My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
5.2. SR 05-28-1996
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
1993 - 1999
>
1996
>
05/28/1996 - SPECIAL
>
5.2. SR 05-28-1996
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/21/2008 8:32:19 AM
Creation date
3/13/2003 7:46:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
5/28/1996
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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 Worksession Meeting <br />Janua~- 15, 1996 <br /> <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />After discussion, it was the unanimous consensus of the City Council to put <br />this issue on the .January 22, 1996, City Council agenda for consideration <br />of awarding the WWTP expansion bids. <br /> <br />b. East Elk River Public Improvement Projegt <br /> <br />The City Administrator provided an overview of this project from its <br />conception in 1989 to the present. It was noted that the urban service <br />district for east Elk River has been established with the update of the <br />Comprehensive Plan and that starting in 1996, the city would look at new <br />alternatives for a construction project and disregard the past options and <br />alternatives. <br /> <br />City Engineer Terry Maurer presented and reviewed alternatives A, B, C, <br />and D. Discussion related to the direction of the trunk sanitary sewer <br />either being along Highway 10 or across Highway 169; the need to <br />establish one assessment rate (plus COLA) for the entire east Elk River <br />project: and the difference between the city "pushing" the project to the <br />east versus a major developer "pulling" the project to the east. <br /> <br />Discussion at the Council level included a concern over how much of the <br />cost of the project the city could hold on a temporary basis until it could <br />be assessed out to benefited property owners...The Mayor indicated his <br />support for the approach of having the trunk sewer go across Highway <br />169 and also indicated his support to hold a public hearing on the project <br />in order to receive property owner feedback on the proposal...The <br />question was raised whether or not it would be appropriate to allow the <br />County Road 12 area to develop in a residential nature prior to the east <br />Highway 10 area developing and if this is feasible...The maximum <br />assessment rate per acre was reviewed...A number of Councilmembers <br />indicated that the project should wait until it was developer driven. <br /> <br />It was the consensus of the City Council to direct staff 1o obtain a quote <br />for a complete appraisal for this project area from Patchin and <br />Associates. It was the consensus of the City Council to get a quote from <br />the City Engineer for the cost of doing topographical maps based on air <br />photography. The Council asked for a clarification on the status of the <br />assessment manual and the need for an update in order to ensure that <br />one assessment rate can be established for the whole east Elk River area. <br /> <br />Co <br /> <br />Review of Current or Onqoinq Projects - The City Engineer reviewed his <br />1/11/96 memo on the status of current projects. <br /> <br />d. Streets <br /> <br />185th Avenue or Hiqhway 10 North Frontaqe Road Beqinninq at Joplin <br />Street <br /> <br />The City Engineer reviewed the timetable for this proposed project. Sherri <br />Emerson, representing the Guardian Angels Foundation, asked a number <br />of questions regarding development of the Guardian Angels property in <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.