My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Public Works Committee - 11/15/2005
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Public Works Committee
>
2000 - 2009
>
2005
>
Agenda - Public Works Committee - 11/15/2005
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/13/2025 2:30:03 PM
Creation date
11/10/2005 3:48:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Public Works Committee
Document Date
11/15/2005
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
62
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
(~) <br /> <br />(2) <br /> <br />(4) <br /> <br />(7) <br /> <br />!9) <br /> <br /> CITY,OF i:L~MSEY <br />Street Maintenance Program Assessment Practices <br /> <br />Projects are identified by individua! subdivisions, or by grouping of subdivision <br />and lots having similar pavement b2stones and conditions and similar pavement <br />areas per benefited unit. <br /> <br />An assessment share will be calculated by determining the-total assessable cost of <br />the project and dividing by the number of benefited units. , <br /> <br />Where and individual lot has more than one frontage and not ali. frontages are <br />scheduled to receive an improvement, or the same type of~ improvements, the lot <br />will be considered benefited and be assessed a full share for the improvement <br />which is conducted along the frontage of the lot that contains the main driveway <br />opening. . <br /> <br />For sealcoats and overlays the amount assessed to 'benefited Pr0Perty'owner is <br />50% o f the total project cost including overhead costs. (1991.) <br /> <br />Projects involving streets which have had previous prgposed maintenance projects <br />defeated by.petition shall be ineligible to receive the City's 50% contribution, if <br />the project requires a more expensive maintenance. (i.e. streets'proposed for <br />sealcoating project which was defeated by citizen petition now are'proposed for a <br />bituminous overlay) (1993). <br /> <br />Where the rule of dividing the assessable project cost by the number of benefited <br />units (no 2 above) would result in an assessable share which is grossly out of <br />proportions to the assessable share being charged to similar lots receiving-similar <br />improvements, the City Council may elect to assess such lots. the average <br />assessable share being made to lots receiving similar improvements for that <br />project year. (1996) <br /> <br />Where a benefited area contains commercial lots having w!dely varying sizes, the <br />assessment shal.1 be made based on 'area of the lot. (2003) <br /> <br />Where an individual lot has more than one frontage including a driveway frontage <br />on a state or county road, and a non-dri~,eway frontage on a MSA or city street, <br />one-half assessment share will be made for an imProvement.to the MSA or City <br />street. (1995) <br /> <br />Where an individual lot has a single frontage on an MSA street, such lots will be <br />assessed the average assessable share for the type of improvement made to non- <br />MSA streets receiving that improvement. (1992) <br /> <br />Whenever possible townhouse units shall be aggregated in:to individual projects <br />having a single land use. ~z~ instances where townhouse units must be combined in <br /> <br />3~ <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.