Laserfiche WebLink
4 <br />project with roughly similar lot sizes and similar housing stock. This would <br />indicate that the City should assess equal amounts to all residential properties <br />within a project area. <br /> <br />Case in point: assume two $150,000 homes in a project area. One house sits on <br />a corner lot, the other is at the end of a cul-de-sac. According to a benefit <br />appraisal, both properties would receive the same benefit; however, under the <br />City’s current assessment policy, the first house would be assessed much more <br />than the second. <br /> <br />Staff recommends that Council consider an assessment policy that assigns a <br />portion of the project cost equally to all similar benefited properties. <br /> <br />B. We should apply maintenance strategies at the proper time and to the proper <br />streets so as to minimize the overall cost to the City and increase the overall <br />benefit to the residents. <br />The general maintenance strategy of a roadway segment would be to apply a <br />surface treatment at around the 5th year of the pavements life cycle, then perform <br />a mill and overlay around the 15th to 20 year, then finally reconstruct in year 35 to <br />40 - generally. The goal of this strategy is to apply the correct maintenance <br />technique at the proper time so as to minimize overall costs. Based on the <br />structure of the City’s current assessment policy, a property owner would be <br />assessed the same amount for a mill and overlay project as they would for a total <br />reconstruction project. Given the choice, property owners may not support an <br />inexpensive mill and overlay project that would cost effectively extend the life of <br />their street and opt to wait for a far more expensive reconstruction project. <br /> <br />Staff recommends that Council consider an assessment policy that assigns <br />amounts to be assessed based on the total project cost and NOT on a fixed <br />amount. <br /> <br />C. We should develop a street program that is supported by the public and can <br />be supported financially by the City. <br />This is an objective that many cities seem to spend much time researching and <br />fine-tuning. Many, if not most, cities assign public improvement assessment <br />amounts base on a percentage of the total project cost. It then becomes a <br />question as to what that percentage should be. In terms of a neighborhood street <br />major maintenance project, the percent range which is assessed by cities in the <br />metro area to residential properties is 10% to 75% of the total project cost. The <br />majority falls in the range of 25% to 50%. For comparison purposes, the <br />proposed assessment for the County Road H2 Project is 13.3 % of the total <br />project cost. <br /> <br />The objective is to select a percentage that is low enough to make the proposed <br />projects appealing to the property owners. However, they need to be large <br />enough to sustain a long-term street maintenance program. The feasibility report <br />for the 2003 Street Improvement Project will have a mock assessment role <br />included that will be based on the City’s current assessment policy. Staff will then