01/14/97 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Department is aware of its ability to cite violators under the basic speed law. He recommended that the street remain un-posted awaiting the results of the speed study. He added that if the Road and Bridge Committee feel there should be some interim posting, he recommended requesting a temporary posting authorization from MnDOT. Consensus of the Road and Bridge Committee was that it's not worth doing anything until the speed study has been completed. ~ Case #3: 1997 Street Maintenance Program City Engineer Jankowski stated that this case serves as the "kick-off' for the 1997 Street Maintenance Program. This program has been done since 1984, and addresses the routine maintenance needs for the City's pavements on a periodic basis so as to maximize the life of the pavement. He noted the summary of the pavement history in the City and a summary of the City's. last five street maintenance programs. He told of the annual expenditures significantly increasing over the past five years, with a current annual expenditure of nearly one-quarter million dollars for the City's nearly 130 miles of bituminous pavement. He summarized past maintenance programs and explained street rating. Mr. Jankowski pointed out that this year the City had an individual go out and rate all the streets. He added that the 1997 program has a budget of $293,700, which is distributed among three major components; the City's share at $135,000, which can be matched with an equal amount of special assessment, and developer's escrows of $23,500 to cover first sealcoats on newer roads. The proposed 1997 program will include 14.3 miles of sea1coating and crack filling at an estimated cost of $140,000 and 3.55 miles of overlays at a cost of $151,950. This represents a total program of 17.8 miles at a cost of $292,390. He stated that, in the past, we have had aggregated individual projects and we end up with 15 to 16 individual projects. We need to have public hearings on each one and we have to send out hearing notices to each property owner. There may be a better way to streamline this procedure. Last year there were about 700 people the city assessed and two came in for the public hearings. Councilmember Haas Steffen inquired if staff c.ould look into combining the hearings. Councilmember Beyer felt that all the public hearings should be kept separate as well as motions, for the record. Councilmember Haas Steffen commented that the public hearings must cost money. Councilmember Beyer responded that the cost is included in the assessment. Councilmember Haas Steffen stated that maybe they should be combined as that's still tax payers money. We could look at ways to "cut down", particularly when you do not draw big crowds for these assessments. Councilmember Beyer stated that the public hearings invite individuals from individual areas to come in and discuss their assessment. It has worked good in the past. ,. Road and Bridge Committee/January 14, 1997 Page 6 of6