The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About7A - 1994-1998 CIP AGENDA #: PREPARED BY: SUBJECT: DATE: INTRODUCTION: DISCUSSION: ISSUES: STAFF AGENDA REPORT 7A FRANK BOYLES, CITY MANAGER AND RALPH TESCHNER, FINANCE 01 RECTOR CONSIDER APPROVAL OF 1994-1998 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND SUPPORTIVE REVENUE FEE INCREASES SEPTEMBER 7, 1993 The City Council has now conducted a workshop on the proposed 1994-1998 Capital I mprovement Program (CI P) and a public information meeting. The minutes of the public information meeting are attached as part of this agenda packet. The information meeting did not generate a significant number of comments with respect to the proposed CIP. During the course of the public information meeting Finance Director Teschner responded to Councilmember Kedrowski's inquiry by reviewing the various funding sources associated with the CIP. From that discussion it was clear that the property tax impact of the proposed CIP could average $125 per year. This would be in addition to any increases residents will be experiencing as a result of the increased debt service levy and 1994 budget. These two figures do not include the impact of the potential school district's referendum expected for this November. The City Council should critically review the proposed projects included in the CIP. Those programs which are not deemed to be of high priority should be eliminated now so that they do not generate public concern or staff effort and expense just to be dropped following the public hearing. Eliminating or delaying projects which the Council deems to be a lower priority will reduce the property tax burden on the public. After reviewing the proposed projects, the Council should consider the following fee increases which are considered necessary to provide an adequate revenue stream: Revenue Fee Current Charge Proposed Charge AMM Survey Average 1. Collector Street Fee Bldg. Permit Fee $250.00 Acreage Charge $750.00 Residential Equivalent $250.00 $750.00 $35.00/ff n/a n/a n/a - 1 - 4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake. Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 A.N EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER ISSUES: ALTERNATIVES: 2. SAC & WAC Charge Bldg. Permit Fee $700.00 $900.00 $1380.00 Acreage Charge $2750.00 $3000.00 $3500.00 3. Water Tower Charge Bldg. Permit Fee $500.00 $600.00 n/a 4. Park Support/Trail Fee Bldg. Permit Fee $350.00 $650.00 $815.00 Staff proposes that the street collector fee be expanded to a three tier charge comprising, in addition to the building permit fee and acreage fees, a residential road equivalent fee of $35.00 per front foot. The purpose is to more equitably distribute the overall cost of the collector street. Developments which have a collector street derive a greater benefit as opposed to non-adjacent developments because they directly connect with the collector. The $35.00 front footage charge represents approximately one-half the actual cost because no driveway access is permitted. The AMM figure is derived upon various composite averages, utilizing representative growth communities of Chanhassen, Eagan, Eden Prairie, Lakeville, Plymouth and Savage. Shakopee was also used in the SAC & WAC survey results. The Council's final act should also determine a final priority for the proposed County projects in order that the staff can "lobby" for their support on an hierarchical order. This request was made by the County because of their concern that municipalities may sometimes "change their priorities" during the course of the year. This will help the County in finalizing their Capital Improvement plans as well. The revenue sources above are the basis for a significant portion of City expenditures associated with collector road construction, trunk system improvements and park trailways within the community. Such cost are a direct spinoff of growth and as a result, funding should be heavily dependent on the development activity responsible for these capital outlays. All fee increases subject to collection at time of building permit application should be deferred until January 1, 1994. The reason is that Building Official Gary Staber notifies all of our area builders of the various fee amounts including MWCC charges prior to the beginning of the new year. Also, it has not been usual and customary practice for the Council to adopt midyear adjustments The following alternatives are available: 1. Following discussion of the CIP authorize its approval, direct the revision of revenue policies and establish a priority with respect to County policies. -2 - 2. Defer consideration of any or all of these matters for specific reasons. RECOMMENDATION: Alternative #1 ACTION REQUIRED: Adopt three distinct motions: a. Approve the proposed 1994-1998 Capital Improvement Program as is or as amended. b. Approve the fee increases as outlined and direct Staff to incorporate these new amounts in ordinance form where appropriate and make the necessary revisions within the City's assessment policy. c. Establish priorities for County Road Improvement Projects. AGNCIPWRT -3 - Prior Lake City Council Minutes August 16, 1993 MOTION BY WHITE, SECONDED BY SCOTT, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS (0) thru (g). Upon a vote taken, ayes by Kedrowski, Fitzgerald, Scott and White, the motion passed unanimously. 5. PRESENTATIONS: A. Public Information Meeting Regarding Draft of 1994-1998 Capital Improvement Program. City Manager Boyles explained the process to be followed for public input and Council consideration, and gave a brief overview of the Program and Executive Summary. Finance Director Teschner reviewed the proposed expenditures and anticipated revenue sources. Public Works Director Anderson reviewed County Road Projects which had been proposed during the County/Council workshop earlier this Spring. Anderson discussed each project and the tirneframe as stated by the Scott County Engineering Department, and requested input from the Council regarding their priorities. Discussion occurred regarding various aspects of the proposed road projects. J (Attorney Rathke arrtved at 8:00 p.m.). Acting Mayor Kedrowski then opened the meeting for public comment on both the Capital Improvement Program and the proposed County Road improvement projects. The following residents addressed the Council regarding the County Road projects: Mannie Russo - 5384 161 Street. Opposed a four lane road for County Road 44. Donald Ramm, 16811 Willow Lane - Inquired about plans for connecting Willow Lane with Five Hawks Avenue. Acting Mayor Kedrowski closed the meeting to public comment at 8:35 p.m. Council then discussed the proposed plans for County Road 44 and expressed concern over the initial levy and property tax impact. After discussion, City Manager Boyles stated that the Capital Improvement Program would be placed on the September 7 Agenda for Council approval. 6. OLD BUSINESS A. Consider Approval of Resolution 93-70 Final Plat of Westbury Ponds. Planning Director Graser presented details of the request and stated that City Attorney Glenn Kessel had examined the plat and other title work associated with the development and is confident all contingencies have been met in the agreement, subject to signing of developer's agreement by the Mayor and City Manager. Ron Swanson of Valley Surveying, representing the developer of Westbury Ponds, stated that all the required adjustments had been completed. -2. PRIOR LAKE SCOTT COUNTY ROAD PRIORITIES September 7, 1993 1. County Road 42 - Ferndale to Boone. 2. County Road 21 - Fish Point to 35W. 3. County Road 42 - Ferndale to County Road 21. 4. County Road 18 - County Road 42 to T.H. 10l. 5. County Road 44 - Highway 13 to County Road 27. 6. County Road 42 - County Road 21 to County Road 83. 7. County Road 21 - County Road 42 to County Road 82. 8. County Road 42 - County Road 83 to County Road 17. 9. County Road 83 - County Road 82 to County Road 42. 10. County Road 23 Realignment. 11. County Road 21 North of County Road 42. FBAG.WRT