at _ feet The final cleaneut is at _-feet and the 4-inch to' 6-inch transition is at feet. The tetal length ef yeur service frem the point that televising began is _ feet. This inspectien alsOi~entifiecla sag er settlement in yeur sanitary sewer service that is not an inflew and infiltratien issue; This sag is lecated between _ feet and _ feet. While cerrectien ef this defectis net required fer cempliance with the Inflew and Infiltratien Ordinance, if it is net addressed it may result in bleckage ef the service line, and petentially result in the bacKup ef sewage intO' yeur heme. Therefere, yeu may alsO' cheese te~~~ this defect~~dressed as part ef this preject. Yeu sheuld alsO' be aware that installatiefli('.)fa sewer~~fVice liner will net cerrect a sag in the service. As an alternative ting in the City program, yeu may cheese to' hire yeur ewn plumbing centracter ct the structural issues with the service, er yeu may cheese net to' address the issue. Sheuld yeu cheese to' hire yeur ewn centracter, this werk must be cempleted prier to' the start ef censtructien (appreximately May 1, 2009) fer the 2009 PMP preject. These repairs will alsO' require a plumbing permit and/er a right-ef-way permit frem the City ef Gelden Valley. If yeu cheese to' net repair yeur sanitary sewer service, yeu will net be able to' cut intO' the City streets fer a peried ef five years fellewing cempletien ef the street recenstructien, except in an emergency such as a sewer backup. 1:\Engineering\lnflow and Infiltration\Letters\PMP\FORM LETTERS\2009-Non Compliant.doc Item 3a If you have any questions feel free to call Jeff Oliver, City Engineer, at 763.593.8030 or me at 763.593.8075. Sincerely, f~{t"v~::e~'~_ , Dave Lemke Utilities Maintenance Supervisor C: Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer Alva Rankin, SEH 1:\Engineering\lnflow and Infiltration\Letters\PMP\FORM LETTERS\2009-Non. Compliant.doc Item 3b City of Golden Valley Sanitary Sewer Service Repair Program Pavement Management In the City of Golden Valley, each homeowner is responsible for the maintenance of their sanitary sewer service between their home and the sewer main in the street. Due to the age and material these sewer services were constructed of, they often experience structural problems that can allow inflow and infiltration into the sewer system, and in some cases, can result in the backup of sewage into homes. In order to address these issues, the City of Golden Valley offers property owners the opportunity to have their sanitary sewer services rehabilitated during its Pavement Management projects. The typical methods of repair include installing a liner inside the service, or excavation and reconstruction of all or a portion of the sewer service pipe. The City encourages homeowners in Pavement Management project areas to participate in this program for several reasons: ~ It will eliminate a source of inflow and infiltration into the sanitary system, helping to control the costs of treating clean water and addressing environmental issues associated with clear water entering the sanitary sewer system. ~ The sewer service work will be performed and coordinated while the streets are under construction, therefore avoiding the cost of pavement restoration by your contractor at a later date, thus protecting your investment in the City's streets. ~ Following street reconstruction, the City restricts excavation of the new streets for five years, except in the case of emergencies such as sewage backup into a home. How the Proqram Works You will be able to enter into an agreement with the City to have your sanitary sewer service rehabilitated as part of the project, at prices that are included in the City's contract for street reconstruction. This program is only for sewer service work outside of your home. Therefore, any issues identified inside your home will be your responsibility to repair before a Certificate of Compliance is issued. City staff and the contractor will recommend the rehabilitation; or combination of methods, appropriate to make the sewer service pipe outside your home compliant with G:\PROJECTS\lnflow and Infiltration\PMP Sewer Service Handout Document.doc Item 3b the City Code. A contract for the work will be prepared for your signature. The total cost will include an administrative fee of 7% of the construction cost. Following completion of the work, you will be able to pay for the sanitary sewer service rehabilitation to avoid interest. If you do not pay for the work at that time, it will automatically be assessed to your property for a period of ten years, at an interest rate that is determined each year. This voluntary program is intended to address inflow and infiltration issu~s. However, additional sewer service defects such as sags that are not a source of inflow and infiltration may also be present in your sewer service line. In some instances, these issues could result in the backup of sewage into your home. If any of these defects are present in your service line, they have been identified in your inspection letter. You may choose to include the repair of these defects as part of this program. The City and its contractor will remove any obstacles, including but not limited to sidewalks, trees landscaping, gardens, private lighting, irrigation systems, electric dog fences and retaining walls, as necessary to perform the sanitary sewer service repair. However, restoration performed by the City will be limited to driveway replacement and installation of sod. Each homeowner will be responsible for replacement of any additional items that were removed. Advantaqes Associated with the Sanitary Sewer Replacement Program ~ The cost of the service replacement can be paid over a ten-year period as part of the residents' property taxes. ~ Residents will be able to take advantage of City contract prices, which mayor may not be the lowest prices available. ~ Participation in the Sanitary Sewer Replacement Program will reduce the likelihood of future disturbance to the street. If excavation is required by a privately hired contractor, the costs of restoring the street will be part of your costs for the sewer service repair. Disadvantages Associated with the Sanitary Sewer Replacement Proqram ~ Because the City must, by law, accept the lowest responsible bidder for the entire project, the costs for performing your sanitary sewer service repair may not be the lowest available costs. Homeowners are encouraged to seek estimates from other contractors for this work so that the estimate from the City's contractor can be compared to estimates from other contractors. G:\PROJECTS\lnflow and Infiltration\PMP Sewer Service Handout Document.doc Item 4a Date Name Address Golden Valley, MN 55422 Subject: Sanitary Sewer Service