Skip to main content

Nowthen Road & Bridge meeting, January 16, 2018

City Meeting

Tuesday, January 16, 2018

This meeting on the city's website ↗

Agenda

Not on file

What was on the agenda.

Packet

Not on file

The supporting materials the board reviewed.

Minutes

Not on file

The official record of what happened.

Source missingNo agenda, packet, or minutes are on file for this meeting.

The meeting recording listed below is the only record we have.

One-line summary

The Road & Bridge meeting focused on 2018 road overlays, especially Pinnacle Lake Estates and Old Viking Boulevard, possible Westbrook Drive paving, assessment methods, and bond-financing options; no minutes were available in the bundle to confirm final actions.

What was on the agenda

9 items as recorded in the meeting transcript, each with a short summary of what was at issue.

  1. A12018 road-improvement plan discussion

    The meeting opened in the transcript with a discussion of the 2018 road-improvement plan: keeping Pinnacle Lake Estates in the plan, adding Old Viking for 2018, removing Garnett for 2018, and aiming for about $400,000 in annual capital improvements for the next few years.

    The group revisited the 2018 road-improvement plan and discussed keeping Pinnacle Lake Estates in the plan, adding Old Viking Boulevard, removing Garnett for 2018, and using a roughly $400,000 capital-improvement target to adjust the five-year plan.

    minutes not available in this bundle

    • 2018 road-improvement plan
    Outcome unrecorded
    1:57we kept in occur in and added old biking for 2018 and then we we said that we would be shooting for 400,000 for capital improvements for the next few years and to then to adjust the five-year plan based on that number3:07Garnett was taken out for 2018 and we added in and we added old biking
  2. A2Possible approval of October 17 item

    There was a brief, garbled transcript passage referring to a motion to approve October 17, but the transcript does not clearly show the full motion, mover, seconder, vote, or result.

    minutes not available in this bundle

    • October 17 approval item
    Outcome unrecorded
    6:42I don't remember who did it but I wasn't going to enough motion to prove the October 17
  3. A3Pinnacle Lake Estates overlay

    Under floor items, the group discussed Pinnacle Lake Estates. The engineer described it as a straightforward overlay project, proposed a two-inch overlay because pattern or stress cracking was beginning, and gave the estimated project cost and per-unit assessment.

    Pinnacle Lake Estates was described as a straightforward neighborhood overlay. Staff proposed a two-inch overlay because cracking was beginning, with an early estimate of $149,000 and an estimated assessment of $2,983 per unit; a later transcript passage appears to refer to the same project as $155,000.

    minutes not available in this bundle

    • Pinnacle Lake Estates overlay
    Outcome unrecorded
    6:47okay floor items pinnacle Lake Estates let me give a kind of a brief overview and to meet pinnacle Lake Estates is uh the more straightforward one7:39we are proposing a two inch overlay because we're already seeing some of these pattern cracks developing
  4. A4Old Viking Boulevard overlay, benefiting properties, and assessment method

    The group discussed Old Viking Boulevard, including the estimated assessment approach, 65 benefiting properties, questions about split lots and frontage, Green Acres or agricultural tax-deferral status, and how to define an assessment unit.

    Old Viking Boulevard was discussed as a larger road project with 65 benefiting properties, an estimated 50-percent assessment approach, and an estimated $4,100 per unit. The discussion also covered how to count units, how to handle split lots, flag lots, access-only lots, Green Acres or agricultural deferrals, and mailbox-relocation costs.

    minutes not available in this bundle

    • Old Viking Boulevard overlay and assessments
    Outcome unrecorded
    9:48believe there are 65 properties city schools on the be 50% of 50% of the project over 65 property results of an assessment of 4100 per unit15:03so those two were added in from my initial report brought the goal of 63 benefiting properties up to 6516:53there are six properties that are in the green acres tax deferment program29:24you referred to some things up there as units you need to define unit not an address is it no really it's any lot in these separate lot
  5. A5Mailbox relocation and project-combination cost questions

    The group discussed line items in the road estimates, including mailbox relocation costs and whether a lower unit price would apply if Westbrook were added to the Old Viking work instead of treated as a separate project.

    Old Viking Boulevard was discussed as a larger road project with 65 benefiting properties, an estimated 50-percent assessment approach, and an estimated $4,100 per unit. The discussion also covered how to count units, how to handle split lots, flag lots, access-only lots, Green Acres or agricultural deferrals, and mailbox-relocation costs.

    The council discussed whether Westbrook Drive should be paved as an add-on while Old Viking Boulevard work was being done. The issue was complicated by the fact that only four houses are on Westbrook, the gravel-to-pavement improvement could justify a higher assessment, and the residents might instead receive only a partial Old Viking access assessment if Westbrook were not paved.

    minutes not available in this bundle

    • Old Viking Boulevard overlay and assessments
    • Westbrook Drive possible paving
    Outcome unrecorded
    17:48you have relocated mailboxes at $150 each how many other projects you have them at $75 each21:14would that be incorporated with little Viking Boulevard because there you have the lower rate on the yeah so yes westward Brooke is completed I think that's a little bit of a separate discussion
  6. A6Road-project bond financing options

    A financial adviser discussed financing assumptions for the road projects, including backing out costs already included in the engineer's estimates, a possible 10-year non-rated limited competitive bond sale, debt-service estimates, and options for using city cash or equity.

