My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
3.0. SR 02-19-1996
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
1993 - 1999
>
1996
>
02/19/1996 - SPECIAL
>
3.0. SR 02-19-1996
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/21/2008 8:32:11 AM
Creation date
1/14/2003 3:34:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
2/19/1996
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
63
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
CIP Memo <br />February 19, 1996 <br /> <br />Page 6 <br /> <br />Attached for your review is a quote from Peter Patchin and Associates <br />regarding an appraisal to determine the benefit of trunk utilities to the <br />eastern part of Elk River. This is not a parcel by parcel appraisal, but a <br />quote for a much more detailed analysis of benefit to properties of various <br />zoning and land use classifications. This information as proposed from <br />Patchin and Associates, should be sufficient to determine benefit to various <br />types of properties and should be sufficient to get us through any public <br />hearing and ordering of a public improvement project. If we end up going to <br />court over the assessments of this project, then a more detailed, parcel by <br />parcel, appraisal will be necessary for the properties that are appealing the <br />assessment. This proposed work could be completed by April 29, 1996. <br /> <br />At the 1/15/96 meeting, the city engineer reviewed Options A-D. The Council <br />should note that we are not locked into any one of these options and that any <br />variation of these options can be looked at for a project area. At this time, no <br />project area is established. Also discussed on 1/15 was the merits of going <br />down Highway 10 or across Highway 169 with the project. It was clearly the <br />consensus of the Council that it desired the project to go across Highway 169 <br />rather than down Highway 10. Also discussed on 1/15 was the merits of the <br />city pushing this project versus developers pulling this project across <br />Highway 169. Again, it was clearly the desire of the Council to have this <br />project developer initiated. Nonetheless, some Councilmember also <br />expressed a desire to get information about this project public and to go <br />through a public hearing on some type of public improvement proposal. It is <br />suggested that we not go through the public hearing until we get the Patchin <br />appraisal authorized and completed so that firm maximum assessment <br />amounts can be presented and discussed by the public. <br /> <br />County Road I Update <br /> <br />County Engineer Dave Schwarting has a scheduling problem and cannot <br />attend this meeting as originally planned. Dave will make a presentation on <br />this project to the City Council on February 26, 1996. Terry Maurer will be <br />in attendance at this Council meeting. <br /> <br />Riverview Heights <br /> <br />Attached for your information is a summary of the Riverview Heights <br />information meeting that was held on 2/8/96. This neighborhood meeting <br />was conducted in order to provide information to residents regarding the <br />various aspects of a public improvement project. The summary from the city <br />engineer is a good starting point for discussion at this 2/19/96 meeting. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.