My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
5.1. SR 12-13-2010
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2000 - 2010
>
2010
>
12-13-2010
>
5.1. SR 12-13-2010
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/10/2010 9:19:26 AM
Creation date
12/10/2010 9:18:39 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
12/13/2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
In preparing recommendations, staff identified several initial questions: <br />1. Are the phase breakdowns appropriate? Staff felt they were logical breakdowns intended to <br />open up land for development while balancing the financial risk. <br />2. What type of environmental assessment, AUAR or EAW? Staff felt the benefits of the <br />AUAR being completed up front, and for the whole project, outweighed the higher initial <br />cost. An EAW would need to be completed at each phase, and at an estimated $50,000 per <br />phase, the costs would exceed the cost of an AUAR. <br />3. Boundary of the environmental assessment. There is option to remove approximately 9 <br />acres of the northern portion of the project from the environmental assessment process. <br />This would allow the sale of that property immediately, and a user could develop that <br />property at their schedule, rather than wait for the environmental assessment process to <br />complete. The downside is that there is a benefit to completing the whole assessment <br />project comprehensively, rather than piecemeal. Additional, any development reduces <br />options, and lastly, breaking up the project could be seen as a connected action by the <br />Minnesota Environmental Quality Board, which could slow down the review of the balance <br />of the project. <br />4. Which entity (Council, EDA) is in charge of the improvement project? While the EDA led <br />the Focused Area Study, since the improvements are City improvements, it is understood <br />that all infrastructure and finance related decisions will be forwarded to the City Council <br />only. <br />FINANCIAL IMPACT <br />Staffls recommendation is to begin the AUAR process for the project, and to prepare preliminary <br />engineering documents for the first phase. These costs would be paid via the City's development fund. <br />To begin the environmental assessment, staff will prepare an RFP, with the Council ultimately approving <br />the contract prior to work. <br />ATTACHMENTS <br />Phase plan <br />Cost breakdown (budgeting estimates based on 2010 construction costs) <br />Action Motion by Second by Vote <br />Follow Up <br />N:\Public Bodies\City Council\Council RCA\Agenda Packet\12-13-10\FAST Joint EDA CC.docx <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.