4.0. SR 04-03-2000'ity of
River
MEMORANDLIM
Item #4
TO:
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: PAT I4I,AERS, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
DATE:
APRIL 3, 2000
SUBJECT: CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP)
WORKSESSION
The City Council is scheduled to meet in a Special Session on April 3, 2000 for
approximately 2 hours. The agenda is getting lengthy so we'll have to keep the
discussion on the CIP topics to the point and continue the discussion on some
of the topics to a future meeting. It is important to review with the City
Council the status of the following projects:
6:00 - 6:10 p.m. Highway 169 Bridge Plaque Discussion with Mike Twaddle
6:10 - 7:00 p.m.
Public
O
O
O
Improvement Projects:
*City Engineer Update on Status of Current Projects
City Administrator Update on Status of 1999-2003
City Funding Sources for Business Center
Drive/Waco and Highway 10 Project
*City Funding Sources and Issues Regarding the
East Elk River Public Improvement Project (Street
and Storm Sewer and City Matching Funds
Requirements)
Scope of Project for 2001 for 175th Avenue Project;
Purchase of R-O-W; Assessment Options; and City
Funding Sources
Miscellaneous...
· Overlay Program for 2000
· *Payment for 1999 of Work for Baldwin Street
· *Highway 101 Bridge Letter
· Highway 10 Committees (MNDOT and Coon
Rapids Committee)
13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 · TDD & Phone: (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425
7:00 -7:10 p.m.
Minnesota Sports Federation (MSF) Building Project
Update
7:10 - 7:20 p.m. Public Works Building Requests and Issues for 2000-01
7:20- 7:50 p.m.
*Discuss Large Meeting Room/Banquet Room Space
Options and Possible Joint City-School Project
(continuation of February 14 discussion)
7:50 p.m.
Adjournment
As you can tell by the above list, we have about 4 hours of work to accomplish
in about 2 hours. It may be appropriate to briefly talk about some of the public
improvement projects and to continue those issues so that additional and more
complete information can be brought to the Council at a future meeting. In
this manner, we can spend more time on city facilities and the need for a large
meeting room/banquet room in the community. An alternative to this approach
would be to discuss the community facilities topic first and review the public
improvement project at the end of the meeting as time allows.
The above items marked with asterisks have a backup memo attached. The
other items will be verbally presented to the City Council at the Worksession.
s: \ council \ cip403OO.doc
Howard R, Green Qompany
QONSULTING ENGINEERS
March 23, 2000
File: 230000M-0325
Mr. Pat Klaers
City Administrator
City of Elk River
13065 Orono Parkway
P.O. Box 490
Elk River, MN 55330-0490
RE: STATUS OF CURRENT PROJECTS
Dear Mr. Klaers:
As requested, this letter is intended to give you a current status of projects we are working on.
They are as follows:
A. EAST ELK RIVER AREA
Since East Elk River is such a large portion of our current workload, I have decided to lump
all of the projects associated with the East Elk River improvements in one area. They are as
follows:
Elk River Sanitary Sewer Improvements
S.R. Weidema is the contractor for this project. They began working on this project in
the spring of 1999. At winter shutdown, they were approximately 80% complete with the
improvements. The remaining work involves sanitary sewer and water near the north
end in the George Deschene area and the extreme south end near the 173rd and 171st
areas. Construction began again this spring the week of March 6th, and will be
completed in early summer of 2000. The sanitary sewer and water improvements
needed to serve Elk River Crossing, Trott Brook Farms, and Vanderberg Industrial
Development are in place and ready for hook-up.
Storm Sewer Improvements
This project was recently awarded to LaTour Construction, Inc. They also started the
week of March 6th. They will start with the storm sewer on the project and then proceed
into the street work. It is anticipated that the project will be substantially complete by the
fall of 2000, but there will be miscellaneous work that will carry over until the spring of
2001.
O:\PROJ~23000OM\0325\Itr 1-31-00 klaers.doc
1326 Energy Park Drive · St. Paul, MN 55108 · 651/644-4389 fax 651/644-9446 toll free 888/368-4389
Mr. Pat Klaers
March 23, 2000
Page Two
Main Street, T.H. 169 to CSAH 13
This is a street improvement necessary for the traffic anticipated to be generated by the
East Elk River commercial development. This project will consist of adding a second
southbound left turn lane from T.H. 169 to eastbound Main Street and a second left turn
lane from westbound Main Street to southbound T.H. 169. The project is currently in
design, it is approximately 90% complete, and has been sent to Mn/DOT for their review.
It is anticipated this project will be let in late spring or early summer. The start of
construction will be timed to allow for detours from the eastern part of Elk River to the
western part with the various other improvements going on this summer. It is anticipated
that the total construction time will be less than 60 days. This project will be 100%
developer financed.
4. CSAH 12 Reconstruction
This is a County project to upgrade CSAH 12 from the CSAH 13 intersection to the east
County limits. I have discussed this project within the last few weeks with Dave
Schwarting, County Engineer. He told me that the County has the right of entry on all of
the parcels needed for this project. Therefore, it is anticipated that the project will
proceed in 2000. We are currently revising the plans based on Mn/DOT's comments.
These plans will be submitted back to Mn/DOT by the end of March. Since this project
involves federal funding, Mn/DOT will be the letting agency. The project will be
combined with other state bids sometime in the spring of 2000, with an anticipated
construction start in early summer.
Trott Brook Farms (Private Residential Development)
In 1999, the Trott Brook Farms development began construction on the first four
additions. The improvements were substantially complete in the fall of 1999. In the
spring of 2000, punchlist work will need to be completed and the final lift of bituminous
surfacing. It is anticipated that the developers will come forward sometime in 2000 with
the 5th and 6th Additions.
Elk River Crossing (Private Commercial Development)
The final plat has been approved and the construction plans and specifications are
approved. The developers have bid this project and Ryan Construction was the Iow
bidder. Site grading began the week of March 20th and utility/street construction will
begin by April 1st.
Vandenberg Industrial Site (Private Business Park Development)
This is the 40-acre site just south of Elk River Crossing to be developed into an industrial
development. The improvements are part of the S.R. Weidema contract. The sanitary
sewer and watermain have already been placed into this development. Once the
developer gets the site grading done in the spring of 2000, S.R. Weidema can then
install the storm sewer and streets. It is anticipated that in early 2000 the developer will
begin construction on a 50,000 square foot industrial building to be ready for occupancy
at approximately the same time as the road improvements are ready to service the site.
O:\PROJ~230000M\0325\Itr 1-31-00 klaers.doc
Mr. Pat Klaers
March 23, 2000
Page Three
Mulvaney Point
This is the development of the Mulvaney site just north of CSAH 12 between CSAH 13
and the Tyler Street alignment. Staff has been meeting with the developers over the
past several months. The Planning Commission and City Council have approved the
preliminary plat. It is anticipated the project will proceed to final plat and construction in
early summer. We have had preliminary discussions with the post office architect about
their new building in this plat.
K & L Addition (Private Commercial Development)
Floyd Kruse has been working with City staff over the past few months to develop his
property located north of 173rd Avenue adjacent to the railroad tracks. Most recently,
City staff has suggested to Mr. Kruse that he involve other property and business
owners in the area. At the latest meeting with Mr. Kruse, he indicated that he was going
to proceed with a plat including Deano's Auto Body Repair property, Dehn's Four
Seasons, Atlas Pet Supply property, and Riverside Sports property. It is anticipated that
within the next 30-60 days the preliminary plat and other information will be coming
forward to a spring Planning Commission meeting.
10.
Wal-Mart Development
The Wal-Mart store to be located in the Elk River Crossing plat has been approved and
is ready to start as soon as spring weather allows. It is anticipated it will begin in early
spring and be construction through the summer, ready for occupancy sometime in the
fall of the year. The current plan calls for a 142,100 square foot building with room for
an expansion of 65,325 square feet.
