2002_0715_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Department Approval: .� � REQUEST FOR COUNCILACTION Manager Reviewed: Item Description: MSA Roadway Assessment Policy BACKGROUND DATE: 07/15/02 ITEM NO.: V, A. Agenda Section: r � �. � � i � � � �� The Council has discussed special assessment policy at four previous meetings. Staffpresented information comparing assessment policies of our neighboring communities on April 8,2002. On May 6 and May 20, the Council received additional information regarding the impact of assessments for MSA roadways and several suggested options for policy revisions. On June 6,2002, the Council heard public comment regarding the potential for a streetscape assessment policy. It was determined by Council Action that streetscapeprojects will not be assessed. The July 15,2002, council meeting was designated as the meeting at which a decision will be made whether to revise the current MSA Roadway Special Assessment Policy. At the May 20 council meeting, Chris Miller, Finance Director, presented information about the financial health of the City, as well as information about the impact of assessments on MSA roadways. His information detailed a shortfall in construction funding for MSA proj ects that are planned in the ne� five to ten years. Additional funding for MSA roadways is needed for several reasons. Number one is that not a11 construction costs are eligible for MSA reimbursement. Only a portion of drainage costs are eligible. Certain landscaping costs are also not eligible for reimbursement. As discussed at previous meetings, the City's share of MSA revenues is shrinking as outer-ring suburbs grow and are allocated dollars from the same pool of transportation dollars. Also, the expectation of amenities, such as trails and retaining wa11s, has increased the construction cost of MSA roadways. The MSA Fund does not build as many feet of street from an annual allocation as it did 20 years ago. All of the above indicates a need for additional revenue to construct MSA roadways. Without additional revenue, future reconstruction projects on MSA roads may become very basic in nature—minimum width streets without trails or retaining wa11s. Additional sloping easements, which cause a greater impact on private property, may be necessary. Also, projects may be pushed back and 1�1� in poorer condition for a longer period of time if MSA dollars are not available due to greater reliance on MSA funds for these proj ects. Staffwill provide a summary of suggested policy revisions if requested by Council Members. It is important as the Council considers change to existing assessmentpolicy that there is fairness to like properties, regardless of the functional classification of the particular street. The value to a particular