7.0. SR 01-05-1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council Meeting Page 2 Capital Improvement Worksession January 5, 1998 City Council will then be faced with the issue of how large of a trunk utility project it should support. In general, after numerous different options have been looked at and evaluated over the years, it appears that the City Council is down to two basic options. The first option is the smallest project possible (just the Earl H. and Waddy S. properties) and the second option is the largest project possible that can be ordered on a 3/5 Council vote. This 3/5 City Council vote relates to state law that refers to a valid petition being submitted by 35% of the benefited property owners. It should be noted to the City Council that staff firmly believes that the largest possible project that can be authorized on a 3/5 vote ultimately must and will be constructed. However, staff supports the smallest project possible in 1998-99 with the balance of the larger project being completed in phases as the market dictates and as property owners petition. On the other hand, the Mayor supports the largest project possible being done all at once in1998-99. The only real difference between the Mayor's desires and the staff recommendation is the phasing of the improvements and the cost of the project being spread out over time. Based on previous discussions with the City Council on possible projects and the financial issues associated with any east Elk River public improvement project, some Councilmembers may already know if they support the minimum or maximum project. At this time, all we have had to work from in analyzing the finances of the projects are estimates as provided by the engineer based on maps of the area and standard construction figures. In order for the most accurate information possible to be available for the Council to base its decision on, the Mayor plans to recommend to the Council that the City Engineer be authorized to design the ultimate trunk utility and street project down to 171st Avenue and that this part of the project be put out for bids when the minimum project for (Waddy S. and Earl H.) moves forward. The Mayor believes that once the true costs are known for the project, then the Council will be in a better position to make an informed decision on whether the maximum or minimum project should move forward. Two points need to be mentioned regarding the Mayor's request. The first point is that we need to get a cost estimate from Terry Maurer so we know what we are looking at for the ultimate design plus we need to know if this design work will be usable in five years. The second point is that in addition to the actual overhead and construction costs of the ultimate project, the Council also has to keep in mind the other costs associated with this project. By this I mean that with the area C project, the city may be purchasing some Business Park land, including its assessments, with the development fund.