|
<br />,. ORDINANeE No. GOO
<br />.~' .CITY O~MOUNDS VIEW
<br />L - COUNTYOF-RAMSEY..,
<br />);:; STATE'OF MINNES"TA. ".
<br />2';, AN ORDINAN.CE AMEflJDING t
<br />C.~APTER 202, SECTION 202.,09 oF'
<br />"if HE MOUNDS VIEW MUNICIPAL
<br />'"CODE VIEW. ENTITLED ~'PUBLIC
<br />, IMPROVEMENTS"
<br />nie City of.lOIounds View ordains:
<br />Section I Chapter 202.09, S'ubd 2 of. the
<br />1I10unds View Municipal Codeis~mended to
<br />.ead:
<br />Subd.2 Improvement Type and
<br />~pportionment of Cost:
<br />.a. Street Reconstruction Including Curb and
<br />::lutter.
<br />The cost of street reconstruction shall be.
<br />'ecovered by the adjusted front'footage
<br />nethod. The front footage rateshafl be
<br />letermined by dividing the project cost by the
<br />otaf number of adjUsted front feet in the
<br />lroject area x the individual adjusted front
<br />ootage x one-half (1/2). The assessments per
<br />ldjusted front foot may vary depending ontlie
<br />mderlying zoning of a parcel. Assessments
<br />qr-, residential properties which are on
<br />:ollectoror arterial streets shall be adjusted
<br />;g,that the amount.of the assessment Shallbe
<br />lie' same as if the project were constructed to
<br />.esidential street standards.
<br />the remaining cost shall be recovered by
<br />neans of the general ad valorem propertY tax
<br />laid by the entire community 01 by other
<br />unds that may become available to the City
<br />or infrastructure cost recovecy.
<br />b.Street Resurfacing. ,
<br />4?treet resurfacing is commonly known and
<br />.ef~rI~.,!()"l\s_street overlaying ~heJ~t>ya
<br />1ew.DEfu'/jfroaomaterial SUCh as bitumInouS
<br />s iristalledover an'exlsting pavec! road to a
<br />;peolfic;lhlc\(l\le5s; Assessm~'ls::s/;lal,I-be
<br />retermined by the .adjusted front footage
<br />nethod. .'
<br />c. Sidewalk. Sidewalk improvements may
<br />le, done in conjunction' with. a Street
<br />3c.onstruction ~r as a s~parate project, In any
<br />'1lnt, ,cost of Sidewalk Improvements Shall be
<br />ecovered by means of the general ad '
<br />alorem propertyt~x paid by the entire
<br />ommunity. or by other, funds that may
<br />ecome available to the City for infrastructure
<br />!l'St recovery." . . , -
<br />1(f sealc~ating.Seaicoatlng, patching and
<br />~8:ckseahng are considered general
<br />~lntenance activities and the expenses of
<br />~,9h acts will be paid' for by ad valorem
<br />rop~rty tax or any other funds available to
<br />Ie City at that time.
<br />e. Sanitary Sewer and Water Mains. Repair
<br />~~ replacement of sewer or water mains is
<br />~,ually done in conjunction with.a street
<br />'~?nstruction Project and the cost of, this
<br />Ot:K shoulct be included as. part of the total
<br />lajo~ street. p,roj~ct cost and should also be
<br />;;nstde-relt.-to- be-ine!trded-in"the I ate
<br />>,sessed for street reconstructiOn. jfit.;s
<br />~ermlned that the repair and replacement
<br />!Irk r~sults in a greCiter'benefit to.some
<br />'OPeltles and not to .otbers the Council
<br />fould consider establishing a different
<br />~'sessment rate based on the benefits
<br />ceived. - ' .
<br />f. Sanitary Sewer and Water Trunk
<br />lprovements. Trunk sewer and water mains
<br />.~ usually designed to carry largervoJumes
<br />flo~ than are necessarywilhinan
<br />lmedlate proPierty area in ord.er to serve
<br />Iditional properties beyond the area ,of their
<br />Im:diate placement. Th,erefore, 100 percent
<br />boYo) of the cost oUrunk improvements will
<br />I ~ssessedon a unit baSis to all properties
<br />thm a district deemed to be benefitted from
<br />e trunk improvements.
<br />~. Sewer and Water Services. Individua;
<br />Iwer and water services benefit only the
<br />ope~ies they serve and 100 percerit(100'l'0)
<br />thel~ cost shall be assessed to the propertY
<br />. which t~ey are installed. ,. .