Repair Estimate 2009 Pavement Management Program, City Project 09-1 Dear: Enclosed with this letter is an estimate for sanitary sewer service repairs at your property. The estimate may contain repairs performed by excavation, lining, or a combination of excavation and lining. The estimate may also include repairs for the entire length of your service from the City's main at approximately the center of the street to a pOint just outside of your home. No repairs are permitted under contract with the City inside your home, or that affect an outside wall or foundation. Those repairs will require a private contract with a licensed plumber. The inspection of your sewer service also identified a sag or settlement in your sanitary sewer service that is not an inflow and infiltration issue. This sag is located between _ feet and _ feet. While correction of this defect is not required for compliance with the Inflow and Infiltration Ordinance, if it is not addressed it may result in blockage of the service line, and potentially result in the backup of sewage into your home. Therefore, you may also choose to have this defect addressed as part of this project. The excavation repair may involve digging up the street and your yard. The pipe liner type of repair will require a smaller excavation approximately 30 feet from the center of the street. Additional information regarding the two repair methods is discussed as follows: Excavation Repairs 1. This method of sanitary sewer repair may include excavating the street, boulevard, and likely a portion of your yard. This excavation will be approximately 20 feet wide. 2. The sewer service pipe will be removed and replaced where necessary to accomplish the needed repairs. 3. A cleanout will be placed at approximately 30 feet from the center of the street. 4. The estimate may include items such as the removal of trees, shrubs, landscaping, sidewalks, etc. in order to complete the repair. If you wish to preserve any of these items, you must have them removed prior to the beginning of the sewer repair. You will be responsible for replacement of any and all trees, landscaping, sidewalks, retaining walls, irrigation systems, or other items removed in order to complete the repair. 5. You will be responsible for the removal and replacement of any irrigation systems, electrical wiring, invisible fences, or other items that are buried in your yard. G:\PROJECTS\2009 PMP (09-01)\Sanitary Sewer Repairs\Service Repair Cover Letter Template.docx Item 4a 6. If applicable, the estimate includes the costs to remove and replace a portion of your driveway in order to complete the repair. 7. The estimate includes sod to restore the portion of the excavation that is outside of the area disturbed by the City's planned project work. Linina Repairs 1. This repair includes the installation of a cured in-place liner in the existing sanitary sewer service pipe. This liner may start at the center of the street and extend towards your home or may consist of one or more "short" liners of various lengths. The liner will correct all I & I defects outside the home which were noted in the inspection follow-up letter which you received from the City. Please be aware that lining will not correct sags that may be present in the existing pipe. 2. A clean out will be placed at approximately 30 feet from the center of the street. This will require an excavation at the end of the repair that is approximately 15 to 25 feet square. 3. Because not as much excavation is required, there is less likelihood of additional removals, but the estimate may include added items such as the removal of trees, shrubs, landscaping, sidewalks, or driveway pavement in order to complete the repair. If you wish to preserve any of these items, you must have them removed prior to the beginning of the sewer repair. 4. You will be responsible for the removal and replacement of any irrigation systems, electrical wiring, invisible fences, or other items that are buried in your yard. 5. The estimate includes sod to restore the portion of the excavation that is outside of the area disturbed by the City's planned project work. 6. If applicable, the estimate includes the costs to remove and replace a portion of your driveway in order to complete the repair. 7. You will be responsible for the replacement of any and all trees, landscaping, shrubs, sidewalks, retaining walls, or other items removed in order to complete the repair. Following completion of the Sanitary Sewer Service Inflow and Infiltration Inspection at your home, a letter was sent to you outlining the defects in your sewer service. If you wish to have your property become compliant with City Code at this time, all the defects outlined in the letter must be addressed. Therefore, if you wish to have repairs that are outside the scope of the City program completed at this time (any defects within your home), you will need to secure a private contract with a licensed plumber. Please review the enclosed estimate carefully. If you wish to proceed with the repair, sign one copy of the estimate and return it to the City of Golden Valley Department of Public Works by date specified in Construction Newsletter. Please keep the second copy for your records. G:\PROJECTS\2009 PMP (09-01 )\Sanitary Sewer Repairs\Service Repair Cover Letter Template.docx Item 4a If you have any questions regarding this matter, feel free to call the Public Works Department at 763.593.8030. Sincerely, Jeff Oliver, PE City Engineer Enclosures C: Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Dave Lemke, Utility Supervisor G:\PROJECTS\2009 PMP (09-01 )\Sanitary Sewer Repairs\Service Repair Cover Letter Template.docx Public Works Department 17800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, MN 55427-4588 763-593-8030 I 763-593-3988 (fax) I TTY: 763-593-3968 I www.cLgolden-valley.mn.L1s IU~III 'JO CONSTRUCTION AGR~~fv1~NT ~,l)vilJ;;' Private Sanitary Sewer Services PROP[RTY OWN[R Resident ADDR[SS 4820 Markay Ridge ADDR[SS m: SERVIC[ DAY PHON[ 612.123.4567 SANITARY SEWER SERVICE BEPAIB ESTIMATE Sanitary Sewer Service Repair Mobilization 1 Sanitary Sewer Service Repair - Lining 6 Cleanout Assembly 1 Remove existing service pipe 29 6"PVC pipe, Sewer SDR 26 (0'-12' Deep) 29 S~~~ ~ EA @ $1562.00/EA LF @ $140.00/LF EA@ $646.00/EA LF @ $5.50/LF LF @ $48.49/LF SY @ $6.29/SY NIGHT PHON[ Estimated Total = $ 1,562.00 = $ 840.00 = $ 646.00 = $ 159.50 = $ 1,406.21 $ 283.05 TOTAL i:::STIMATED COST Engineer's Estimate 7% Administration Fee Total Estimated Cost = $ = $ = $ 4,613.71 322.96 4,936.67 Estimate not to be exceeded by more than $500 without authorization of the property owner. .'...... ,- -.... ---- ..,-....,_..._....' ...-...... - -".., '_.'_" _...__ ..,,___ '." .._"__'_ .. _",',"_"- .. _......