My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Council - 10/25/2016
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Council
>
2016
>
Minutes - Council - 10/25/2016
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/13/2025 2:26:32 PM
Creation date
11/18/2016 11:07:15 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
10/25/2016
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
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).
View images
View plain text
October 24, 2016 <br />City of Ramsey, MN <br />Objection to Special Assessment <br />Page 3 of 5 <br />In order for the new road to last 60 years, the proactive maintenance that is recommended, per <br />Bruce Westby, City Engineer, is as follows: <br />New Road <br />Existing Road <br />Year <br />Proposed <br />Maintenance <br />Year <br />Actual <br />Maintenance <br />3 <br />Crackseal <br />6 <br />Crackseal & Sealcoat <br />7 <br />Sealcoat <br />13 <br />Crackseal & Sealcoat <br />14 <br />Sealcoat <br />20 <br />Mill & Overlay <br />23 <br />Crackseal <br />26 <br />Crackseal & Sealcoat <br />31 <br />Reconstruction <br />33 <br />Crackseal & Sealcoat <br />40 <br />MiII & Overlay <br />43 <br />Crackseal <br />46 <br />Crackseal & Sealcoat <br />53 <br />Crackseal & Sealcoat <br />60 <br />Reconstruction <br />So, only two of eleven maintenance operations were performed. The next one that should have <br />been done was a mill and overlayment which is a critical step in maintaining the life and <br />condition of the road. Had that been done, it would now be due for another sealcoating rather <br />than reconstruction. <br />The residents continued to pay their property taxes each and every year, but did not receive the <br />benefit of the road maintenance as they should. The city saved the money that otherwise should <br />have been spent on maintenance of this road over those years and, essentially, deferred the <br />maintenance until now when it needs to be reconstructed. <br />This could be likened to buying a car and only doing the first couple of oil changes and then just <br />driving the car until the engine quits and then buying a new car. That is probably not the most <br />cost-effective way to manage the ownership of a car. <br />For these reasons, the reconstruction at this point in the life of the road should not be subject to <br />special assessment. <br />The Reconstruction Restores Properties to Proper Values. <br />According to the feasibility study and the special assessment policy, eligible project costs include <br />those costs required to reconstruct the streets at their current width and to accommodate <br />residential traffic only. So, essentially, the costs subject to assessment are what it would take to <br />replace the road that was already there, but in good condition. By definition, no increase in value <br />to the properties can exist. Any increase in values from the period just prior to construction to <br />after construction would be the result of restoring values to what they should have been all along. <br />In other words, allowing the road to deteriorate may have reduced the values of the properties <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.