11.
Home Depot Development
Home Depot has also been approved for construction within the Elk River Crossing
Development. It is anticipated that construction on this facility will begin as early as
possible in the spring of 2000, continue through the summer, and be ready for
occupancy by this fall. At this time, final plans have not been submitted for the building
permit.
B. OTHER IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
175th Avenue Improvements
175th Avenue improvements are in the East Elk River development area but will not
proceed until 2001. The City received a T-21 grant in the amount of $360,000 for'the
reconstruction of 175th Avenue from Tyler Street to Filmore Street. We have begun the
preliminary design, and originally anticipated the project may be constructed in 2000 if
CSAH 12 did not proceed forward. Since CSAH 12 appears to be going to construction
in 2000, we will not proceed with 175th Avenue improvements until 2001. However, we
will need to proceed forward in 2000 with the necessary land acquisition and work on the
improvement hearings for the project. Therefore, there will be ongoing work in 2000. A
City Council planning session on the scope and funding of the improvements is
necessary before a property owners' meeting and right-of-way acquisition take place.
O:\PROJ~30000M\0325\Itr 1-31-00 klaers.doc
Mr. Pat Klaers
March 23, 2000
Page Four
Western Area Phase 4 Improvements
The project was petitioned for by Stewart Wilson and includes Business Center Drive
westerly to Waco Street, the realignment of Waco Street to the east, a new intersection
with T.H. 10, the signalization of that intersection, the reconstruction of the north
frontage road from the new Waco Street intersection easterly to Naples Street, the
closing of old Waco Street intersection with T.H. 10 and the access to T.H. 10 at the
Sherburne County Government Center. In addition to the street improvements, there
would be lateral sanitary sewer along Business Center Drive, trunk watermain along
Business Center Drive and Waco Street and lateral watermain along the north frontage
road to create a looped system. In addition, there will be lateral storm sewer along all
three of the roads; Business Center Drive, Waco Street, and the north frontage road.
The public hearing was held on March 13th. The plans and specifications are
approximately 95% complete and have been submitted to Mn/DOT for their preliminary
review. We are expecting cooperative agreement funding from Mn/DOT. It takes about
13 weeks for Mn/DOT to prepare a cooperative agreement so it is anticipated the
earliest this project could proceed to construction would be in early summer of 2000.
Pedestrian Bridge
The pedestrian bridge that crosses TH 169 was substantially complete in 1999.
However, there is still a minor amount of work to be completed in the spring of 2000. It
is anticipated that there will be a grand opening of the bridge scheduled in spring of 2000
with Congressman Oberstar, since he was responsible for providing the funding for the
construction of the pedestrian bridge.
4. TH 10/Main Street Intersection Geometrics
We are currently working on the layout and analysis of potential improvements to the
TH 10/Main Street intersection. We have had preliminary discussions with Mn/DOT
regarding their interest in helping fund improvements at this intersection. They have
indicated a willingness to consider participating in the funding of geometric and signal
improvements at this intersection due to the TH 101 bridge replacement that is planned
for 2001 or 2002. We anticipate that the analysis and layout for potential improvements
to this intersection will be completed in the spring of 2000 and be ready for City Council
consideration and review by Mn/DOT.
C. PRIVATE DEVELOPMENTS
This area summarizes those private developments that we anticipate will be completed in
2000. The City Engineer's role is to provide construction inspection services to ensure
compliance with approved plans and City specifications.
I. Lafayette Woods 4th Addition
This will complete the Lafayette Woods development. The improvements were reviewed
and approved by staff in the fall of 1999; however, the developer did not ask for or
receive final plat approval. We anticipate that this will happen in the spring of the year,
and the construction of the improvements to complete this development will proceed
forward.
O:\PROJ~30000M\0325\Itr 1-31-00 klaers.doc
Mr. Pat Klaers
March 23, 2000
Page Five
2. Windsor Park
This is a development that has received preliminary plat approval in the northwest
portion of the City. It is the first cluster development to proceed forward. Final plat on
the first phase was recently approved by the City Council. This development will have a
community septic system constructed with it.
Hillside Estates 9th Addition
Hillside Estates 9th is a large area in the southeast corner of the Hillside Estates
development. It received preliminary plat approval sometime ago. The developer is now
prepared to proceed with the first phase of Hillside Estates 9th. Hillside Estates 9th
Addition final plat will consist of one cul-de-sac containing 13 lots. It is anticipated that
this project will move forward in the early summer of 2000.
4. Preserve Estates Addition
This is a development on North Tyler Street in the rural portion of the City. This
development was begun in 1999. It is a quasi-clustered development done under the
DNR ordinance. However, this site does not have a community drainfield, rather it has
one-acre lots which have individual septic systems.
5. Hillside Estates 8th Addition
This is the northwestern portion of the Hillside Estates residential development. It also
received preliminary plat approval sometime ago. Staff is anticipating that the developer
will move forward shortly with a portion of the Hillside Estates 8th area for the first phase
final plat.
Seven Oaks Development
This is a development on the west side of County Road 1 near the northwestern
boundary of the Urban Service District. The development received preliminary plat
approval in the fall of 1999. There are a couple of issues, including tree preservation,
that the developer needed to resolve prior to proceeding to final plat. We anticipate that
the developer will be coming to the City with the first phase final plat of this development
sometime in the spring/summer of 1999.
=
Dobel Farm Development
City staff has been meeting with individuals interested in developing the Dobel farm as a
clustered development. We have been led to believe that something will to coming
forward in the next several months regarding the potential development of this property.
Rolling Hills Addition
This is a cluster development in the extreme northeast corner of the City. It involves
approximately 120 acres. It should proceed to the Planning Commission in April of
2000.
O:\PROJ~230000M\0325\Itr 1-31-00 klaers.doc
Mr. Pat Klaers
March 23, 2000
Page Six
Whitetail Ridge Addition
This is another cluster development located north of Preserve Estates. It will be going to
the March Planning Commission meeting.
10. Twin Lake Townhomes
This is a proposed townhome development along CSAH 13 where Tyler Street meets it.
Staff has been working with the developer and expects a Planning Commission
submittal in the next few weeks.
D. MISCELLANEOUS PROJECTS
1. County Road 'I3/T.H. 169 Signalization
Mn/DOT is proceeding with the signalization of this intersection. Mn/DOT has agreed
that signals are warranted based on accident experience in this intersection. However,
they have called this signalization a temporary measure based on the inter-regional
concept that is being promoted by Mn/DOT. This would indicate that sometime in the
future perhaps an interchange could be constructed in this area that would eliminate the
need for the signal. It is anticipated that this signal will be in and operational by the fall
of 2000.
2. County Road l/School Street Signalization
The County is proceeding with the signalization of the intersection of County Road 1/
School Street. We have corresponded with them, indicating that we felt it was important
that the signal be in and operational prior to the start of the 2000/2001 school year. We
have heard nothing from the County that would tell us that they are on any different
schedule, so at this point we assume that the project will be let in spring of the year and
constructed prior to the start of school year.
3. County Road 1/County Road 77 Signalization
This project is also being done by Sherburne County. It is likely this project will be
combined with the signal at School Street. Therefore, we would anticpate that this
intersection would be signalized sometime in the fall before the start of the school year.
As you are aware, a four-way stop was installed at this intersection last fall as a
temporary control until the signalization system can be installed.
4. TH 101 Bridge Replacement
We are monitoring closely the plans being prepared by Mn/DOT for the replacement of
the northbound bridge across the Mississippi River on TH 101. Michele McPherson and
I have sat in on one technical advisory committee meeting with regard to detours and
other issues that may be a result of the construction of this bridge. Mn/DOT anticipates
right now that during the construction they will use the southbound bridge to carry three
lanes of traffic. It has not yet been determined whether or not they will use a moveable
barrier to always allow two lanes of traffic with the peak flow. We anticipate there will be
O:\PROJ~230000M\0325\Itr 1-31-00 klaers.doc
Mr. Pat Klaers
March 23, 2000
Page Seven
additional meetings of the technical advisory committee in the early spring of 2000.
will continue to update you on the progress of this project.