<br />1. Draina,ge Imp~vements. Storm drainage
<br />11;1 pondmg/basm systems are usually
<br />nstructed to serve a specific drainage or
<br />atershe.d" district..l'l'Ie ~e"t8f IIraillil~
<br />!J'le....."H....lo;1 ..,',QU,. l>~., Uflog Ju;...lr {J,'f!}
<br />~ These drainaQe districts have trunk
<br />~s. which are large diameteroipes that
<br />n I 'vlm fwterfro oe r
<br />
<br />reasonableOll!!ount of time (10 to 1:2 yea~fol" ,~IJ .:>.....~..r9LOI" 'mInIS mstancetne
<br />resurfacin!l\.~ to 17 years for partial .adjuSled. lron.t. . fo.ota.. ~ '.f.o. r. rect. 6j9u.'ar lot~will
<br />recil,93tructio~ and 17 to 25 years for total be the actuaHrpnHootage if dte.I~T.he
<br />reconstruction) the assessment shall be lro~ge'measufed shall be the lot wiaih 'at
<br />calculated on a pro-rated b..SIS. The .thefrontlotline.., . lao
<br />remaining cost shall berecovered'bymeans~lp'~ ,.., "\
<br />
<br />~~~h:n~i~:e~~~J~~~~ ~i~~ ~:I~h~. . M...j..~.$...~ .N......./.ll. (J. ..l~\f.. EI..... ...... . )j..Front Footage EXAMP~~~ .;
<br />may become available to the. City. for t A'Side 1 = 43.75' ,
<br />Infrastructure cost recovery:. , Side 2 = 95'
<br />Section II. Chapter 202.09 Subd 3 of the . '. .A B, L~t~d~i~e=11;:7.5'
<br />Mounds View MuniCipal Code Is amended to '
<br />Read:.. . . .. ,.. ,,/ (b) Genera/Commercial Zoned Comer Lots,
<br />Subd.3 METHO .0$ 0'" ASSES' SMENT .' ~lE! alle,ueA9s relief "'iII11e !lrllRtell ~eeaYse ef
<br />,- Adj: Front Footage EXAMPLES "" "'.
<br />a. The nature of an improvemerit. . -LotA'50' --- s '!I"er iR"'SI'6Rt Ill'6filsFl)' ''lill"s ass9sia.lell
<br />determines the method of assessment,The .. :LdtB-9d' ":it.".i."lfilFS' ell trams fFsRta!lS QRll !lreater
<br />o.bjective is to choose. anassessmen t .method '(2) R '.Isllllllty aleR!lllysiReSS lli.striel eRll iRllystriel
<br />.. -'. ,e. cta. ngular Va.riation. Lots. Fora lot "'aFII I II Th .
<br />WhiC. h will arrive a, t a reasonable, fair and hi h -- ~' iR sl'6es eRs, e adjusted front footage;
<br />w c IS approximately rectangula. r and'. shall be the entire fronta ... I
<br />eqUitable assessment w.hlch will be un.,'for.m. nllo I shape . " ge I'FIsesyre_ II eR~
<br />u,.m1.. A, the. adjusted front foota.gels. Ille sel"oell I .. I"
<br />up.on the same claSs 0.1 prope, rty within the t d b ~- IR8 ee""llrlSIR!I ..e llYillliR!I
<br />~mpu e.. y averaging t.he,'front a. ndbaCk. ~ of the s de of th I t. d.
<br />asses~ed area. The most frequently s,des f th' T. .............., . i e 0 Imme lately
<br />recogn.IZed ass. essment methods are'. the u..n.',t . h'.. 0 ,e, ot. his method is used only abuttmll the Imorovement
<br />Vol .,~~.. the. divergence between front and rear
<br />assessment, the. front footageafisessm~ntlpt lInes is 2() feet or less.. .
<br />
<br />r~l~d~"~~:'~~~. AV.. ~ :.'Jr-:-.~.,. ...'.'.-.'-:
<br />
<br />combl.natlon of these methods may be utilized /70" . .. '. ;: ~. . :. '.' . . ..'
<br />to. arrive at an appropriate. cost distribution. .' . A : ' :t. B
<br />
<br />~,=,:,~::,=~ f~!. . S ......"'.-(1 'i'Oon_nno,,!
