My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 2001/02/12
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2001
>
Agenda Packets - 2001/02/12
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:46:26 PM
Creation date
8/29/2018 9:23:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
2/12/2001
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
2/12/2001
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
104
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
3 <br /> <br />Analysis: <br />It is inevitable that any assessment policy and or street standard for any proposed project will <br />meet with a certain amount of resistance, just as it is inevitable that streets will need to be <br />improved throughout the entire City in the future. The goal of the program is to be successful in <br />improving the City’s infrastructure in a manner that is the most cost effective and efficient, that <br />ultimately produces an end product that the City, which is the residents, feel is worthwhile and <br />affordable. Staff has some suggestions for Council to consider for the future of the City’s street <br />improvement projects <br /> <br />1. Keep existing policy in place. Move on to next residential project on the list. <br />2. Modify existing policy to reduce assessment amount and improve street <br />construction standard, which would require additional City funding. <br />3. Identify the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) in which street reconstruction is <br />required. <br />4. Cease solicitation of new improvement projects; continue to perform preventative <br />maintenance measures on pavements worthy of these procedures. Deposit <br />remaining funds into Reconstruction fund. Consider projects by petition or <br />established reconstruction PCI value only. <br />5. Survey property owners regarding street improvement concerns. Possibly add <br />questions of funding options, which could include increased taxes, increased <br />utilization of Franchise funds, bonds and assessments to next election ballot. <br />Recommendations: <br />Staff highly recommends that concerns from the residents be identified regarding both the <br />assessment policy and street standards, these concerns be addressed in the best possible manner <br />and a threshold PCI value be established for a street reconstruction project or a average PCI <br />threshold for an area project, prior to any further project proposals. <br /> <br />Staff has surveyed a number of surrounding communities requesting information on average <br />miles of reconstruction per year, and methods for determining projects. It is hopeful this <br />information will be available to present at the meeting. <br /> <br />Accompanying this report is the current Assessment Policy for Council’s review. <br /> <br />If Council members have any questions or concerns pertaining to this report, please feel free to <br />call me. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />_________________________________ <br />Michael Ulrich, Director of Public Works
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.