The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2024-03-19 Work Session Meeting PacketAgenda City Council Work Session City of Edina, Minnesota City Hall Community Room Tuesday, March 19, 2024 5:30 PM I.Call To Order II.Roll Call III.Discuss Petition Response for Morningside C Street Reconstruction Assessments IV.Discuss Grandview Parking Ramp ADA History & Grandview Pedestrian Bridge V.Adjournment The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance in the way of hearing ampli*cation, an interpreter, large-print documents or something else, please call 952-927-8861 72 hours in advance of the meeting. Date: March 19, 2024 Agenda Item #: III. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Other From:Chad A. Millner, P.E., Director of Engineering Item Activity: Subject:Discuss Petition Response for Morningside C Street Reconstruction Assessments Discussion CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: None, discuss petition response for Morningside C Street Reconstruction assessments.. INTRODUCTION: This topic has been previously discussed on the following dates and times with City Council. Council noted more discussion was needed before a formal response was provided. •June 6, 2023 Community Comment Presentation by Residents. •June 20, 2023 P etition accepted by Council. •July 7, 2023 Staff provided a detailed review of Street Reconstruction Program and Assessment Policy with Members Agnew and Risser. •July 18, 2023 Staff Response to the Petition at City Council. •No specific direction from council, staff considered matter closed. •October 3, 2023 Community Comment Presentation again by Residents. •Council asked for more discussion. ATTACHMENTS: Description Petition Against Morningside C Street Reconstruction Assessments Petition Presentation, June 6, 2023 Morningside C Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Community Comment Response !"#$%&" '('%) (!'*+, - ./+0* #(**.. ))) & '- !" "#$%&"'('%)( !'*+,-")#''1 &" " ")&#''1 &" #$ ! (!'*+,- ! #$%&"'('%) 3FDFJWFE+VOF BU $PVODJM.FFUJOH ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION ASSESSMENTS IN MORNINGSIDE C June 6, 2023 OVERVIEW •We believe the assessments for Roadway Reconstruction in Morningside C are inequitable and unfair to its residents. •The assessment calculation goes against common sense, general fairness, and is inconsistent with the city’s stated policy objectives. •We request the Edina City Council review the proposed assessment for Morningside C Roadway Reconstruction, and adjust it accordingly. MORNINGSIDE ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION “For reference, each street reconstruction project has a letter associated with the neighborhood –that’s because neighborhoods are much too large to reconstruct in one Summer, therefore we divide them into sub- groups,each distinguished with a different letter…” 2023 Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction [video] MORNINGSIDE ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION Morningside D/E 2022 246.21 REUs Morningside C 2023 133.61 REUs Morningside D/E 2022 246.21 REUs $ 2,285,103 S.A. $ 9,300 per REU Morningside C 2023 133.61 REUs $ 1,843800 S.A. $ 13,800 per REU MORNINGSIDE ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION 48% UPCHARGE 9,300 13,800 MORNINGSIDE D/E MORNINGSIDE C ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION ASSESSMENT The projected assessment for Morningside C is 48% higher than the assessment charged to Morningside D/E residents - for the same project. VALUE ADD SHORTFALL Under State Statutes, the City can assess properties for public improvements, but the benefit to property values must be ‘equal to or greater than the assessment’. (City of Edina Special Assessments Policy) ESTIMATED VALUE ADDED D/E C $20K $15K $10K $ 5K EST. VALUE ADDED $14 -20K ASSESSMENT $ 9.3K EST. VALUE ADDED $12 –17K ASSESSMENT $13.8K $13.8K $9.3K DOES STATUTE ALLOW CHARGING ABOVE $12K? SO, WHAT HAPPENED? MORNINGSIDE C PROJECT AREA MORNINGSIDE C PROJECT AREA 115 Full REUs (blue) MORNINGSIDE C PROJECT AREA 115 Full REUs (blue) 4 (8 x .5) REUs (yellow) MORNINGSIDE C PROJECT AREA 115 Full REUs (blue) 4 (8 x .5) REUs (yellow) 8.61 Avail Acad. MORNINGSIDE C PROJECT AREA 115 Full REUs (blue) 4 (8 x .5) REUs (yellow) 8.61 Avail Acad. 5 Weber Park 133.61 Project REUs MORNINGSIDE C PROJECT AREA 115 Full REUs (blue) 4 (8 x .5) REUs (yellow) 8.61 Avail Acad. 5 Weber Park 133.61 Project REUs MORNINGSIDE C PROJECT AREA 115 Full REUs (blue) 4 (8 x .5) REUs (yellow) 8.61 Avail Acad. 5 Weber Park 133.61 Project REUs 18 Uncounted REUs 3 Weber Short REUs 21 Total Extra REUs 154.61 Adjusted Ttl REUs MORNINGSIDE C PROJECT AREA 115 Full REUs (blue) 4 (8 x .5) REUs (yellow) 8.61 Avail Acad. 5 Weber Park 133.61 Project REUs 18 Uncounted REUs 3 Weber Short