-..'.-.u',._'.',.,'...._.., '_'_"" __ .... ., Thi$~()tllm~nt is.~vail~blgi[ialterf19te.f()flnats.uP6ha..Z2.h6ur.request.please call.. 76S-'593-8(){)(S (lTY' 763-593-39(8) to m~k~? requ~st,. ExamPles ()f alternateforrnats may include large print, electronic, Braille, audiocassette, etc. if) 2009 Pavement Management Program 11/( Item 4c I hereby acknowledge the above information is complete and accurate and that I am the fee owner of the subject property. I also acknowledge that I desire that the work contained in this document be performed on my property, and on the sanitary sewer service line providing service to my property, by the City of Golden Valley, its employees, agents and/or contractors, and I furthermore grant permission for the above to perform this work on my property. I understand that this work will be performed under the direction of the City Engineer, or his designee, and that the estimated construction cost stated within this document is in fact an estimate and may be subject to change based upon conditions encountered in the field during construction. I understand the construction costs may be increased up to $500, at the sole discretion of the City Engineer, or his designee, based upon conditions encountered in the field. I agree that I, or a person authorized to act on my behalf, will be present during the sanitary sewer service repair to authorize increases to the construction costs in excess of $500. If lor my representative cannot be present I agree to accept the judgment and decisions made by the City Engineer or his representative in my best interest in repairing my sanitary sewer service. J acknowledge that J have read and understand the following restrictions, limitations and requirements of the sanitary sewer service replacement program. 1. The City of Golden Valley and its agents or contractors will remove any obstacles, including but not limited to sidewalks, trees, landscaping, gardens, private lighting, irrigation systems, electric dog fences and retaining walls, as necessary to perform the work included in this document. I also understand that the City and its agents will restore any excavated areas with sod and that reinstallation of all other items will not be performed by the City, and that I will be responsible for any restoration of any of the above items. 2. I understand that the sod installed on my private property will be my responsibility to maintain, including watering; and the City will not provide any warranty for sod outside of the street right-of-way. 3. I understand that the sanitary sewer service repairs included in this work are intended to address the inflow and infiltration of clear water into the sanitary sewer system only. I also understand that I may choose to make repairs to address other issues such as settlements or sags in the sanitary sewer service line which services my home that if not addressed, may result in blockage of the service line, and potentially result in backup of sewage into my home. If I choose not to make repairs to address non-inflow and infiltration defects I understand that I will be solely responsible for this decision and will not hold the City of Golden Valley or its agents or contractors liable for any sewage backup resulting from my decision. G:\PROJECTS\2009 PMP (09-01 )\Sanitary Sewer Repairs\Private Contract Text.docx Item 4c I understand that I will be responsible for 100 percent of the cost of the authorized work, plus an administrative fee of 7 percent of the construction costs. Both are payable in full to the City of Golden Valley following completion of the work or through a special assessment certified to my property taxes at the interest rate established by the City Council over a period of up to ten years. I also hereby waive my right to appeal the special assessment for all work related to sanitary sewer service repairs only as outlined herein according to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429. By signing this document I attest that I have read and understand the above information. As the undersigned property owner, I release the City of Golden Valley, its employees, agents and contractors, from any claim or causes of action in connection with the additional work authorized herein. G:\PROJECTS\2009 PMP (09-01 )\Sanitary Sewer Repairs\Private Contract Text.docx SEWER SERVICE REPAIR WORKSHEET Item 4d PROPERTY OWNER ADDRESS MAILING ADDRESS DATE DAYTIME PHONE EVENING PHONE SANITARY SEWER SERVICE REPAIR ESTIMATE Sanitary Sewer Service Repair Mobilization 1 EA @ $1562.00/EA Sanitary Sewer Service Repair - Lining LF @ $140.00/LF Cleanout Assembly EA @ $646.00/EA Remove existing sewer pipe LF @ $5.50/LF Crushed Rock for stabilization T @ $27.06/T 4"PVC pipe, Sewer SDR 26 LF @ $31.55/LF 4"DI pipe, Sewer CL 52 LF @ $39.19/LF 6"PVC pipe, Sewer SDR 26 LF @ $48.49/LF 6"DI pipe, Sewer CL 52 LF @ $72.06/LF 10"PVC pipe, Sewer SDR 26 LF @ $55.67/LF 10"DI pipe, Sewer CL 52 LF @ $71.51/LF 6"X4" PVC Reducer EA@$100.00/EA 8" X 4" PVC Wye EA @ $115.00/EA 10" X4" PVC Wye EA@ $173.00/EA 8" X 6" PVC Wye EA@ $185.00/EA 10" X 6" PVC Wye EA@ $243.00/EA DIP Wye EA @ $451.00/EA Service Wye Saddle EA @ $539.00/EA Riser Repair EA@ $681.00/EA Sanitary Sewer Service Repair Dewatering EA @ $1.00/EA Sodding SY @ $6.29/SY MISCELLANEOUS REMOVAL OR SALVAGE - TREE REMOVAL. LANDSCAPING. WALLS. SIDEWALK. ETC. Clearing (tree removal) Tree @ $410.00/EA Grubbing (stump removal) Tree @ $360.00/EA Salvage Wood Rail Fence LF @ $7.00/LF Salvage Landscape Timber LF @ $12.00/LF Salvage Landscape Blocks LF @ $5.00/LF Salvage Landscape Stone LF @ $10.00/LF Salvage Landscape Rocks LF @ $3.00/LF Salvage Modular Block Retaining Wall SF @ $8.55/SF Salvage Stone Retaining Wall SF @ $11.45/SF Salvage Timber Retaining Wall SF @ $33.15/SF Remove concrete walk SF @ $0.75/SF Remove concrete steps SF @ $10.00/SF DRIVEWAY REMOVAL & REPLACEMENT Remove existing concrete pavement Remove existing bituminous pavement Saw concrete pavement Saw bituminous pavement 6" concrete pavement 3" asphalt pavement SY @ $12.30/SY SY @ $6.36/SY LF @ $2.65/LF LF @ $1.94/LF SY @ $46.00/SY SY Item 5 """"""""""""~"""" """"""""""""""""" loday's Date: SEWER SERVICE REPAIR OUTSIDE YOUR HOME IS COMPLETEI Your next step in this process is to call and schedule a follow up television inspection of your sewer service by calling Golden Valley Public Works at 763-593-8030. PLEASE NOTE: Any sewer service defects inside the home must also be repaired in order to receive the Certificate of Compliance. II ,au hale an, questions or cancems, please call the CIIt 01 Golden lall., at 783.593-8030. Your cooperation and patience are appreciated. 