If you have any questions regarding any of these projects please call.
Sincerely,
Howard R. Green Company
Terry J. Maurer, P.E.
TJM:tw
We
O:\PROJ~230000M\0325\Itr 1-31-00 klaers.doc
Zity of
River
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Mayor & City Council
Pat Klaers, City Adm~~r
April 3, 2000 ~
East Elk River
The east Elk River $12 million public improvement project continues to move
forward. Last year the sewer and water components of the project were approved
and the majority of this work is completed. Earlier this year, the street and storm
sewer components of the project were also approved and this work is scheduled to
move forward in 2000 with completion in 2001.
Now that the street and storm sewer bids have been approved, the total figures
are starting to come into focus. The actual final figures will not be realized for
another 18 months or so, but we are getting a better understanding as to the city's
financial participation into this project from our surface water management
(SWM) fund and municipal state aid (MSA) street fund. For the last few years it
has been clear that the sewer and water part of the project was in "pretty good
shape" based on assessments being levied and collected (although some
assessments are deferred), TIF funding for the lift station, and a city sewer
department and utility water department financial contribution into the project.
Likewise, for the last few years it has been clear that the street and storm sewer
component of the project required city participation. The city has received (or will
be receiving) federal funds for part of this project and will also be collecting as
much as possible/reasonable from the development projects for these
improvements.
Lots of growing cities like Elk River use future MSA funds for current MSA
projects. This approach is consistent with the past practice in Elk River and the
plan for the east Elk River project is, and has been, to use the MSA funds that will
be allocated to us for the next few years on this street and storm sewer project.
After this project and the Business Center Drive project, no MSA funds are
expected to be available until about 2004. The good news is that there are very
few MSA street projects on the schedule for the next few years and this was
anticipated when the east Elk River project was under consideration. The city will
be using about $2.2 million of MSA funds for this east Elk River project.
13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 · TDD & Phone: (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425
East Elk River
Page 2 of 2
After using MSA funds for the city share of the street project, the project then
needs about $810,000 from the city for trunk storm drainage improvements and
this is planned to be financed mainly with SWM monies. Some brief history
regarding the status of the SWM fund is in order. In 1994, the city discussed a
number of options for funding its major SWM projects. Ultimately the City
Council decided that a general city-wide tax levy was the best approach to fund
necessary projects. This approach was approved by the City Council and the first
tax levy was received in 1995. By spring 1995, the city had spent over $1 million
on improvement projects (Deerfield III, Highway 10/101 intersection, and County
Roads 12/13 area), and had plans to spend over another $1 million within the next
year. The 1995 tax revenue was estimated at $210,000 with a projected increase
to $240,000 in 1996. This levy was planned to continue for the foreseeable future
and to increase with inflation.
Over the last few years, some of this SWM levy has been "moved around." Part of
the levy has been, and continues to be, dedicated toward the storm sewer bonds
and some of the levy has been, and continues to be, received in the SWM fund for
general projects. However, a few years ago, the council decided to move some of
the SWM tax levy into the development fund. Approximately $135,000 to $145,000
of the SWM tax levy was shifted to the development fund and the last year of this
"commitment" is 2001. Accordingly, the plan calls for the SWM tax levy to
increase by $145,000 in 2002 and the development fund tax levy to be eliminated.
Following this plan is essential in order to have funds available to finance the
storm sewer component in the east Elk River project and to fund future SWM
projects (such as major ditch improvements or improvements related to Western
Area Phase V).
The street and storm sewer participation by the city is a little higher than
expected a few years ago, based on the high cost of the right-of-way and on TIF 18
funds (Morrell project) not being available to help fund the railroad crossing at
171st Avenue. As the council may recall, TIF 18 was decertified in 1998. However,
as previously reviewed with the council, city MSA and SWM funds are available to
finance the project, but it is a major commitment by the city for development of
east Elk River.
Another financial issue, but one that is slightly different than what is discussed
above, also needs to be reviewed by the City Council over the next few months.
This issue is the city matching funds requirements for the federal street grants
and the TIF 19 project. The federal street project requires the city to have about
$600,000 in matching funds, and this is planned to be met by way of using MSA
funds. TIF 19 has a $900,000 local contribution requirement, and we believe that
most of this match can be realized with the work at the Main Street/Highway 169
intersection.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Pat D. Klaers, City Administrator
Phil Hals, Street/Park Superinte~'
March 9, 2000
Paving of Baldwin Street
In the fall of 1999 Baurerly Company of Sauk Rapids did a road-paving job
for Livonia Township on Baldwin Street from County Road 4 south to the
northern Elk River city limits. For some unexplained reason they continued
the paving of Baldwin Street within the city limits to the point of where it
connected with the paved section of 225th Avenue, which runs east from the
landfill. They placed 3" of class 5 gravel on our road base, 2 1/2" of
bituminous wear and installed a 2-foot wide CL-5 shoulder on each side.
The bituminous material amounted to 895 ton at $21.96 per ton or
$19,654.20. This cost does not include the CL-5 base, grading or
shouldering. Baurerly Company has asked the City to pay the $19,654.20 to
cover the paving costs. While at this price this is a good deal for the City, I
am a little skeptical about paying for a project that we had no knowledge or
control over.
Our maintenance costs for this road are about $1,200 per year for grading
and CL-5 replacement. Because of the cost savings for maintenance and the
benefit of not having to operate the grader on Highway 169, I would
recommend paying Baurerly Company $10,000 from City street reserve
monies.
Howard R, Green Company
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
March 24, 2000
File: 230000M-0325
Mr. Peter Korolchuk, P.E.
Stanley Consultants, Inc.
5775 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 955
Minneapolis, MN 55416-1235
RE: HIGHWAY 101 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
Dear Mr. Korolchuk:
The Elk River City Council discussed the options presented at the open house regarding traffic
during the replacement of the Highway 101 bridge. The City Council was in agreement that the
option to put four lanes of traffic on the existing bridge during construction was the best, but
they are quite concerned about the potential closing of the eastbound Highway 10 ramp to
southbound Highway 101. Based on our phone conversation on February 22, 2000, I have
informed the City Council that you will be doing traffic counts of the eastbound Highway 10 to
southbound Highway 101 traffic and making a firmer decision on this. This letter is just to
inform you that the City Council of Elk River is very concerned and would like to see every
effort made to maintain this movement. They do not believe that having traffic go further east
on Highway 10, make a u-turn, come back, and use the westbound Highway 10 ramp to
southbound Highway 101 is a satisfactory solution.
Please let me know as soon as you have more information regarding the potential for keeping
the eastbound Highway 10 to southbound Highway 101 ramp open so that I may report back to
the City Council and they can take a firm position on your recommended option.
If you have any questions regarding this, please call.
Sincerely,
Howard R. Green Company
Terry J. Maurer, P.E.
TJM:tw
O: \proj \230000m \ 0325 \ ltr 3-24-00 Korolchuk
1326 Energy Park Drive · St. Paul, MN 55108 · 651/644-4389 fax 651/644-9446 toll free 888/368-4389
-~ity of
iver
M£MORANDLIM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Mayor & City Council
Pat Klaers, City Administrator
April 3, 2000
CIP - Community Facility
A community facility that would be shared by the school district and the city was
briefly discussed at the January 24, 2000, joint School Board/City Council meeting.