<br />
<br />recommendation to the City.Council in the: ' I (''''''"0 .../~:
<br />form ~fa m,ock assessment roll (or rolls). A
<br />deSCription of each assessment and its eo" . . Ad). Front Footage EXAMPLI;S
<br />correspon(ling ~olicy application is presented, .'?~. iFrontFootageEXAMPLES "'~ot A-aiQ' W
<br />Asepar~lte section (Section III) win identify the i..', 'LOt'A-9ll.:..11Q = 100'. . . ; Lot B~' ~
<br />appropnate matchup of method with a specific ... .. 2
<br />type of project and analyze why each is Lot 0."7(.. .on ,
<br />generally used. .. _..', ., "', ~ = 75 8. Flaa L.ots. Properties which utilize a
<br />The purpose of assessment formul . t . . - narrow private easement or maintain
<br />allocate assessed costs among be~:f:~e~ 'Q:3~~n:~~~ ~ots-t ~or a tri~ngular Shaped .owners.hip of access to their property
<br />properties, the formula should result In a' ron ootage IS co'!1puted by exceedIng ~ minimum length of 125 feet,
<br />allocation of assessments which Is reasonabl . ,a~Elraging ,the front and back I?t lines. The th.ereby ha~lng a smail frontage on a street,
<br />related to the benefit receiv dAY measurement, at the .back lot line shall not WIll be assIgned an adjusted fronffootage'c:/f.
<br />predetermined formula' will not b~ ~p~p~~: I af~~!~ ~~4m ~~~~~~n-~~ptt;;Qf.~5J i[?~~ljl~; .Thls di~ensi.,?~ is. con~~t~':l~ ~it~ t~e
<br />In all'C8ses because of circumstances unique::- ~"^""77;:;::- .-.... ',.' :',~:;, ' , ['.',:' I 0... (~i su IVISlon ordl~a~ce which prescribes sucfi'
<br />~~ .the r.elatronship between the sp'ecific .. ., ';' ,'0/ .'. ' iol;~; . .'!';~ '..) i leng.th as the mlnlmu~ lot frontage along a ,_
<br />project a nl1. the lspe.C.'ifiC pro.p.ertles bene fitt ad..,.. <!*~.l.'.F i T-'\;';-' "--_._-,,-. '... ~u. bllc roadway., T,t\e adjusted front faotage for:
<br />When considering an assessment method oi: J~. A ci.. \ c! '('!- "' ! Of ag 10!S whose driveway access IS under 125 .f "
<br />formula for any given project, it may be : (\ ,I I? I~~t f:liI be measured at .the building setback
<br />necessary to combine. assessment methods'" '. ",/ 'i ' om the access terminus.
<br />
<br />~~.~.~e~~~~~y tt~: ~j:~~..~.:gd~~::rj~t~e~o~f. '.. .1_ _.l.l\<'>j .JJ!Z.' - _l\__ - - - '. ~[:;I
<br />methods of assessments should be regarded.,:rl~ ....AI.. AVt.. , ..,
<br />
<br />as .gUideline.s, which m.ay not be appropriate. . . .... .... .. .: , _ '0. ,& e.
<br />In all c~s. .' ~;F;rontt~abtage eXAMPLES --:-l~: ,":
<br />b. U~lt Asses~~e.nt. A unit assessment shall ,::iJ#r~1pq{-i40;= 70'.. ! A.. I I~i-;--'
<br />be denved by dIVIding the total project cOstib~,~. ~.~..,,":,"~2., .' . ---;;;;-
<br />the number or Reside~tial Equivalent rieris'lty.i~" .,~ot~4~'~ ~~O ';' 85'
<br />(RED) units In the proJect area. ARED unit is ,i. /.i. ... ,.g,
<br />defined as a single family residential unll.AII '.. .lotC-12lL:..Q = 60'
<br />Pla~ted and unplatted property willi b'fj'.)" ",.:,._",..:~ ..
