Minneapolis road resurfacing and special assessments

[Realstreets]

I received a notice of a special assessment to resurface my road (as well as others in the neighborhood). A cool $1000 for my new blacktop... As a first time homeowner it got me thinking. What sort of input do I have on these projects? When do you think a typically Minneapolis residential street will get reconstructed? Will property owners be able to give feedback on design or priorities then?

[mattaudio]

There's the whole line of thinking that any special assessment in excess of the return your property value would receive (i.e., an actual "improvement") is a violation of the U.S. Constitution. Therefore special assessments are not a legitimate function for maintenance.
http://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2012 ... uture.html
http://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2012 ... ig-up.html

Setting that aside for a minute, I'd be rather upset if I had to spend $1000 for new blacktop on my street... It's far too wide right now, especially given low parking demand (never mind the parking is free, meaning subsidized)... Therefore the street design encourages fast driving, therefore the street design actually lowers my property values. I'd rather have my street 8 feet narrower. Bonus would be lower pavement, plowing, sweeping, etc expenses.

If they're going to assess me $1000, it better be for good quality street lights to replace Xcel poles.

[Realstreets]

Setting that aside for a minute, I'd be rather upset if I had to spend $1000 for new blacktop on my street... It's far too wide right now, especially given low parking demand (never mind the parking is free, meaning subsidized)... Therefore the street design encourages fast driving, therefore the street design actually lowers my property values. I'd rather have my street 8 feet narrower. Bonus would be lower pavement, plowing, sweeping, etc expenses.

If they're going to assess me $1000, it better be for good quality street lights to replace Xcel poles.

This is my line of thinking too. I would love narrower streets less pavement to maintain, less water run off, slower cars, more green space. However, if my street were to undergo such a transformation I would image the assessment would be a lot higher.

I'll read up on the legal arguments too. Thanks.

[FISHMANPET]

A resurfacing doesn't really have the power to change the geometry of the road, it's simply exactly what it says it is, a resurfacing. You're talking about impacting reconstructions, which are much more expensive. Those involve ripping everything out and starting from scratch, and are done far less frequently than resurfacing.

[VAStationDude]

I'd be interested to know how much eliminating eight feet of road width would reduce the cost of full street reconstruction. I imagine it's not much because building sub surface and black top seem a lot less labor intensive than utility and curb work which would be the same at current and narrower widths.

[RailBaronYarr]

https://streets.mn/2015/10/27/the-battle ... klyn-park/

Narrowing this set of Brooklyn Park streets by 2' reduced full reconstruction costs (including sewers, curb, gutter) by 3.4%. I'd assume reducing by 8' would be somewhere in the 8-10% reduction (rather than 4*3.4%, since savings diminish the more you reduce as costs like utilities, curbs, setup, design, etc are fixed). Plus, the more you widen the boulevard space the more you're pressured into actually doing something with it (stormwater basin, landscaping it, etc). I wrote a thing about other options we should maybe consider.

While I agree with Matt on value of my home on a narrow street vs. a wider one, I think we should be careful assigning that mindset to everyone. While I've never met a person who didn't wish cars drove slower on their street, they all seem to like free parking a whole hell of a lot more. They don't know (or care) how much the city would save in stormwater management or plowing costs or regular sealcoating over the next 30 years, since those costs are baked into property taxes (and a very small share at that). But people loooooove the convenience of free parking right out front, for themselves and their guests. Not just rich people in SW or by Nokomis, either - take a look at the comments re: the North Minneapolis Greenway. A typical residential street reconstruction assessment costs a house on a standard lot $4-5k. With interest and spread over 20 years, that's about $250-300 a year. If I'm being honest, most families would easily take the free parking out front for $25/year rather than have a calmer, cheaper, narrower street.

[Realstreets]

I think it would behoove the city to research how much could be saved in capital and maintenance costs by reducing the width of residential streets, especially considering how little money there is to address these infrastructure needs. Maybe pulling out all the residential streets of the CIP (perhaps streets with high concentrations of multifamily shouldn't be included) and apply Railbaronyarr's estimate of a 10% savings in construction and make up some assumption for maintenance savings (i.e. repavings). Streets.mn post...?

On a personal note, I really don't get the appeal of parking my own cars on the street. I have a secure garage. But I do see the value for occasional guests. Still paying for everyone's cab fare to your house would probably be cheaper. I think you could remove parking on one side of most residential streets in Minneapolis without much inconvenience to anyone.

[xandrex]

On a personal note, I really don't get the appeal of parking my own cars on the street. I have a secure garage. But I do see the value for occasional guests. Still paying for everyone's cab fare to your house would probably be cheaper. I think you could remove parking on one side of most residential streets in Minneapolis without much inconvenience to anyone.

I mean, a private garage is great...if you have one. Obviously, nobody is entitled to a spot on the street. But it sure is nice for those of us who live in buildings that lack any parking. The street is all we've got.