REUs 21 Total Extra REUs 154.61 Adjusted Ttl REUs 9 Natchez withheld 163.61 w/ Natchez MORNINGSIDE D/E MORNINGSIDE C SIDE-BY-SIDE COMPARISON OF ASSESSED AND UNASSESSED LOTS ALL OF MORNINGSIDE It’s worth noting, that for flood mitigation all 570 Morningside parcels make up the Morningside Neighborhood Watershed Drainage Area. Why would roadway reconstruction for everyone’s drainage pond be paid for by only residents of Morningside C? HERE’S WHAT (MAYBE) HAPPENED. The division of the Roadway Reconstruction was good for project logistics, but it was not equitable for Morningside residents. Morningside C was unintentionally saddled with nearly all unassessed lots/areas for the entire roadway reconstruction area. While unintentional, it resulted in significant financial disparity. THE WHOLE PROJECT Total Project REUs:379.82 Total of Specials $ 4,128,903 Assessments Avg. Assessment $ 10,871 Morningside D/E $ 1,571 (below) Morningside C $ 2,929 (above) Difference $ 4,500 It helps to consider the whole Morningside Roadway Reconstruction Project, D/E + C together. OUR REQUEST •Review Morningside Roadway Reconstruction assessments to understand the information we’ve provided. •Adjust the projected assessment for Morningside C to reflect a more equitable share of project costs. •Explore the legal issues of special assessments greater than the estimated added value to avoid city liability. •Revise the city assessment policy for ‘divided’ projects to ensure ‘resident equity’ is considered, with project logistics. OUR REQUEST: PETITION You’ll remember there are 115 homes in Morningside C 100+ Homes have signed on in 2 weeks THANK YOU. EdinaMN.gov Morningside C Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction BA-462 Assessment Community Comments / Petition Response City Council Work Session March 19, 2024 Chad Millner, Engineering Director Background •June 6, 2023 Community Comment Presentation by Residents. •June 20, 2023 Petition accepted by Council. •July 7, 2023 Staff provided a detailed review of Street Reconstruction Program and Assessment Policy with Members Agnew and Risser. •July 18, 2023 Staff Response to the Petition at City Council. •No specific direction from council, staff considered matter closed. •October 3, 2023 Community Comment Presentation again by Residents. •Council asked for more discussion. •March 19, 2024 City Council Work Session Petition Details Comments of the Residents that Filed the Petition •Petitioners feel assessments are inequitable and unfair (Morningside C). •Assessment calculation goes against common sense, general fairness, and is inconsistent with city’s stated policy objectives •Request City Council review proposed assessments for Morningside C and adjust accordingly. Petitioners Comparison / Slides (23) Morningside D/E - 2022 Morningside C - 2023 Assessments Differences •Memo posted to BTE in December 2022 with explanation between Morningside D & E compared to Morningside C 1.Zero REU Lots 2.Wider Lots – ~57-ft compared to ~41-ft – less REU’s (~30% wider lots) 3.Inflation – Unit Prices Increases (estimates before bids) •2022 $311 per foot of roadway •2023 $365 per foot of roadway (17% increase) Street Reconstruction Program •20+ years street reconstruction •Assessment policy applied consistently over all neighborhoods •Neighborhoods have unique characteristics •Street lengths, curves, lot sizes, unbuildable lots, vital infrastructure lots, flood areas •Assessments vary by year and area Background •Assessment Policy History •2003 The Valuation Group Report •2005 Local Assessment Policy Approved – Dorsey & Whitney Report •2006 MSA Assessment Policy Approved •2007 Policy Review •2010 Policy Revision •2012 Policy Revision – Northland Securities •2016 Policy Revision •2018 Policy Revision – The Day Group Report •2020 Street Funding Task Force •2021 Policy Revision 2020 Street Funding Task Force •Final Report Dated February 22, 2021 •7 Residents with varied backgrounds •Ann Swenson (chair), Concord Neighborhood •David Alkire, Minnehaha Woods Neighborhood •Chip Howard, Countryside Neighborhood •Kathy Kelly, Normandale Park Neighborhood •Hamid Mohtadi, Prospect Knolls Neighborhood •Matt Scherer, Edina Transportation Commission and Indian Hills Neighborhood •Ralph Zickert, Lake Cornelia Neighborhood •10 months – 16 meetings – in-depth review •Policy change is needed •Policy is both fair and unfair at the same time. •July 2021 – Policy Changed •Removed subcuts, retaining walls, and transition to taxes. Street Financing Options 1.Special Assessments 2.General Tax Dollars 3.Franchise Fees •Set specific % specially assessed (ex. 50%) •Set flat rate (ex. $8,000 per REU) •Set max rate (all assessable costs up to $10,000 / REU) •Set assessment amount = market benefit •Set assessment amount based on lot size (tiered) Residential Equivalent Units •Assessments distributed based on REUs •- Factor used to compare properties to a single-family residence •Additional factors for commercial, industrial, and public-use properties Scenario Land Use Class REU Factor A Single-Family Residential 1.0 B Multi-Family Residential 0.8 Scenario Land Use Class REU Factor Notes A Single Family Residential – Single Family Detached 1.0 1 B Multi-Family Residential – Single Family Attached 0.8 1 C Multi-Family Residential – Multi-Family 0.5 1,4 D Industrial and Utility 0.5 2,3 E Commercial – Office and Retail 1.5 2,4 F Institutional – City Owned Buildings 0.9 2,5 G Institutional – City Owned Open Space See Note 2,6 H Institutional – Schools – Public and Private 0.2 2 I Institutional – Places of Worship 0.2 2 J Mixed Use See Note 4 Preliminary Assessments - 2018 Assessments Street Reconstruction Program Street Reconstruction Program Preliminary Assessments (1)Estimated $20,000 assessment without Assessment Policy Changes (2)Estimated – finalized in July / August 2024 Neighborhood Estimated Assessment per REU (Prelim) Estimated Assessment per REU (Low Bid)(1) Estimated Assessment per REU (Final) Morningside C (2023)$13,800 $10,800 $9,500 (2) Morningside D/E (2022)$9,300 $9,300 $8,340 30% wider lots = $8,340 (D/E) x 1.3 = ~$10,800 (+~$2,500) > $9,500 (C) (estimated final) Factors: assessment transition, inflation, REU’s, lot size, sq yards of paving, 0 REU lots, contractors Recommendation •Staff believes the assessment policy applied to this project is consistent with the past 20+ years of our City’s street reconstruction program. •Its both Fair and Unfair at the same time. •Staff recommends no change to the assessment calculations for Morningside C Neighborhood Street Reconstruction Project. •Staff will be seeking approval of assessments October 2024, both Morningside D/E (2022) and Morningside C (2023). Date: March 19, 2024 Agenda Item #: IV. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Other From:Chad A. Millner, P.E., Director of Engineering Item Activity: Subject:Discuss Grandview Parking Ramp ADA History & Grandview Pedestrian Bridge Discussion CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: None, discussion only. INTRODUCTION: City Council and the HRA asked for a discussion on this topic when staff recently sought approval of a contract change order related to the Grandview P edestrian Bridge. Staff will provide a history of the studies completed to date in the Grandview District related to the Grandview P arking Ramp and the Grandview Pedestrian Bridge. ATTACHMENTS: Description Grandview Ramp ADA & Ped Bridge Review EdinaMN.gov Grandview Parking Ramp ADA History Grandview Pedestrian Bridge City Council Work Session March 19, 2024 Chad Millner, Engineering Director Background •Discussion at Council and HRA: Staff sought approval of a Contract Change Order •Council wanted to understand project history and potential future steps related to ADA of the Grandview Parking Ramp. •Department of Justice Letter – Reviewing an ADA complaint •Staff and Legal provided a response on March 13, 2024. •Awaiting a response from DOJ. •Questions: •DOJ: Does the Ped Bridge Project meet ADA requirements? Legal review •Should the City have conducted a much larger project to correct known ADA issues with the ramp? Background – Grandview Parking Ramp,1987 Background – Water Treatment Plant #6 Background •Yearly inspections required for public safety •Ramp is Permitted by City •Maintenance recommendations – push to Capital Improvement Plan •Concrete / Chloride Investigation •Excessive salt use for snow and ice management •Leached into concrete – prestressed steel cables? •Testing this spring determine depth and damage Background •Guiding Principles Background •Guiding Principles Background - 2016 Background – Grandview Transportation Study 2016 Background – 2016-2020 •Avidor Development – TIF District Created •Opportunity for Public Improvements funded by TIF - June 2021 •2020 Studied •Eden and Arcadia •Pedestrian Bridge Background - 2020 Background Background – 2021 Background – 2022 / 2024 Construction Background – 2024 •$1M - $1.5M Cost Range Background – 2024 •$1M - $1.5M Cost Range Background - 2024 •$100k - $200k Cost Range •Lose 16 parking stalls •Formal Agreement with Jerry’s – City owns ramp, Jerry’s responsible for maintenance Background - Grandview Parking Ramp •Insert photos of Level 3 of ramp. Background - Grandview Parking Ramp Background - Grandview Parking Ramp Background - Grandview Parking Ramp •1987 Construction •Van Access on Lower Level •Existing Height Limit is 7-ft (7-ft 2-inches) •ADA Recommended Height for van accessible parking structures is 8-ft 2-inches Background •Railings are coming. MnDOT ADA compliant railings that meets the building code. Questions?