11111111111111111 Item 6 Date Name Add ress Golden Valley, MN, 554 Subject: Sanitary Sewer Service Compliance Inspection 2008 Pavement Management Program Address, Golden Valley, MN Dear Property Owner(s): The sanitary sewer service to the property was recently inspected as part of the City of Golden Valley's Inflow and Infiltration (III) Reduction Progrflm, in conjunction with the 2008 Pavement Management Program. A copy of the video inspection of the sewer service was forwarded to the Public Works Department for review. The purpose of this review is to determine the condition of the sewer lateral, and whether or not the sewer service is compliant. Based upon our review of the video, the sewer service at (Address) is compliant. Your Certificate of Compliance is enclosed with this letter. This certificate needs to stay at the compliant property. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact me at 763.593.8075. Sincerely, lit(~- Dave Lemke Utilities Maintenance Supervisor Enclosure c: Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer Alva Rankin, SEH 1:\Engineering\lnflow and Infiltration\Letters\PMP\FORM LETTERS\#8-Compliant-PMP.doc alley Me randum Public Works 763-593-8030 I 763-593-3988 (fax) Executive Summary Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting December 9, 2008 Agenda Item 7. Inflow and Infiltration Inspection Standards Prepared By Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Jeff Oliver, PE, City Engineer Summary The City of Golden Valley's Inflow and Infiltration Sanitary Sewer Service Inspection Criteria are attached for City Council review. The standards are applied uniformly by consultant and City inspectors for both the inspections completed as part of the point of sale program and the pavement management program. These standards outline which defects in sanitary sewer services need correction as part of the City's efforts to minimize the discharge of clear water into the sanitary sewer system. Attachments Inflow and Infiltration Sanitary Sewer Lateral Inspection Criteria (2 pages) City of Golden Valley Inflow and InfIltration Sanitary Sewer Lateral Inspection Criteria Properties found to be Compliant have: · No foundation drain connection to sanitary sewer service. . No sump pump discharge to sanitary sewer service. . Sump pit not connected to sewer lateral. · Sump pump properly piped outside structure with rigid piping. · Service lateral structurally sound with no evidence of infiltration or exfiltration. Properties found to be Non Compliant have one or more of the following: . Foundation drain connected to sewer lateral. . Sump pump piped into sanitary sewer. · Sump pump discharge with flexible pipe. . Roof drains or cistern drain connected to sanitary sewer. . Structural damage to service lateral with evidence of infiltration or exfiltration. Properties found in need of Further Investigation have one or more of the following: . No one home at time of inspection - missed appointment · Unable to access sewer lateral due to unlocated c1eanouts (behind walls, under flooring, etc.) · Unable to complete inspection of sewer lateral due to roots, solid deposition, crushed pipe, etc.). · Unknown connections ( unable to verify connection flowing water into sewer lateral) Video Review (DVD). Three persons authorized to review/analyze, City staff include the Utility Supervisor and Maintenance Manager; and one SEH staff member. This may be subject to change to ensure timely review. · Review Sanitary Sewer Service Inspection Form prior to viewing DVD. · After reviewing DVD the lateral is either compliant or non-compliant. ~ If compliant, a Compliance Certificate and letter are completed and mailed. ~ If non-compliant a Correction Notice is completed and mailed. Thecorrection notice letter identifies all non-compliance issues (sources of infiltration or exfiltration) that require correction in order to receive a Compliance Certificate. The letter also informs the property owner the footage location of all defects, the final c1eanout in the home (if lateral has a final c1eanout), any additional c1eanouts, and location of 4" to 6" transition and total length of lateral from where the inspection began. ]:\Bert Tracy\I & I Documents\Procedures\DVD Review Criteria 2408.doc 2/08 The following defects and conditions are considered during the review of sanitary sewer service videos for compliance with City Code regarding inflow and infiltration. 1) Root Intrusion- minor root intrusion such as hair line roots are compliant, major root intrusion such as heavy root mass or roots expanding pipe cracks are non- compliant and require repair. 2) Mineral Deposits- mineral deposits are direct evidence of infiltration and are non-compliant. 3) Pipe Cracks - minor pipe cracks such as hair line cracks are compliant, major cracks that show visible signs of separation are non-compliant. 4) Pipe Joints - pipe joints in good visible condition are compliant, deteriorated pipe joints that show visible signs of separation and or the gasket is rolled or protruding into the pipe are noted as non-compliant. Off set pipe joints that either show visible signs of separation and/or obstruct flow enough as to allow for infiltration through the off set pipe joint are non-compliant. 5) Crushed Pipe/Missing Pipe - areas of crushed pipe and/or missing pipe are non- compliant. 6) Sags - all sags in sewer lateral are compliant from an inflow and infiltration perspective. Sags are areas of the pipe where the grade of the pipe holds grey water from flowing properly and are not a direct source of infiltration. These sags may result in sewage backups into the structure and should be addressed by the property owner. 7) All Connections (drain tile roofleaders) and or Clean outs - connections are verified by flowing water from the source i.e. sinks, drains, wash and bath tubs in order to confirm connection to domestic source, if connected to domestic source the connection is compliant. Cleanouts must be opened and inspected in order to verify condition/integrity of pipe and verify any connections in order to be compliant, cleanout stacks occasionally have drain tile connections and cracks that are non-compliant. 8) 4" to 6" Transition - transitions are most commonly located at the property line, and the transition location is noted on the correction notice, if the transition has root intrusion, it is non-compliant unless the roots are hair line or minor. 9) Wye Connection- connection located at the end of the sewer lateral at the municipal sewer main. The connection is inspected for any major defects such as. cracks, roots, mineral deposits, crushed or missing pipe, noted defects follow the guide lines listed above, this connection is the responsibility of the property owner. 