3B - Infrastructure - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

revenue only. All of the additional revenue, a full $370,000 per year, would need to be dedicated to capital improvements. Areas of the City with sewer and water infrastructure have an even greater disparity between the long-term city maintenance liabilities and the revenue generated by the properties serviced. The other way to increase revenue is to increase the value of the property that is serviced by the infrastructure. If the road currently serves eight homes, can the development pattern be changed so that it will ultimately serve sixteen homes? Making better use of existing infrastructure is a spatial fix that will work in the urbanized areas of town, but shoreline regulations and environmental sensitivity will prevent increasing density from being a viable solution for rural areas. REDUCING EXPENSES There are ways in which the City can reduce the overall liabilities it has taken on. The first, and perhaps the simplest, is to reexamine the official road standards. In the case of North Sleutter, where eight dwellings will likely generate less than 50 auto trips per day, a 24-foot roadbed width (18-foot pavement width) is excessive. In such a low volume environment, there is no reason that two cars need to travel concurrently at high speeds in opposite directions. A much narrower roadway, where cars would need to slow down, pull over and yield to oncoming traffic at the infrequent times when two cars would meet traveling in opposite directions, could cut costs dramatically. The City may also question whether or not every rural road needs to be paved. While there are studies indicating that the cost of maintaining gravel roads exceeds that of paved roads, these studies do not take into account multiple life cycles.They also assume an intense standard of maintenance. Maintaining many of the rural roads at a rural non-paved standard would, at the very least, give the City financial flexibility when budgeted for maintenance liabilities. Some of the roads that are currently maintained by the City may not be able to be justified when looked at through a financial prism. In cases where the City has made commitments to spend taxpayer money maintaining infrastructure for a remote properties, a way to wind down those commitments would be a prudent thing to consider. Finally, the covenant that the City has had with property owners—namely, where a road is improved to meet the City's standards, the public will take it over and maintain it in perpetuity—needs to be reevaluated. It is obvious now that this approach has induced the City to assume long-term liabilities that the public does not have the reasonable ability to absorb. Future transactions of this type only make the long-term financial health of the City more tenuous. PRIORITIZING PUBLIC INVESTMENTS The City needs an updated set of priorities for public infrastructure investments. All components of the City's infrastructure have not been created equal. Some generate revenue in excess of their cost, but the vast majority cost more to maintain than they produce in revenue to do so. In an age where the ability of Federal and State governments to assist in maintaining infrastructure is waning, the City will need to take steps to bring these long- term financial disparities into balance. Page 14