This topic was also discussed at the February 14, 2000, City Council Capital
Improvement Program (CIP) meeting. At both meetings the City Council indicated
that it was open to discussing and evaluating all options and alternatives. However,
at the 2/14/00 meeting, I believe there was a general consensus by the City Council
that the top community facility priority was for large, multi-purpose meeting room
space. (I'm not sure that this statement is still true today and also it should be
noted that at least one council member was not convinced that the city should be in
the "large meeting room space" business.) On 2/14 staff indicated that the city could
finance a modest lease/purchase expenditure for meeting room space without a
bond referendum.
With the highest city priority being large meeting room space, I met with
Administrator of Community Education Charlie Blesener on 2/29/00 to review some
of the buildings concepts that were discussed in 1999 (see attachment). As noted at
the 1/24/00 joint meeting, the school district is fairly clear in identifying its space
needs for a new facility as they relate to Community Education, Early Childhood,
and Special Education programs. The same is true for Community Recreation and
this organization was part of the 1999 study. The space for these four programs has
limited flexibility and most of the shared space in a joint facility would be for
programs in the large meeting room space that could be converted into smaller
multi-purpose rooms. This type of space with a kitchen may also be able to function
as a senior center dining site and be used for senior programming.
When Charlie and I met we also discussed the sizing, location, and financing of a
facility. Last year the thought of the planning group was that the existing
Community Education site could be used for the new project. All the activities at
the Community Education building would have to relocate for a period of time, the
structure demolished, and then a new structure could be constructed at that
13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 · TDD & Phone: (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425
CIP - Community Facility
April 3, 2000
Page 2 of 5
location. However, if the city was to be part of the project and the project size
increased due to the large meeting room space component, then it is very
questionable whether everything could be accommodated at the existing
Community Education site. Accordingly, an alternative location may need to be
identified for this joint project and neither the school nor the city has the funds to
purchase a site that is large enough and centrally located to accommodate this
proposed facility. The obvious option then is somewhere at the City Hall complex. If
the total project was in the 35,000 square foot range and was two stories, it may
work at the existing Community Education site, but if the project was 50,000
square feet and was all on one level, then this could not work at the existing
Community Education site. Regarding financing, it should be noted that the Ivan
Sand School was financed through a lease/purchase plan, and that the builder,
Winkelman Construction from St. Cloud, owns the facility until all of the payments
are made by the school district. The school could likewise finance its proposed
facility outside of a bond referendum through the lease/purchase approach if
another agency financed the project. Under a joint project, the logical fiscal agent
would be the EDA.
After discussing things with Charlie, it appeared as though there were a few
options in addressing the city need for additional larger multi-purpose meeting
room space. One option would be to work with the school district for a new building
at the Community Education site and, as they have some meeting room space in
their proposed facility, simply provide some funds for increasing the size of this
space. The school could then own, manage and operate the facility, and the city
could simply be an investor into the project with the assumption that it would be
available for community use under certain conditions. A deviation of this option is
for the city to own and manage the meeting room space, and this may be something
that needs to happen if liquor is going to be served at banquets or weddings.
Another option is for the city to provide its own meeting room space for the
community for larger weddings, banquets, or conferences as part of a City Hall
expansion project and as Phase I of a community center. A third option is for a new
joint facility at the City Hall complex. A concern with this option is whether enough
land is available for this joint project plus the other city facilities that may be in our
future at this location. If any option is pursued, and assuming that this space could
be divided into smaller areas, then it could be fully programmed during the day or
weekday nights by Community Education, Community Recreation, various
businesses or nonprofit groups for meetings, or for senior activities and dining
location.
On Tuesday, March 7, 2000, I met with Gary Tushie from the architectural firm,
Tushie Montgomery Associates, Inc. This is the firm that did the new liquor store
and the city was very happy with the project, the process, and the expertise of this
firm. One of the things Gary and I discussed was "why the city would want to be
CIP - Community Facility
April 3, 2000
Page 3 of 5
with the school on a joint project" and "why the school would want to be with the
city on a joint project." From the school point of view it appears to be beneficial for
possible state grants, the EDA being the financing agency, a different and larger
site (no temporary relocation needed), and school uses for the larger meeting room
space. On the other hand, there didn't seem to be any strong compelling reason for
why the city wanted to partner with the school district other than providing good
customer service to our citizens for having multiple services and functions at one
location.
Another topic that Gary and I visited about dealt with the uses of the large meeting
room space. In this regard, the space being used simply for banquets versus having
space being used for presentations or plays, and needing special sound systems and
storage space, led us to some uncertainty as to what is truly desired as a large
meeting room area. Some of the additional use can really add to the cost of the
facility. Getting some help in identifying and thinking through what we really want
for the large meeting room space may be appropriate.
In the discussion with Gary about the size and location of a shared facility, we
talked about the long range plans for public facilities at the City Hall complex.
While this City Hall site has always been envisioned to be our home forever, there
has never been any detailed planning completed to identify what size and type of
facilities would go into each available building site.
After discussing our general situation in Elk River, it became clear that our needs
may be able to be met with a facility of 10,000 square feet with a catering kitchen
that could be expanded to a full kitchen. This size facility could accommodate a
300+ person event (assuming that the people would be sitting either at longer "row"
tables or large circular tables that seat 12-14 people). Gary indicated that this type
of facility could be completed for about $100/square foot (plus FF&E), and doing the
math, this puts us in the $1 million range for the building and makes me
comfortable in continuing the discussion on the facility that can be accomplished
without a bond referendum. Of course, if you start adding uses and expenses for
such things as presentations and plays, then you start compromising the conference
or wedding facility and make it much more expensive and more difficult to finance.
The balance between what we need and can afford must be carefully maintained in
order to get anything accomplished without a bond referendum. (On 2/14, Daryl
Thompson indicated that he would check on some building cost figures, but I don't
know what he found out.)
At this point I don't know if we can eliminate the possibility of a joint or shared
school/city facility, but I am certainly leaning toward the city addressing its large
meeting room space/multi-purpose space need in conjunction with a City Hall
CIP - Community Facility
April 3, 2000
Page 4 of 5
expansion. A ma]or reason why I am leaning in this direction is because I believe
that the large meeting room space may/should be the foundation or Phase I of a
larger community center facility that could include a pool, theater, youth center,
etc. In order to fully analyze the situation and reach a sound conclusion, I think
that we should hire a professional to help us decide if we should be partners with
the school or not. A professional will help us look at our city needs and the functions
of a shared or larger meeting room facility. Essentially this means working with the
City Council on "programming" so that we will really understand what we want and
need and how it can be best accomplished. In this regard, I would suggest the city
obtain an hourly proposal from Gary Tushie. Gary has been through this process
with other communities and will be able to ask the right questions in order for the
city to come to some reasonable conclusions for what is best in our particular
situation. This programming process will most likely take three, or maybe four,
meetings. I think that once we get into the programming process we will also end
up looking at our municipal facilities plan in order to identify what should be
located at the City Hall complex (this may add a meeting or two to the process).
Since my March 7 meeting with Gary Tushie, a lot has transpired on the
Community Center issue and on the school pool issue.
First, Don Heinzman did an editorial in the March 15 newspaper regarding the
need for a civic center. In this article it was mentioned that the Chamber of
Commerce "has begun to study the operations of successful centers in Chaska and
Shoreview." In a conversation with Chamber Executive Director Renee Sande I
learned that this study is coming out of the Chamber's Economic Development
Commission, but is not part of the chamber's or commission's 2000 work plan. In
this regard, some members strongly believe that a community center and an arts
center would be beneficial to the city, and are gathering information on this topic.
A newspaper article was also written on the recent efforts in the city of Buffalo to
get special legislation passed to help fund a community center. Representative
Anderson has sponsored legislation in this regard, but it was not successful.