10) Other Issues - issues or concerns that can be visibly seen in the inspection that cause infiltration or exfiltration that are not specifically discussed above. J:\Bert Tracy\I & I Documents\Procedures\DVD Review Criteria 2408.doc 2/08 alley emo ndu Public Works 763-593-8030 I 763-593-3988 (fax) Executive Summary Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting December 9, 2008 Agenda Item 8. Proposed Xcel Energy Franchise Fee Prepared By Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Ron Nims, Public Works Project Coordinator Summary At the December 2,2008 Council meeting, Council directed staff to develop possible franchise fee rate options for Xcel Energy. Staff has developed the attached rate schedule option comparison and examples of potential franchise fee revenues using rates from six surrounding cities (Hopkins, Minnetonka, New Hope, Oakdale, Richfield and St. Louis Park). It should be noted that all of the surrounding cities, except Minnetonka, also receive franchise fees from CenterPoint Energy as well as Xcel Energy. For Council's information, the attached is a listing of franchise fee structures from other communities for both Xcel and CenterPoint Energy. It should also be noted that the rate structures must be reviewed with Xcel Energy prior to the public hearing. Attachments Xcel Energy Franchise Fee Rate Options (7 pages) Northern States Power-Minnesota, an Xcel Energy Company State of Minnesota - Electric City Surcharges (2 pages) CenterPoint Energy Franchise Fee Report - 11/05/2008 (2 pages) Proposed Alternate A - Xcel Energy Franchise Model for Golden Valley (Rates currently in effect under surcharge) CUSTOMER CLASS Residential* Small C&I - Non-Demand* Small C&I - Demand Large C&I (> 1 Mw) Public Street Lighting Municipal Pumping - Non-Demand Municipal Pumping - Demand Total (1) AVERAGE MONTHLY CUSTOMER COUNT 8,938 586 365 114 39 3 10,045 (1) (1J XCELENERGY 12 MONTHS ELECTRIC REVENUES $7,177,787 $776,098 $4,483,750 $16,124,076 $261,792 $1,242 $0 ,28,824,746 t2) ESTIM ANNUAL FRANCHISE FEE REVENUES $391 ,484 $25,667 $48,021 $19,925 $0 $0 $0 485.091 % GROSS REVENUES FEE 66.92 110.37 1,022.41 11,814.87 556.79 34.50 ANNUAL KWH Proposed Alternate B - Xcel Energy Franchise Model for Golden Valley CUSTOMER ClASS Residential* Small C&I - Non-Demand* Small C&I - Demand Large C&I (> 1 Mw) Public Street Lighting Municipal Pumping - Non-Demand Municipal Pumping - Demand 'otal (1J AVERAGE MONTHLY CUSTOMER COUNT 8,938 586 365 114 39 3 10,045 (1) (1) XCELENERGY 12 MONTHS ELECTRIC REVENUES $7,177,787 $776,098 $4,483; 750 $16,124,076 $261,792 $1,242 $0 28,824;745 (2) ESTIM ANNUAL FRANCHISE FEE REVENUES $268,140 $49,224 $59,204 $109,178 $0 $0 $0 m46 ANNUAL KWH % GROSS REVENUES FEE --r.74% 6.34% 1.32% 0.68% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% t:69'% Proposed Alternate C - Xcel Energy Franchise Model for Golden Valley CUSTOMER CLASS Residential* Small C&I - Non-Demand* Small C&I - Demand Large C&I (> 1 Mw) Public Street Lighting Municipal Pumping - Non-Demand Municipal Pumping - Demand 'otal (1) AVERAGE MONTHLY CUSTOMER COUNT 8,938 586 365 114 39 3 (1) (1) XCELENERGY 12 MONTHS ELECTRIC REVENUES $7,177,787 $776,098 $4,483,750 $16,124,076 $261,792 $1,242 $0 ,28;824,74 % GROSS REVENUES FEE 3.74% 15.40% 1.66% 0.14% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.68.% ANNUAL KWH $80,112,482 $7,899,463 $56,690,005 $231,112,864 $1,582,172 $10,623 $0 377,407, (2) ESTIMANNUAL FRANCHISE FEE REVENUES $268,140 $119,544 $74,553 $23,200 $0 $0 $0 ;437 NOTE: The above figures do not reflect any calculation for low income residential customers which may affect the total revenues the City may receive from the franchise. Proposed Alternate D - Xcel Energy Franchise Model Using the City of Hopkins' Rate Structure Residential* Residential Low Income Small C&I - Non-Demand* Small C&I - Demand Large C&I (> 1 Mw) Public Street Lighting Municipal Pumping - Non-Demand Municipal Pumping - Demand 'ota; (1) AVERAGE MONTHLY CUSTOMER COUNT 8,938 (1 ) XCEL ENERGY 12 MONTHS ELECTRIC REVENUES 7,975,319 586 365 114 39 3 $776,098 $4,483,750 $16,124,076 $261,792 $1 ,242 $0 ,2 7,899,463 56,690,005 231,112,864 1,582,172 10,623 NOTE: The City of Hopkins also receives franchise fee revenue from CenterPoint Energy. (2) 1:;;) IIIVI'" II:LI ANNUAL FRANCHISE FEE REVENUES 107,256 $0 $14,064 $39,469 $85,978 $0 $0 $0 ..,'7'6 110.37 1,022.41 11,814.87 556.79 34.50 w' Proposed Alternate E . Xcel Energy Franchise Model Using the City of Minnetonka's Rate Structure Residential'" Residential Low Income Small C&I - Non-Demand* Small C&I - Demand Large C&I (> 1 Mw) Public Street Lighting Municipal Pumping - Non-Demand Municipal Pumping - Demand otal (1) AVERAGE MONTHLY CUSTOMER COUNT 8,938 586 365 114 39 3 7,899,463 56,690,005 231,112,864 1,582,172 10,623 (1 ) XCELENERGY 12 MONTHS ELECTRIC _ REVENUES 7,975,319 $776,098 $4,483,750 $16,124,076 $261,792 $1,242 $0 (2) 1:0 IIIVlJ'\ II:U ANNUAL 'FRANCHISE, FEE ,: REVENUES 268,140 $0 $31,644 $19,735 $6,141 $0 $0 $0 325,660 110.37 1,022.41 11,814.87 556.79 34.50 $, Proposed Alternate F - Xcel Energy Franchise Model Using the City of New Hope's Rate Structure Residential* Residential Low Income Small C&I - Non-Demand* Small C&I - Demand Large C&I (> 1 Mw) Public Street Lighting Municipal Pumping - Non-Demand Municipal Pumping - Demand :81 (1) AVERAGE MOWTHL Y '. .CUSTOMER COUNT 8,938 586 365 114 39 3 7,899,463 56,690,005 231,112,864 1,582,172 10,623 (1) XCELEWERGY 12 MONTHS ELECTRIC ReveNUES 7,975,319 $776,098 $4,483,750 $16,124,076 $261,792 $1,242 $0 (2) C;:) IIIVII\ I cu ANNUAL FRANCHISE FEE REVENUES $160,884 $0 $31,644 $39,469 $49,130 $0 $0 $0 % GROSS . REVENUES FEE 2.02% 4.08% 0.88% 0.30% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% OJJ5% 'I NOTE: The City of New Hope also receives franchise fee revenue from CenterPoint Energy. $4;50'.. $9.00 $36.00 w' 110.37 1,022.41 11,814.87 556.79 34.50 Proposed Alternate G - Xcel Energy Franchise Model Using the City of Oakdale's Rate Structure {;r-- ResidentiaT* Residential Low Income Small C&I - Non-Demand* Small C&I - Demand Large C&I (> 1 Mw) Public Street Lighting Municipal Pumping - Non-Demand Municipal Pumping - Demand '018' AVERAGE MONTHLY CUSTOMER COUNT 8,938 586 365 114 39 3 7,899,463 56,690,005 231,112,864 1,582,172 10,623 XCELENERGY 12 MONTHS ELECTRIC REVENUES 7,975,319 $776,098 $4,483,750 $16,124,076 $261,792 $1.242 $0 NOTE: The City of Oakdale also receives franchise fee revenue from CenterPoint Energy. I 110.37 1,022.41 11,814.87 556.79 34.50 Proposed Alternate H . Xcel Energy Franchise Model Using the City of Richfield's Rate Structure Residentil:Jl* Residential Low Income Small C&I - Non..Demand* Small C&I - Demand Large C&I (> 1 Mw) Public Street Lighting Municipal Pumping - Non-Demand Municipal Pumping - Demand :a .