My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
5. EDSR 06-11-2007
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Economic Development Authority
>
EDA Packets
>
2003-2013
>
2007
>
06-11-2007
>
5. EDSR 06-11-2007
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/15/2009 10:17:31 AM
Creation date
1/15/2009 10:16:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
EDSR
date
6/11/2007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
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
Message <br />Barnhart, Jeremy <br />From: Dan.Tveite@wellsfargo.com <br />Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 10:58 AM <br />To: Barnhart, Jeremy <br />Cc: Mehelich, Catherine; Clark, Scott; Jeff@elkriverchamber.org <br />Subject: RE: Gateway concepts <br />My thoughts from yesterday's conversation: <br />Page 1 of 2 <br />• Ideally, we look at this parcel in a comprehensive fashion incorporating city owned property and privately <br />owned property <br />. We need to reach out to the private land owners to verify their plans and to see if they are willing to work <br />with us. Given the long-term local presence and standing in the community of these owners, we need to <br />extend as much courtesy as possible. <br />• We should keep open the option of buying the private properties if the owners are amenable to selling at a <br />reasonable price. <br />• Even though the market survey wasn't optimistic about commercial/retail along highway 10, I still think the <br />highway offers an asset; maybe not today but down the road (i.e., 5 years) so t would want to keep an eye <br />towards this use fronting the highway. <br />• With the above parameters, my preference of the 3 options is B with the revision from "big box" to <br />"commercial" to allow ourselves as much flexibility to address potential users as possible. I also like this <br />option because of the industrial presence away from the highway and near the RDF plant. <br />. My statements are made under the assumption that we don't have any immediate pressure (either a <br />definitive proposal or even an inkling of possible developments) to bring this land online and thus should <br />keep our options as open as possible. Until we have some serious interest or a sense that the <br />development pressure is increasing, I wouldn't get the site prepared (i.e., bringing infrastructure into the <br />parcel) - again, I want to keep as much flexibility as possible. <br />Hope this helps. <br />I will be out of the office the afternoon of June 8 with no access to email or voicemail. <br />Thanks a lot! <br />Dan Tveite <br />Enterprise Sourcing, Contracts & Procurement <br />Phone - 612-316-1735 <br />Fax - 612-316-3521 <br />This email (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, l8 U.S.C. §§ 2510-2521, is <br />confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any retention, <br />dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Please reply to the sender that you have <br />received the message in error, then delete it. Thank you. <br />-----Original Message----- <br />From: Barnhart, Jeremy [mailto:jbarnhart@ci.elk-river.mn.us] <br />Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 9:18 AM <br />To: Tveite, Dan <br />Cc: Mehelich, Catherine; Clark, Scott <br />Subject: Gateway concepts <br />6/8/2007 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.