Reports on this proposal has spurred other people on into thinking that Elk River
could get a community center partly financed with state monies. In fact, this is very
unlikely. The Buffalo legislative effort is not unlike the Elk River effort on behalf of
the Minnesota Sports Federation proposal in 1998, where Representative Anderson
and Senator Ourada sponsored special legislation for that Elk River community
facility. This proposal was also not successful. In today's political climate, the
Governor is pointing to such things as the Hastings community center request as
an example of what is, and should be, a local project and not included in the state
bonding bill.
CIP - Community Facility
April 3, 2000
Page 5 of 5
On a different front, I think everyone knows that the 2001 Arts Alliance
organization is continuing to study how an arts facility can be constructed in Elk
River. The arts facility topic has been a major item of discussion at the last six to
eight meetings of the 2001 Arts Alliance.
Additionally, the VandenBerge pool has generated significant discussion since the
board rejected a funding proposal for repairs. In this regard, the Mayor has had a
meeting with the finance director, a school representative, and some concerned
citizens. Dr. Flannery has advised me that he expects a request of some type from
the school board to the communities at the April 11 School Board meeting.
Finally, and most recently, the financial problems with the Senior Center and
kitchen improvement project at the Guardian Angels complex was on the front page
of the Star News.
All of these recent events and issues may be making the affordable large meeting
room space project more difficult to pursue. These recent events are making it more
difficult to define exactly what is truly needed in the community versus what is just
desirable to have in the community. Also, the city needs to establish what its
responsibility is in some of these areas. Based on recent events, I need the council
to confirm whether or not staff should be pursuing large, multi-purpose meeting
room space at this time.
Recommendation
If we are still only looking at 1.) addressing the city's need for large, multi-purpose
meeting room space, 2.) if we should develop this space with the school or not, and
3.) if we do go with the school, should the project be at the City Hall complex or
not...then it is recommended that we request a proposal from Tushie Montgomery
Associates, Inc., on an hourly fee basis to facilitate the city programming process for
large meeting room space needs.
Attachments
· Three pages on space issues from Charlie Blesener from 1999 report/study
· 3/15/00 Civic Center Editorial
· 11/18/99 Chamber-Rotary Meeting Handout on Community Centers
· Community Center Material from Ron Wilkes
s: \council\cipfclty.doc
Space for Community Education, ECFE, ECSE and Community Recreation Jan. 1999
1. Status quo: (critical space problems for these programs)
a. CE Center code problems & expense. Abandon CE Center.
b. History of on-going relocation of ECSE programs in K-12 spaces (6 moves in 9 yrs.)
C. Erosion of ECFE spaces at Handke--competition with K-12 space.
d. Continuation of joint powers agreement w/Community Recreation-district providing space.
e. Continued partnership with Reach-Up-Head Start.
2. Demographics:
a. Population growth at 3-5%/year--early childhood numbers will swell (current birth to five population
of 3230 will be 4546 in 7 yrs with 5% growth--a 40% increase).
b. ECFE now serves about 50% of all families with early childhood children-growth in participation will
mean more space to meet needs.
c. ECSE population has increased 29% in the past 8 years.
d. CE and Community Recreation serve the entire 37,000 district population, not just a portion. Many
participants have no children in public schools-a chance to benefit from tax supported schools.
3. Grants and partnership possibilities provide better value.
a. Dept. of CFL co-location grant of up to $500,000 for new construction or for renovation--provided
district has matching $. (assumes co-location of Head Start, ECFE, ECSE, Community
Education child care, Community Recreation)
b. Bigger, better facility without 100% district funding. Municipal partnerships are more possible with
CE and Comm. Rec. connections--taxpayers win, district wins, municipality wins.
c. Several partnership/co-location facility examples available: Chanhassen, Red Wing, New Brighton,
St. Cloud.
4. Space solution:
a. Significant space in central part of district. 30,000-40,000 s.f. "Family Service Center" -relieves
elementary space crunch, maximizes early childhood spaces and budgets, and eliminates
duplication of clerical/administrative functions.
· majority of ECFE, ECSE staff housed here; central reception function for early childhood
screening, Community Education, Community Recreation, ECFE and ECSE
· multiple rooms designed for early childhood programs (ECFE,ECSE, Head Start)
· adult rooms/meeting spaces for parent discussion, adult enrichment, ABE, computer lab
· spaces for school age child care including school day care for kindergarten
· large motor (gym) area for pre-school to adult programming efforts
· indoor play area, outdoor play area
· daytime meeting spaces for curriculum, staff development, speakers, events, etc.
· large meeting space for daytime/evening school board-type meetings
b. Service Centers in north and south
· 6 rooms in conjunction with school construction/renovation or municipal construction
project(s)
· Note: if space is in a school, it is imperative to have a firm commitment of long-term space, or
planning efforts will be in vain.
What would work--one or more of the following:
1. New construction--stand alone facility.
2. Included as part of other municipal partner construction-swimming center, Minnesota Sports Federation
facility, community center, City Hall, etc.
3. Renovation/addition at a current school (provided spaces are designed for our use, and protected long-
term).
4. New construction-as part of a new elementary or secondary school (dedicated long-term space).
5. Included as part of fine arts center construction.
uthors: ~
~'his plan was developed by Mary Linz & Tami Hampton, ECSE; Kathy Simonson, ECFE; Jeff Asfahl,
Community Recreation, Carole McNaughton-Commers & Charlie Blesener, Community Education.
Types of spaces required
Community Education, ECFE, Recreation
_ reception and waiting area
_ offices & work areas for staff
_ large motor/multipurpose rooms
_ adult & parent meeting rooms/classrooms
_ children's rooms w/sinks & bathrooms
_ some rooms partial carpet/partial tile
_ some private staff offices
_ private conference rooms
_ public lending library
_ staff resource room
_ storage and supply rooms
_ staff dining area/break room
_ multi-age outdoor playground
_ child and adult size restrooms
_ changing areas
_ adequate parking, well lit
_ staff workroom and copy center
_ kitchen facilities
_ computer lab
_ easy access for public
ECSE
work areas for staff
_ large motodmultipurpose rooms or access
_ adult/parent meeting space
children's rooms w/sinks & bathrooms
_ some rooms partial carpet/partial tile
_ therapy rooms & speech therapy areas
_ private conference rooms
_ public lending library
staff resource room
_ storage and supply rooms
_ staff dining area/break room
_ handicap accessible outdoor playground
child and adult size restrooms
_ changing areas
_ adequate parking, well lit
PROGRAMS COMBINED majority of space in central location
Reception, waiting area
Staff workspace for FT & PT staff
1 large motor/multipurpose room
1 room with indoor play equipment
1 large adult meeting room
4 adult meeting/class rooms
1 computer lab
1 Adult Basic Ed. classroom
2 Enrichment/Ext. Day rooms
10-13 children's rooms
4 private conf. & screening rooms
1 staff conference room
1 staff resource room
1 staff workroom and copying
1 staff dining area/break room
1 kitchen facilities
1 toy library (public)
program supply rooms
general office storage
adult restrooms w/diaper changing areas
outdoor multi-age playground
adequate parking ~ well lit - easy access
(all together)
(shared)
(shared)
(shared)
(shared)
(shared)
(sink, water, restroom)
(sink, water, restroom)
(shared)
(shared)
(shared)
(shared)
(need sink, water)
(shared)
(shared)
(shared)
(shared)
(shared)
APPROX. 36,000 S.F.
Recommendations/ideas for space solutions:
1. Secure commitment from City of Rogers to fund Early Childhood/CE/Recreation additions to
current or new Rogers Elementary school, with the understanding that the Early Childhood
space be secured long-term from loss to K-12 uses.
Discussion: Four to six additional rooms, and perhaps an additional gym may be included in
such a proposal. The additional costs when added to the base cost of an elementary school
are expected to be relatively small--perhaps $200,000 for the rooms. Probably more cost
effective to plan the space as additional to a new school than to add it to the existing one.