<br />,assigned RED unit values equivalent tothe...' , (~);,C'lJHte-Sac Lots The adjusted front
<br />underlying Zoning. When the existing land use . ... footage for those lots that exist on cul-de-Sacs
<br />IS 18SS than th~ highest and best permitted INI!I ,t>Il.~lcplated ~t the midsection of the lot
<br />Use, the Council may consider t!:le, current use'J1:,t. .the. most reasonably defined and
<br />as well.asthe full potential 01 land use In .~ete.rmlnal:lle ,position. ThiS line will be
<br />determining the appropriate ,number of RED \Xl~ut~byconnecting the midpoints of the '
<br />units, Otherwise., the following RED chart will tw()Skl$lot liJ'leS. Or,if the lots' are similar In
<br />app'Y on.. a per. unit basl~. subject., to\ nature 8Il.d cor;1flguratlon,a common lot Width,
<br />adlustn:!!tntJ:!x.the .YlW.ncl. for anYJI!!CI!,!lt!e~ .....-:~uch as. the. stand~ixl. set back of 30' may. be
<br />. ., n .'. : "8sslQ,;1&d ~..,..,d opon~ttollvf IYIJI"al
<br />Single Family. 1.00 FiED.lotswlthln the subdivision.
<br />Duplex 1.00 flED . .
<br />Condominium 0.80 RED
<br />Multifamily 0.80 !'lE[)
<br />(3 Units or more) '.
<br />Townhouse 0.80 RED
<br />Commercial 2.00 Units
<br />Industrial 2.00 Units
<br />
<br />
<br />B
<br />
<br />
<br />Adj. Front Fo()tage EXAMPLES
<br />Lot A-75'
<br />Lot 8-90'
<br />9. Double Frontage Lots I.f a parcel; other
<br />than a corn~r I~t,. camprises frontage on ~
<br />str:ets and IS eligible for subdivision, thenaJ'l' ,
<br />adjusted front footage assessment will be
<br />charged along each street. Fordouble
<br />fronta.g7 ~ots lacking the necessary depth for .
<br />subdiVISion, only a single adjusted front
<br />fo?tage . will be computed. The frontage with
<br />drrvewayaccess to front of house, shall be
<br />.,~~~~.:._. -. _.__.~_n
<br />
<br />The Unit approach has proven to be the best
<br />!"ethod in those instances whereby the
<br />Improvement largely benefits everyone to the
<br />same degree and. the cost of the improvement
<br />Is not generally affected by parcel size. .
<br />assessa~le area, the following considerations
<br />wllJbe gIVen:
<br />(1) Ponding Assessment ConSideratiOn.
<br />Lak7s, ponds and swamps may .be
<br />considered a part of the assessable area of:a
<br />parcel.
<br />(2). RO~d Right-of-Way Assessment
<br />ConSideration. Up to 20 percent (20%) of the
<br />gross acreage may be deducted for street
<br />right-of-way purposes within unplatted parcElls
<br />of five ac~s or. more depending upol1 the
<br />p~rcel conflguratl9n and is only applicable to
<br />Single. family residential uSe. Parcels of less
<br />than five acres may not qualify and. may be
<br />~sessecJi full acreage, The reason for this
<br />size restriction is that. in most instance.s.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />~, A
<br />r/
<br />
<br />Jill"". '.A I ~-.Q."'A....-\I.-l:-_..-.
<br />0;)
<br />;; s. ...
<br />
<br />l!!!::
<br />
<br />Adj; Front Footage ExAMPLES
<br />LotA-75' '.
<br />Lot 8-1.10'
<br />Lot C-8O?
<br />Curved Lots. in. certain situations such as
<br />those where iotsare located along
<br />meandering. trail system streets, read patterns
<br />.create curvillneal .frontages. In such
<br />.instances, the adjusted front footage will be
<br />the. width of the lot measured at the midpoint
<br />of the shOrtest side lot line: .
<br />
<br />Adj. Front Footage EXAMPLES
<br />Lot A-220'
<br />Lot B-80'
<br />The ultimate objective of these procedures
<br />is. to arrive at a fair and eqUitable diStribution
<br />of cost whereby consideration is given to lot
<br />size and parcels are comparably assessed.
<br />. SECTION III. This. ordinance is effective
<br />thirty days after its publication.
<br />. Introduced and ,read by the City Council of
<br />\ the City of Mounds View on April 28, 1997.
<br />Read and passed by the City Council of the
<br />Mounds View this 12th day ,of May, 1997.
<br />Is/ Duane W. McCarty
<br />. Mayor
<br />ATTEST: Chuck Whiting
<br />Administrator
<br />{Bulletin: May 21, 1997)
<br />
<br />-/~rt'L<lN,t .'
<br />/.t:'/ .. ...... ~
<br />~/ ,.8 . c .....'...' ....
<br />..(.............I..A....... __.'~..O_...:_._ \l.)...
<br />. .P--L-.' --~-- .... 1
<br />..':J::. ' : ,/
<br />
<br />, I
<br />
|