(1) AVERAGE MONThIL Y CUSTOMER .. COUNT ~ 8,938 586 365 114 39 3 7,899,463 56,690,005 231,112,864 1,582,172 10,623 (1) . XCEl ENERGY I 12 MONTHS ELECTRIC REVENUES 7,975,319 $776,098 $4,483,750 $16,124,076 $261,792 $1 ,242 $0 (2) t;i:) I "VII'''' t;U ANNUAL FRANCHISE FEE REVENUES 1'7'6.972 $0 $35,863 $49,687 $100,512 $0 $0 $0 NOTE: The City of Richfield also receives franchise fee revenue from CenterPoint Energy. 110.37 1,022.41 11,814.87 556.79 34.50 ~. Proposed Alternate I - Xcel Energy Franchise Model Using the City of St.Louis Park's Rate Structure Residential* Residential Low Income Small C&I - Non-Demand* Small C&I - Demand Large C&I (> 1 Mw) Public Street Lighting Municipal Pumping - Non-Demand Municipal Pumping - Demand (1) AVERAGE MONTHLY . CUSTOMER COUNT -a:93-S 586 365 '14 39 3 (1) ANNUAL KWH 80,112,482 (1) XCElENERGY 12 MONTHS E:LECTRIC REVENUES 7,975,319 $776,098 $4,483,750 $16,124,076 $261,792 $1,242 $0 ,622;2 (2) 1:.0 '"VIM , I:.U ANNUAL FRANCHISE FEE REVENUES 134,070 $0 $28,128 $43,855 $88,707 $0 $0 $0 94,760 7,899,463 56,690,005 231,112,864 1,582,172 10,623 NOTE: The City of St. Louis Park also receives franchise fee revenue from CenterPoint Energy. % GROSS '. REVENUES FEE r68% 3.62% 0.98% 0.55% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% :0- w. 110.37 1,022.41 11,814.87 556.79 34.50 Northern States Power Company-Minnesota, an Xcel Energy Company State of Minnesota - Electric City Surcharges Sheet 1 of 6 Updated 11101/2008 FRANCHISE FEES A franchise fee as designated below will be included in the customers' monthly bills under the indicated customer classes effective in the following Minnesota communities: Indicates fee is not applied (U) Indicates unincorporated community Afton $2.00 $2.00 $5.00 $5.00 $1.00 $1.00 $1.00 Baker (U) · $3.25 $3.25 - - - - - Brooklyn Center $1.48 $3.00 $20.00 $96.00 $12.00 $12.00 $12.00 Coon Rapids b 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% - - - Cottage Grove $1.25 $1.25 $6.25 $25.00 $2.50 $0.63 $6.25 Deephaven $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 Dilworth $1.75 $4.00 $14.00 $91.00 - $4.00 $14.00 Excelsior $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 Faribault C $1.35 $1.60 $32.00 $280.00 - - - ..~ Goodview $2.75 $3.00 $25.00 $110.00 $25.00 $2.50 $10.00 Grant $2.35 $2.00 $14.00 $75.00 $2.00 .$2.00 $2.00 - Hopkins $1.00 $2.00 $9.00 \ $63.00 - - - Little Canada d $1.75 $4.00 $24.00 3.75% $15.00 $1.00 $7.00 F.... Mahtomedi $1.30 $1.38 $14.40 $110.28 $12.71 $0.63 $14.84 Mankato $0.50 $1.00 $10.00 $130.00 $1.00 $0.25 $1.00 Maplewood $0.50 $1.00 $6.00 $45.00 $0.50 $0.50 $0.50 3.0% ~100kWat 5.0%. 5.0% 5.0% primary or Minneapolis · <100 kWat <100 kWat higher voltage 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% effective secondary secondary 5.0% 01/1994 voltage voltage <. ...... ~100 kWat secondary ....... voltage - Minnetonka $2.50 $4.60 $4.50 $4.50 - $4.50 $4.50 1 Monticello $1.95 $5.50 $31.00 $190.00 $12.00 $12.00 $31.00 Mound $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 Mounds View 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% ~ New Brighton $0.0023 $0.0023 $0.0016 $0.0009 $0.0023 $0.0023 $0.0016 per kWh per kWh per kWh per kWh per kWh per kWh per kWh - New Hope $1.50 $4.50 $9.00 $36.00 $4.50 $4.50 $4.50 Newport $0.50 $1.00 $6.00 $5D.DO $4.00 $1.00 $5.00 North Mankato $0.75 $1.10 $9.25 $125.00 $13.25 $1.10 $9.25 - Oakdale $1.00 $2.00 $9.00 $7.50 $6.00 $1.50 $7.50 Owatonna $0.0016 per kWh Customer peak demand less than 100 kW in calendar year $0.0014 per kWh Customer peak demand greater than 100 kW in calendar year ........ Northern States Power Company-Mlnnesota, an Xcel Energy Company State of Minnesota - Electric City Surcharges Sheet 2 of 6 Updated 11/0112008 ..".." Richfield Robblnsdale 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% Sartelll $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 Sauk Rapids 3.0% Customers who purchase $50,000 or less In calendar year 1.5% That part which exceeds $50,000 in calendar year South St. Paul 9 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% SI. Cloud h 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 2% purchase ~$100,000 in SI. Joseph calendar year $10.00 $1.00 $1.75 $10.00 $8.00 $1.00 1.5% that part >$100,000 in calendar year St. Louis Park $1.25 $4.00 $10.00 $65.00 $4.00 $10.00 SI. Michael $2.50 $2.50 $2.50 $10.00 $10.00 '$2.50 $10.00 51. Paull See fee schedule in Franchise Fee Notes. St. Paul Pl'!rk $1.50 $2.00 $25.00 $335.00 $10.00 $1.00 $5.00 Stliiwater $2.00 $2.50 $18.00 $125.00 $4.00 $2.00 $18.00 Watertown $2.00 $3.50 $15.00 $50.00 $12.50 $20.00 West St. Paul j 5.26% 5.26% 5.26% 5.26% . White Bear Lake 1.5% 1.5% 1.5% 1.5% 1.5% 1.5% 1.5% Winona 4.0% Customers who purchase $100,000 or less In calendar year 1.5% That part which exceeds $100,000 In calendar year FRANCHISE FEE NOTES a Baker: Represents a city fee collected to cover energy usage and maintenance on community street lighting. b Coon Rapids: The franchise fee excludes rate schedules for highway lighting, municipal street lighting, municipal water pumping, municipal tire sirens, and municipal sewage disposal service. C Farlbault: The franchise fee excludes invoices to the city for street lighting and municipal pumping. d Little Canada: The franchise fee shall not exceed $2,400 in any calendar year for the large commercial and industrial customer class. · Minneapolis: The franchise fee for the residential customer class will change to 4.5% effective January 1,2013. f Sartell: Effective with January of the respective years, the monthly franchise fee will be as follows: . 2007 and 2008 . 2009 and 2010 · 2011 and 2012 $2.50 $2.75 $3.00 · 2013 and 2014 · 2015 and 2016 . 2017 and 2018 $3.25 $3.50 $3.75 . 2019 and 2020 . 2021 and 2022 . 2023 $4.00 $4.25 $4.50 9 South St. Paul: The franchise fee excludes rate schedules for highway lighting, municipal street lighting, municipal water pumping, municipal traffic signals, municipal fire sirens, and municipal sewage disposal service. . CenterPoint Energy Franchise Fee Report - 11/05/2008 City Fee Status Calculation Method Franchise Fee Schedule In Lieu of Fee Start Date SunsetlReview Oat Permit Fees IAfton ~pproved IFlat Rate Residential - $2.00 lYes . PI/01/2005 6130/2006 Comm A = $4.00 ""omm B = $5.00 Comm C = $5.00 sVDF A = $5.00 SvPF B = $5.00 VDF- $5.00 IAlexandria ~nnroved Yo of Revenue "\11 Customers - 5% !Yes kM/O I/2004 None 1An0ka ~pproved IFlat Rate Kesidential = $2.75 lYes 161/05/2004 Sunset 12131/2011 '"'ommA= $2.75 Comm B = $8.00 Comm C = $35.00 VDF A = $75.00 VDFB= $300.00 ..... VDF= $900.00 Blue Earth Approved Flat Rate esiilential = $2.00 Yes 12/01/2003 lNone Commercial = $3.00 BrooIdyn Center A.pproved Flat Rate esidential - $ I .48 Yes 01/29/2004 lNone Icomm A = $1.53 k:omm B = $5.00 Icomm C = $20.00 ~VDF A = $50.00 ~VDF B = $96.00 ILVDF- $96.00 oon Ranids IAnnroved Yo of Revenue IAII