The trade-off to the district is additional needed spaces for two non-K-12 programs at no or
Iow cost in exchange for a commitment to house them in those spaces for the long term.
2. Add ECFE and ECSE space needs into the remodeling/additions planned at Zimmerman
Elementary and include them in the bonding request fall 1999.
Discussion: Same logic as in Rogers as to cost effectiveness and ease of including on the
ballot now. Early Childhood programs benefit, Zimmerman residents get needed
improvements to an existing school--a win-win. The only downside for Early Childhood
programs is the lack of guaranteed space over the long term.
3. Build a stand-alone facility in the central part of the district to house a majority (75%) of
ECF~E-a~nd ECSE programs;' Head Start, Early Childhood Screening, Community Education
and Recreation. (with option to include/exclude: School Board (large) meeting space, staff
development spaces, space for District office overflow as the district grows and current DO is
at capacity).
Discussion:
Sites:
· build on a site already owned/donated to the district (current CE Center, Otsego
Elementary site, future elementary school site, )
· build on a site to be secured (Morrell site, 2 sites owned by City of Elk River near Elk
River City Hall, other?)
Funding options:
· Strong preference that the District own its own facility. Include in bonding this fall--
requires voter approval and inclusion as high priority
· construct using lease to own conditions (i.e. Ivan Sand Community School)--no voter
approval needed, and district eventually owns the building free and clear.
· partial funds from grants/partnerships--possible with either of the above
Size/cost:
· original proposal (on the table) is approx. 35,000-40,000 sq. ft. and includes spaces for
all the programs as well as a gymnasium-type space and another large space suitable for
school board meetings and other similar large gatherings. The demolition of the CE Center
would eliminate day-time staff development space and School Board meeting space. By
eliminating space for staff development/school board meetings, and by downsizing the
gymnasium spaces, a smaller, less expensive building could be proposed, perhaps not to
exceed 20,000 sq. ft. and at a cost of $1.6-$2.0 million. (I believe Ivan Sand costs out at
about $82. sq. ft.)
· in order to be eligible to pursue state grant (up to $500,000), we would need a local
effort--whether bonding or lease to own.
4 / Elk. River Stpr News/Wednesday, March 15, 2000,
it
Opinions
on- I
., !~.~,.,~',. ~ ~ ~-~:.,~.,~ , ..
.~ . ":zs ',one w~th.' good, i~-
;'-E~ ~ver',' ~ad,~ ~ay, is ~ ~"t~~a;
'~ver.~;Ye~0~j~ ~e lead~rs~"0f't~e comm~t~is'
probl6m.~'.~i ~' :c6~ ~ ~? ~'/'t~6s~ S~o~n~·
~~g about i~,;,.-;:~;;~4~'~ ~'~:.~'¢~:~g~t;~/.¢.'-~ ...... "
.~., ~;~s due .~e. m,~e+~ ~m~ng t~at. concen-
~a~s~::~on.. pr9~ .fac~e~,;~fe~ .more ho~mg;, but
.d~sH~le ~ promo~'ggoa, space fOr.z~
'~ :NOW, 'm~g mat~rs'.worse;' ~veh~t~. fac~ties"the
co~~ h~ ~e fa~' a pool t~t's closed.~d;
.~'. ~:' ~s~t[~t~Monb~eflo.~th a..?ew,.comm~ty ~
&n~+-~d' ~'~:~gh 's~6ol,~ Big L~e' ~th' a 'mod-
..em.~,sc~ool~on~;~ego ~th a. Comm~ty~
. ~~fi':~~;~41~': c6~c~dt0 its school,
. ;~e comm?~7~-zs co~2~ed,by, cau[zous [~g,;
exCep~ whe~'i{; C~mes ,'~.~o~/a' spots fac~
~d laxly a fiae Boys ~d ~ls Club b~ding, w~ere
no Publib vote ~c0n~olS~?'. ;' ,~; ?.~ ~ ..... :.-...~ ?:; ~.-..;~ .-
~e new cz~ h~'~d' the ad~tz6h' to the ice arena
both were done ~th creative ~eing and no refer-
~y i~ there such'~ a~re]uctane~:f0r~he ~lk ~iver
comm~ to ~ut up a comm~t~'.ce~te~? In a' word,
lack of public du~ for one. Polifi~i~s'reac[ ~& feed,
back and conce~s voiced ~ theme' ~'~.,~ '
Secgn~y,' there is a ~once~ about ~ow ~0 ~ay for it.
Effe~ive co~fies decide what they w~ and.
T~y, there is a ~o]ia~ split' i~the s~h~] dis-
trict over ~ fac~ties in ~ ~iver, even though
people from' all over the school dist~c~ use ~he poOl,
the ice arena and the ~. ' . .
Fo~h]y, the leaaers~ in the c0mm~ty is para-
]~zea on b~]ain~ a facUi~ ~ha~.wo~d se~ce corn-'
m~i~ and school ~stHct needs. Is ~here r~M]y a
~fference? ~e t~ dollars ~e the same. '
~ere.is one. bH~ht:'Spot.. ~e.. ~]k ~iVer ~ea
Ch~ber"of COmmerce, from where leaders~p must
come, has be~ to stUdy the operations.of success~
centers in Chaska and Shore~ew. ~y recommenda-
A co~ion of sO~ of ~e ~'~,~aS in ~he '~i~Y neea~
to"come ~getheT' and d6YeloP aPfopbs~ ~that C0~d
be p~:,bf be SePara~ff6~ ~g schoolb0nd r~feren~'
Ch~ber o(~0~er6e p9eds'~t~6 ~,m~j6r in-rest
~'t~S becaUse 'g0od .~[iesk66~":~g6p16/.~'"~'
and that'is'~good'fo~ bfis~e~s'~::. ~ %:?~ ,:-~.~,~?~?::
ple,-pro~d~g g0d~g~es ~d a'~d ~dficat~0n for ::'
i~s s~den~'. Ha~g'a~g°od cO~~:,.~en~r:.~th.,."
room] for the '~s '~d facilities for C°mmnnlty~' and.~
co~~ :recreatiOn .'pro,ms' m~es.' Sense.' ~-
FACILITY
1. Maplewood Community center
COST OF BUILDING
SQUARE FT.
$12.6 million
90,000
2. Chaska Community Center
$9.2 million (Phase I)
$3.2 million (Phase 121)
$2.3 million (Pha~e III)_
$14.7 million (Total)
140,000
3. Maple Grove Community Center
$14.0 million
118,831
4. Plymouth Ice Center/
Lifetime Fitness
$7.0 million
$10~0 million
$17.0 million (Total)
83,000
~00,000
183,000(Toml)
5. Eden Prairie Community Center
$2.9 million (Phase 1r)
$2.0 million (Phase ID
$4.9 million (Total)
95,000
Monticello Community Center
$10 Million (includes land, site prep) / 78,000 square feet
4,005 square foot pool with 161' water slide & aqua play station
Gym - basketball, volleyball, walking track
Fitness Area - aerobics, fitness equipment
Full locker room facilities - male, female, family
Indoor children play area (like McDonalds)
Teen Area (table games & tables)
38' Climbing Wall
Senior Center with Ceramic Room
City Hall - 7,000 square feet
2 full kitchen areas
280 - 300 people banquet / substitutes as City Council Chambers
62 people meeting room
30 people meeting room
Fireplace room
Concession / lounge
Wheel park (skate boards outside)
Patio / sun deck
$646,000 estimated annual operating cost
$470,000 estimated annual revenue
$176, 000 estimated annual operating cost to the city
No Referendum - lease from I-IRA Revenue Funds
Annual Membership Dues (paid in full in advance annually)
$300 individual non resident $240 individual resident
$360 family non resident $300 family resident
03/22/00 09:$9 "~612 428 0667 GBLC
Green Better Living Company
14176 Northdale Blvd., Rogers, Minnesota 55374 U.S.A.
~001/007
Tel: 763 428-0665
Fax: 763 428-0667
03/22/00 09:59 '~'612 428 0667 GBLC ~002/007
Green Better Living Company
14176 Northdale Blvd., Rogers, Minnesota 55374 U.S.A.
Tel: 763 425-066~
Fax: 763 428-0667
03/22/00 10:00 9612 428 0667 GBLC ~003/007
Green Better Living Company
14176 Northdale Blvd., Rogers, Minnesota 55374 U.S.A.
Td: 763 428-0665
March 22, 2000
Fax: 763 421t-0667
Star News
Elk River, MN 55330
Fax:441-6401
Don Heinzman,
Re: Buffalo Community Center (ITF2625, January 2000) vs Elk River Community
Center
Enclosed please find the response from Brace Anderson (State representative 19B Wright and
Sherbume Counties 651 296-5063) regarding my Email concerning the Elk River Community
Center proposal.