    The financial adviser reviewed financing for the 2018 road projects and recommended a limited competitive, non-rated bond sale because of the small size and 10-year term. The group discussed backing out about $20,000 already included in estimates, a revised estimate around $685,000 for the evening’s scenario, interest and total-payment estimates, and options for using $280,000 in city cash to make early payments or reduce the bond size.

    minutes not available in this bundle

    • road-project financing
    Outcome unrecorded
    43:31if you can just kind of come back out about 20,000 or so because that that appears to already be built into Shane's estimates and I think that he's he's pretty accurate in his what he has going there for the 533 in the 14944:13this assumes a 10-year term this would be assuming a limited competitive sale and would be issued non rated52:15the third option which is what we would recommend for the size sale is the limited competitive and the reason why we recommend that one it's a small part of around three-quarters of a million dollars - it's a short duration of ten years
  7. A7Westbrook Drive possible paving and assessment approach

    Council members and staff discussed whether to add Westbrook Drive to the Old Viking work, whether the four Westbrook homes should receive only a partial assessment for access to Old Viking, and whether residents should be asked if they want the gravel road paved.

    The council discussed whether Westbrook Drive should be paved as an add-on while Old Viking Boulevard work was being done. The issue was complicated by the fact that only four houses are on Westbrook, the gravel-to-pavement improvement could justify a higher assessment, and the residents might instead receive only a partial Old Viking access assessment if Westbrook were not paved.

    minutes not available in this bundle

    • Westbrook Drive possible paving
    Outcome unrecorded
    58:35I was curious to get everybody to get the thoughts on adding in Westport Brook Drive and if people would want to do that to incorporated that plan or just leave the crowd maybe I think you need to talk to the residents there's only four houses on here59:54it's still sixty five thousand divided by four and what percentage you assess but if you again just took eighty percent as a number it's about thirteen thousand1:04:23talk to the residents then get their feelings they don't want to do it you just take it off the list
  8. A8Public-improvement and assessment-hearing process

    The group reviewed the statutory public-improvement and assessment-hearing process, including the next step of approving feasibility reports and calling the public improvement hearing, later holding an assessment hearing, and the possibility of written objections and court appeals.

    Staff reviewed the process still ahead: the council would need to approve feasibility reports and call public improvement hearings, later hold assessment hearings after better numbers or bids were available, and handle any written objections and possible district-court appeals before deciding whether to award work.

    minutes not available in this bundle

    • public-improvement hearing process
    Outcome unrecorded
    1:07:05the next step would be for the City Council to approve the feasibility reports and call for the public improvement hearing public improvement hearing is kind of our first formal meeting with the residents1:07:39after you receive contractor bids then we invite them back in for an assessment hearing and then that is their chance to comment the actual amount of the assessment1:11:57within 30 days they'd have to go to the district court and actually file uh basically sue the city
  9. A9Possible alternate or future road projects

    Near the end of the transcript, the group discussed possible alternate or future road projects if Old Viking did not proceed, including Pinnacle Lake, Garnett, and 218th, and noted timing concerns if a new project had to start later in the season.

    The group briefly considered what would happen if Old Viking Boulevard did not proceed and noted that Garnett and 218th were comparable in cost, but starting a new project later would likely push bidding into June or July and could hurt bid pricing.

    minutes not available in this bundle

    • future road projects
    Outcome unrecorded
    1:14:43Panera Lake was 155 and the two that we were looking that reworking would was garnet and then 218th and that would it be uh that would be a hundred and sixty two so they're darn close1:15:05the downfall there's were a couple months down this road already right and so to start a new project we probably would be opening bids in June or July

Sources

Documents and recordings archived for this meeting, when available.

Show a sample of the transcript (518 segments, 1:30:33 total)
  • 1:57 [Music] we added we kept in occur in and added
  • 2:35 old biking for 2018 and then we we said that we
  • 2:47 would be shooting for 400,000 for capital improvements for the next few years and to then to adjust the
  • 2:56 five-year plan based on that number it was pin occur and then there was a
  • 3:07 smaller one yeah Garnett was taken out
  • 3:17 for 2018 and we added in and we added
  • 3:20 old biking it came down to that we're
  • 3:30 probably not gonna get this the state funding as quick as we'd like to and something would need needs to get looked
  • 3:37 at for old Viking based on the discussion that we had during the City
  • 3:42 Council meeting occurs a little bit
  • 4:16 earlier in the process and the roads are still relatively good condition and it's just starting to exhibit indicators other funding avenues that we weighted
  • 4:37 when we hit the five thousand mark yeah yeah
  • Showing first 12 segments. Open the YouTube video for the full transcript.

The summary on this page is AI-extracted and may need correction. The PDFs and the meeting recording are the official record. What do the trust labels mean?