customers 4% No OI/01/1992 !None ottage Grove IApproved lat Rate lResidential = $1.25 es 1/29/2004 1N0ne !commA= $3,75 1/01/2007 Icomm B & C= $6.25 IsvoF A & B = $12.50 ILVDF= $18.75 &1 Tn $18.75 Deenhaven IAnnroved lat Rate A.l1 Customers -$2.50 No 2/04/2002 Review 02/04/2005 !Excelsior 1ADDr0ved [at Rate 2.50 / meter es 10/15/2005 [Hopkins ~pproved [at Rate esidential = $1.00 :-,)0 2/06/2004 :sunset 12131 /2009 k:omm A = $1.00 Icomm B = $3.00 l:;omm C = $9.00 SVDF A = $18.00 SVDF B = $63.00 VDF= $63.00 ake Crvstal Annroved Yo of Revenue All customers 5% No 08/01/2003 None ittle Falls Approved IFlat Rate Residential - $1.00 No OI/0J/2004 . None iAII others - $5.00 ong Prairie ~nnroved IFlat Rate 1.00 I meter !No i(1I/01/2007 None ~ankato ~pproved IFlat Rate ~esidential $0.95 1/110 10/01/2008 NA k:om A 2.50 k;om B 5.25 ~om C 12.00 SVDFA 15.00 ::iVDFB 20.00 VDF 25.00 Minneapolis Approved VB of Revenue /2001, Res = 4.25% Yes o I/O J/I 992 lNone /2008, Res = 4.50% Commercial A,B,C = 5% SVDF.. 5% .VDF-:3% !Morris A.pproved Flat Rate K.esidential $2.00 Yes 7/01/2004 None "ori1-A $5.00 r'om/Ind-B $9.00 r'om/lnd-C $27.00 VDF.A $35.00 VDF-B $35.00 ILVDF $750.00 Mound IAllnroved lat Rate IAII customers - $2.00 No I 0/20/2003 None New Hope IApproved Plat Rate lResidential = $1.50 Yes 01/0112004 lReview 01/0112006 ~omm A = $3.00 ~omm B = $6.00 ~mm C = $20.00 ~VDF A = $30.00 ~VDF B = $40.00 L..VDF= $60.00 \lorth Mankato ~pproved lat Rate Res $1.00 \10 06/0112008 Ilranchise Exp Com A 5.00 06/2812009 Com B 10.00 Com C 15.00 SVDF A 20.00 SVDF B 30.00 VDF 75.00 Oakdale Approved ~Iat Rate Residential - $0.50 No 1/2012004 Review 0613012006 Comm A & B = $3.00 Comm C = $5.00 SVDF A & B = $10.00 VDf:= $10.00 Owatonna <\.pproved X, of Revenue Residential = 1.75% Yes 01/01/2003 None :;omm A & B = 1.75% ~ Comm C = 1.00% -- SVDF A & B = 1.00% VDF- 1.00% Prior Lake Approved ~Iat Rate ~esidential $1.50 Yes P7/0112006 r'omm-A $1.50 omm-B $5.00 :;omm-C $5.00 VDF,A $10.00 VDF- B $10.00 VDF $50.00 lRichfield '\pproved I'lat Rate ~esidential - $I. 60 - 1.65 Yes 02/03/2004 eview 0613012008 ~mmA= $1.60-1.65 F Inc. 01-01-06 ~omm B = $4.95 - 5.1 0 Comm C == $11.00 - 11.33 SVDF A = $11.00 - 11.33 SVDF B = $11.00 - 11.33 LVDF= $11.00 - 11.33 Robbinsdale Approved Vo of Revenue All customers = 4% \10 - but not )6/0112003 Sunset 07/0112009 equired to ay (same Sleepv Eve ADDroved Yo of Revenue All customers - 2% Yes 1/0111998 None st. Louis Park Approved lat Rate Residential = $1.25 No 1104/2004 None Comm A = $ \.25 Comm B = $4.00 :;ommC= $10.00 SVDF A&B = $10.00 VDF= $65.00 Waseca Approved !Plat Rate Residential $1.40 1N0 01/0112006 None Com A $1.80 ComB $5.00 Com C $16.00 SVDF A $100.00 SVDF B $150.00 VDF $300.00 .f~.f..ll iy, a ey f lV.emorandum Planning 763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting December 9, 2008 Agenda Item 9. A. Draft General Land Use Plan Map Prepared By Joe Hogeboom, City Planner Summary Recently, the Planning Department was directed to consider amending the residential land use categories on the General Land Use Plan Map in order to reduce the maximum housing units per acre allowed for high density housing development. Upon consideration, staff recommends the creation of four residential land use categories. The categories, shown below, are organized by density and reflect current multifamily housing locations in Golden Valley. Residential CJ low Density (Lesslhan 5 unIIs per ami) ~ Medium-low Density (5\0 11.9unilsperacm) .. Medium-High Density (12 \0 19.9 unIIs per acre) .. High Density (20orlllOlllunilsperllCle) The creation a new high density land use classification will allow greater flexibility in the allocation of multifamily housing units in Golden Valley. Previously, 13 areas in the City where guided for high density housing which could exceed 12 units per acre. Allocating those areas to either medium-high density housing or high density housing allows fewer areas to exceed 20 units per acre. Attached is the draft General Land Use Plan, updated to reflect these changes. Staff seeks direction in assigning land use density categories in the residential areas of Golden Valley. Attachment Draft General Land Use Plan Map (1 page) alley Memorandum Planning 763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting December 9,2008 Agenda Item 9. B. Housing Chapter Prepared By Joe Hogeboom, City Planner Summary In November, staff presented the Council with the draft 2008 Comprehensive Plan. The Council has reviewed individual chapters of the Comprehensive Plan. The Housing Chapter is the final portion of the Comprehensive Plan that has not received preliminary Council review. Staff requests that Council prepare to review and discuss the draft Housing Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. alley e orandum Public Works 763-593-8030 I 763-593-3988 (fax) Executive Summary Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting December 9, 2008 Agenda Item 9. C. 200a Comprehensive Plan, Transportation Chapter Prepared By Jeannine Clancy, Director of Public Works Ron Nims, Public Works Project Coordinator Eric Eckman, Public Works Specialist Summary As part of the 200a update to the'City's Comprehensive Plan, staff and its consultant, Short Elliot Hendrickson, Inc., have prepared a draft of the Transportation Chapter. The chapter has been previously submitted to Council and was reviewed at a Special Council/Manager Meeting on October 30. Issues which require direction from Council are: TrailslWalks A. Please reference Figure a, "Existing and Proposed Trails and Sidewalks." Several trail and sidewalk segments are recommended to be added to the 200a Transportation Plan including: 1. Duluth Street, between Mendelssohn Avenue North and Winnetka Avenue North. 2. Wisconsin Avenue, south of Duluth Street. 3. Wesley Park, south side, construct trail around parking lot to Orkla Drive. 4. COmmercial/industrial area west of Boone Avenue North and north of TH 55. These routes were originally identified in the TH 55/Boone Avenue/General Mills Boulevard Pedestrian Study. 5. Brookview Golf Course, south side. 6. Maintenance entrance to Westwood Hills Environmental Education Center. 7. Sandburg Road/Nevada Avenue North, completion of loop. a. Glenwood Avenue, two locations between TH 55 and Wirth Parkway. 9. Lilac Drive, east of Turner's Crossroad North. It is recommended this walk be shifted to the other side of the street to better accommodate school pedestrians and to avoid the use of Mn/DOT's maintenance strip. B. Several trail and sidewalk segments are recommended to be deleted from the 1999 Transportation Plan including: 1. Winsdale Street, between Wesley Park and Winnetka Avenue North. 2. Olson Memorial Highway, adjacent to Brookview Golf Course. 