After developing a plan for the Community Center, I propose that the School District # 728,
Great River Energy, the Elk River Community Development Council, Chamber of Commerce
and the City of Elk River approach Bruce Anderson to ask for his assistance in authoring
Iegislation during the 2001 legislative session.
The proposed legislation could be patterned after HF2625 after we receive a copy thereof. The
proposed legislation would be presented to the MN State Revisors Office (651 296-2868) for
final review and transcription before returning it to House representative Anderson for
submission. Identical legislation would be simultaneously authored by Mark Ourada (District 19
State Senator 651 296-5981) for presentation during the same legislative session.
Please provide your comments and opinion on this matter.
With kind regards,
Ronald D. Wilkes
W-763 428-0665
F- 763 428-0667
cc:
Sandy Pine, Elk River City Clerk
Ranae Sandie, Chamber of Commerce
Mayor S. Klinzing and City Council
Enclosure
RDW/
03/22/00 10:00 '~612 428 0667 GBLC ~004/007
Bruce D. Anderson
State Representative
District 19B
Wright and Sherburne Counties
Minnesota
House of
Representatives
COMMI3'rEE$: VICE-CHAIR, CRIME PREVENTION; GOVERNMENTAl. OPERATIONS AND VETERANS AFFAIRS;
March ! 6, 2000 STATE GOVERNMENT FINANCE
Ronald Wilkes
19695 1542 St. NW
Elk River, MN 55330
D e ar '1~Tr .-Wilk'~'s :- .....
Thank you for contacting me about the fact that I attthored legislation to obtain funding for a
community center in Buffalo.
You may be interested to know that the reason I authored the legislation, is the same reason I
introduce many of the bills I do - because constituents have aaa idea aaad request my help at the
legislature to make that idea a reality. That is my job as a legislator. I represent the interests of
those I serve.
In the case of the Buffalo Community Center, I was approached by the city of Buffalo, the
YMCA, School District #877, and the Buffalo Hospital, who had collaborated in the
developmenz of a plan for the community center. They asked if I would sponsor legislation on
their behalf', and that is how House File 2625 came to be. Unfortunately for Buffalo, the
proposal was not included in the House Bonding Bill that was recently assembled.
I am aware that Elk River does not currently have a community center, but I have never been
approached by local officials or residents interested in securing state funding for such a project.
In yom' e-mail you ask me to author a bill to request funding for a center in Elk River,
Unfortunately, the deadline for such legislation during the 2000 session has passed. However, if
you are working on developing plans for a community center in Elk River for which you would
like state assistance, I would be interested in hearing more about the project over the interim with
the possibility of authoring legislation during the 2001 session.
Thank you again for contacting me about this issue. Please be in touch if you working on plans
for a local community center.
State Representative
3~__2~ Aadland Ave. NE Buffalo. Minnesota 55313
411 State Office Building. 100 Constitution Ave.. St, Paul, Minnesota 55155-1298
(612) 682-1480
(651) 296-506~
FAX (651) 296-$607 'r'FY (651) 296-gsg6 email: rep.bruce.anderson@house.leg.sl, al.e.mn.us
03/22/00 10:00 '~612 428 0667 GBLC
~ 005/007
Page 1 of I
gblmpl$
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:
gblmpls <gblmpls@spacestar. net>
<rep. bruce.anderson@house, leg,state.mn, us>
Wednesday, February 23, 2000 12:56 PM
Proposed Legislation
Ronald Wilkes
19695 154th St NW
Elk River, MN 55330
Tel: W- 612 428-0665 H- 612 263-6291
Febma~ 23,2000
Honorable Representative
Bruce Anderson
MN House of Representatives
District 19
Bruce Anderson,
I see that you have authored a bill (HF2625, Jan. 2000) to procure funding of 4 million dollars for a "Buffalo
Community Center" to be located in Buffalo minnesota which I believe is your home town.
Well, I live in Elk River. You should know that Elk River does not currently have a community center. Please
tell me why Buffalo should get a community center while Elk River does not get one. I hereby kindly request
that you author a state bill to request additional funding for an "Elk River Community Center" or explain to me
why a buffalo community center will accrue significant advantages for the city of Elk River.
With kind regards,
Ronald D. Wilkes
Elk River MN 55330
Ema[l: g him pis ~..s, p_a_c..e_sta r. n et
3/22/00
03/22/00 10:01 ~'612 428 0667
Anderson, Bruce (R) 19B
GBLC
~006/007
Page 1 of 1
Ml'nnmota House of Rejmsentatlvm
*Prefers interim mail at this address.
Anderson, Bruce (R) 19B
411 State Office
Building
St. Paul, Minnesota
55155
(651) 296-5063
E-mail:
r_e~_..B, ruc e. Ander .s_o.!a_~h.o_u_s_e.:.l.eg :st ate .m n. u. s
B i.l.1 s. A..u_t .h_o_r_e_d. Bills Co.a,u,th. 9.re_ .d
District Map ..Legislative News
Town Hall _M_e_e. fi.n. g_s
Home: Buffalo Township;*3222 Aadland Ave. N.E., 55313; (612) 682-1480
Business: St. Paul
Minnesota Air National Guard HQ 133 Airlift Wing 631 Minuteman Drive, 55111
Born:3/12/50. Married: spouse Dottle, 5 children.
Occupation: Agricultural and Industrial Sales and Management, Military.
Education: aviation electronics, USN; AA, agribusiness, Willmar Technical College; BS (1/99),
business administration, Northwestern College.
Elected: 1994.
Term: 3rd.
Committees: Crime Prevention; Government Operations and Veterans Affairs Policy; State
Oovemment Finance.
Return to index of House members.
htm:/Iwww.house.le~,.state.mn.us/members/19B/I 9B.htm 3/16/00
03/22/00 10:01 '~612 428 0667 GBLC
House Bill Status Summary Display Documents 1 to 20
[~007/007
Page 1 of 2
House Bill Sca~v~ S~m~.az~lr Displ'&¥ Documents i to 20 o~ 37
Full
Status Text Summary Short Description
Buffalo additional sales, use, and excise taxes authorized, and
HF402g l~ill Summary bonds issued for the purposes of health and education center
Text
improvements.
.B.i]_l Wright county aggregate materials removed production tax
HF3814 Summ a~
Te..x..t. requirement provided.
HF3786 B.i.ll Summary Wright county ditch conveyance to St. Michael and Albertville
Text authorized.
Bi.._.ll Wright county nursing facility rate adjustment provided and money
HF3727 .S. _u~..._m._ar~.
Te_.x_.t appropriated.
Bill Veterans affairs commissioner duties technical changes provided,
HF3554 -- Summary_
Text and agent orange information and assistance program expanded.
Bill Local and state ¢orrectimml facility inmate telephone access
HF3512 Text Summary regulated, and criminal penalties imposed.
B__il] $~._aD.' State purchases open bidding authorized.