3. Ensign Avenue, south of Medley Park. 4. Boone Avenue North, west side, south of Plymouth Avenue. 5. South side of the Colonnade property. 6. Connection through Crystal from Kentley Avenue to Highway 100 Pedestrian Bridge. 7. Culver Road, west of Regent Avenue North. 8. Connection via C.P. Rail from Breck School to Breck Ice Arena. 9. Poplar Drive, between Meadow Lane and Wirth Parkway. C. A "Share the Road" concept is being recommended along three routes including: 1. Culver Road/June Avenue, between Regent Avenue and Sochacki Park in Robbinsdale. 2. Natchez Avenue South/Sunset Ridge, between Glenwood and 1-394 Pedestrian Bridge. 3. Olson Memorial Highway South Frontage Road, between the KARE-11 sidewalk and General Mills Nature Preserve. Duluth Street Cities' with a population over 5,000 may designate up to 20 percent of their total improved street mileage as state aid routes. Streets must meet certain criteria to receive a state aid designation. Typically, they must be considered a collector street (typically carrying higher traffic volumes) and they must terminate at a state, county or another state aid street. State Aid designated streets receive funds from Mn/DOT derived from gas tax revenues each year. The amount of the allotment for each segment is based on the proposed future design of the roadway and its condition. Each segment will develop its funding over a period of 20 years (35 years for bridges) at which time the segment receives its full allotment. Once a segment is reconstructed, it becomes ineligible for all funding except overlays for the following 20-year cycle. Duluth Street, between Mendelssohn and Winnetka Avenues (please reference Figure 2), was part of the original Municipal State Aid System developed in 1959 when it received its designation. The east part of the segment, from Aquila to Winnetka Avenue, was constructed in 1964 as a 44-foot wide concrete street. In 1984, the portion between Independence and Gettysburg Avenues was reconstructed to state aid standards as a 36-foot wide asphalt street with concrete curb and gutter. The following issues should be considered in a discussion regarding removal of Duluth Street, between Mendelssohn and Winnetka Avenues, as a minor collector on the comprehensive plan and elimination of the state aid route: 1. Since Duluth Street is currently drawing full state aid needs for complete construction, elimination of the segment would currently decrease the City's state aid allotment by approximately $43,000 per year. If an equal length of other streets were designated in its place, the City could lose up to that amount depending on the condition of the street receiving the designation. (Streets recently reconstructed with local funds would only be eligible for overlay allotments for the first 20 years after reconstruction.) 2. Construction/reconstruction of the entire length of Duluth Street would be eligible for state aid funding. Typically, the street reconstruction cost is 100 percent funded by state aid. In addition, storms sewers included in the. construction are funded up to 100 percent based on the area they provide drainage to. The current concept level estimate for street and storm sewer construction on non-standard portions of Duluth Street (Mendelssohn to Independence and Gettysburg to Aquila) is $2,600,000. Removing the designation would require the project to be funded locally. Some of this cost may be assessed to General Mills through a development agreement. 3. Potential expansion of over 150,000 square feet at the James Ford Bell General Mills facility will require the City to evaluate the need for construction of an additional access point. As a collector street, the Duluth Street segment provides a critical east/west link between Mendelssohn and Winnetka Avenues that would serve as a good alternative. Elimination of this route would force traffic to use local streets to access Medicine Lake Road to the north. Recommendations 1. Direct staff to proceed with including Figure 8 entitled "Existing and Proposed Trails . and Sidewalks" as proposed in the Transportation Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. 2. Direct staff to proceed with including Figure 2 entitled "Existing and Proposed Functional Classifications" as proposed in the Transportation Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. Attachments Figure 8, Existing and Proposed Trails and Sidewalks (1 page) Figure 2,Existing and Proposed Functional Classifications (1 page) Hey Memorand m Planning 763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax) Executive Summary Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting December 9,2008 Agenda Item 10. City Involvement in Xenia Avenue/Park Place Boulevard Pedestrian Study Prepared By Joe Hogeboom, City Planner Summary The City of St. Louis Park is currently directing a study of pedestrian and bicycle connections in the area of Park Place Boulevard. The study is funded through the federal Non-Motorized Transportation Grant. The City of Golden Valley was a co-applicant for this funding opportunity, and has been following the progress of the study. Currently, a portion of this study area extends north into Golden Valley. The City of St. Louis Park has contracted with HKGi Consulting, Inc. to assist in the execution of the study. The City of St. Louis Park has instructed HKGi to conduct a public meeting, where residents from the study area would be invited to view preliminary work, as well as offer suggestions for preferred bicycle and pedestrian routes. The City of St. Louis Park has invited the City of Golden Valley, and its residents, to participate in a community meeting. The City of St. Louis Park has indicated it would like to hold a proposed community meeting in early January 2009. HKGi has generated a map (attached) which identifies existing and proposed non-motorized trails and routes. Staff has reviewed this document and has requested that it be revised to reflect the City's Transportation Plan. Additionally, staff has asked for explanations surrounding HKGi's suggested sidewalk and trail routes. Currently, several future options exist for this situation. First, the City could choose to move forward with participation in the proposed community meeting. To proceed with this option, the City must identify a geographical area from which to invite participants. Any costs associated with this meeting (mailing, signage, etc.) would be the responsibility of the City. Second, the City may choose to not participate in a public meeting at this time, and instead request a review and recommendation from the Sidewalk Committee. Finally, the City may choose to limit, reduce, or end its participation in the study. Staff seeks Council direction in proceeding with this study. Attachment Location map ( 1 page)