.HF3.49...5 Text
Bill S....um_n..~ .ary State vehicle identification requirements modified.
HF3475 Text
OSHA; deceased employee next of kin authorized to participate in
Bill S ..urn.mary occupational safety and health citing procedures, and presumptive
_I~2901 Ti~.~ penalties provided.
Bil___! .S__u~..m..~.High-risk sex offender placement after release regulated.
Bil__! Summary State vehicle identification requirements modified.
SF28 I_3. Text
Buffalo community center grant provided, bonds issued, and
HF2625 Bil! Summary
.... Te.xt money appropriated.
. .. Independent school district No. 728, Elk River, debt service lev,/'
HF2624 Bill
...... Text rate provided.
.../SDF?SESSION NUMBER=0&SHORT _DESCRIPTION-O--c°ntains+the+phrase&Sh°rt-De~/16/00
Community Center Concept -
via Paul Motin, Council Member
Drawing is clearly not to scale. Just a general concept drawing.
Would include:
a. Area for school / community purposes, including ECFE, Community Ed, Community
Rec, Special Education, Arts Council, Sr. Center, etc.
b. Combined Theater / Large Meeting Room and multi-function space;
c. Aquatic area, with Olympic type swimming pool for year-round activities (i.e.,
community ed, school swim teams and classes, open swim). Walls on two sides
would have doors similar to large automatic garage doors. Could be kept closed in
cold or poor weather, opened on warm, good days. Additional facilities, such as
seasonal pool, volleyball courts, little tykes pool, whirlpool, concession stand and
picnic areas (such additional areas could always be done in phases). Outdoor aquatic
area to be completely fenced, with "quality" trees placed in picnic area.
d. Additional area around the site for expansion (both of meeting area and aquatic area).
Either joint ownership with School District or City-owned with long term lease to District.
Arts Council (or other philanthropic organizations) to raise capital for arts / theater space.
Benefits to multi-purpose facility include:
a. Shared costs between City, School District and Arts (even if City pays, revenue is
generated by leasing);
b. Meet multiple needs of school, business and community;
c. Parents and kids can both use the facility at the same time, but for different purposes;
d. Year round and day round usage of facility. One parking area for all. One large site
and location, rather than spreading locations all over the city.
Potential locations:
a. Morrell / Houlton sites
i. Pros: location - central to entire city and district, close to schools, park area
(especially good if school uses for swim classes and teams)
cleanup of site;
-1-
bo
do
possible sharing of parking area for high school (if School District
provides crossover / more safety areas);
with existing park, schools and Boys & Girls Club, already viewed as
the community area;
Quieter facility which is more agreeable to local residents.
ii. Cons: cost / environmental cleanup?
Congestion (maybe not - facility would likely be busiest when schools
are not in session (evening, weekends, summer));
Loss of other commercial / industrial potential
Lake Orono - City space
i. Pros: cost - land is already owned by City; close proximity to City Hall
(though why is this deemed desirable?);
ii. Cons: not centrally located. Difficult for most residents to get to without
transportation;
limits future City Hall expansion;
placing the aquatic center right next to what is now the only other
swimming facility;
disturbing the natural setting of the area.
County Road 12 and Fillmore
i. Pros: Likely to be less costly than Morrell site;
Lots of space for expansion;
School District has been discussing possible eastern Elk River site for
elementary school. (With Trott Brook Farms, the future Rick Foster
development (to the east of Trott Brook), likely residential
development of property to the south and southwest, including
extension of sewer and water along 175% this seems like a very good
location for the school);
Bike trail already planned for expansion of County Road 12;
Cons: Location - not central to City (but better than Lake Orono)
Other Sites ???
-2-
]
I ~ao~... I, VACL I$
Proposed Family Center
Spaces Available for Scheduling
Type of space
Approximate size
1 banquet/reception 20,000 sf
5 adult meeting/class rooms 450 sf each
large adult meeting room
2 multipurpose rooms 2000 sf each
1 1100 sf
1 3000 sf
1 400?
5-7 1100 sf each
1-3 180 sf each
indoor play area
kitchen facility
children's rooms
private conference rooms
Possible uses
weddings, funerals, annual meetings, reunions, etc.
enrichment classes, training, meetings
large workshops, training, meetings
large motor activities for child & adult, family activities, etc.
daytime play area for on-site programs, also events, parties, etc.
daily food prep or snacks, banquets, meetings, classes
ECFE, ECSE, EdVenture Club, classes, community groups
staff, community members
Notes:
· May want to consider using dividing walls for some of the adult meeting spaces, multipurpose, and/or banquet room
· Any group serving alcohol would need to be scheduled into the banquet space, which would be considered "city" space
· Leave room to grow .... our needs at CE/ECFE/ECSE have changed significantly since first projected in 1997
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) YEAR . 1999 SUMMARY
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
School Street Improvement Project
Ice Arena/School Parking Lot
Highway 169 Pedestrian Bridge
Highway 10/1718t Avenue Signal
East Elk River Trunk Sewer and Water Project
(Eas
t Elk River Tyler Street ~d Sto~ Sewer
EDA Business Park Land Acquisition
~aste Water Treatment Pl~t Cl~ifier
~*X~mprovement
lee ~ena and Outside ~aed~ms Bleachers
Improvement~¢o~ '> ~
gapital Improvement Pro~ (CIP) Year - 1999
COST AND FINANCING
$308,000 - $169,000 in assessments; $139,000 from city
MSA funds
$39,000 - from city street reserve (as city participation to
schools project)
$500,000 - $400,000 paid by federal government;
$100,000 from city MSA funds
$70,000 - city MSA fund (second half of total project,
which was started in 1998)
$6.46 million - $4.83 million in assessments; $630,000
from TIF 19; $800,000 from Municipal Utilities;
$202,000 from city WWTP fund
$5 million - $2.85 million federal/state funding; $866,000
city MSA funds; $775,000 TIF 19; $350,000 from
developers; $159,000 from city SWM fund
$604,000 - paid by city development fund (to be repaid
over 14 years with TIF 19)
$80,000 - paid by WWTP funds
$50,000 - paid by either NSP or city capital projects
reserve
Page i of 2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Improvement of Railroad Trail
Highway 10 (Cretex) Trail
Neighborhood Park and Trail Improvements
~.~ipment/Vehicles/Trucks
COST AND FINANCING
$98,000 - $49,000 paid with state grant; $30,000 paid
from city park dedication funds; $19,000 paid from city
equipment/infrastructure reserve
$30,000 - city capital projects reserve
$57,000 - paid by city park dedication funds
$413,000 - $61,000 from general fund budget (taxes);
$162,000 from equipment certificates (taxes); $190,000
Developer Initiated Projects:
f] // Trott Brook Farms Development
Elk River Crossing (Commercial and
Business Park)
from city equipment reserve
100 percent financed by developer and TIF 19
100 percent financed by developer
Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Year - 1999
Page 2 of 2
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PRO~ LAM (CIP) YEAR. 2000 SUMMARY
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Complete East Elk River Trunk Sewer and Water
Project
Complete East Elk River Tyler Street and Storm
Sewer Project
/Dodge Avenue and 5th Street
vans Avenue
175th Avenue Improvement from Tyler Street to
Fillmore Street
Highland Road Sidewalk Improve~nent Project
City Street Overlay Program
7-. 1I
Fire Station #2 Land ~ ~'l,.c ~ f~/' ~d
County goad 77 Trail ~ ~
Neighborhood Park and Trail Improvements
Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Year - 2000
COST AND FINANCING
SEE 1999 CIP NARRATIVE
SEE 1999 CIP NARRATIVE
$160,000 - $60,000 assessed to benefited property
owners; $100,000 from the city street and capital
projects reserves
$65,000 - $25,000 assessed to benefited property
owners; $40,000 from city street reserve
$65,000 - $25,000 assessed to benefited property
owners; $40,000 from city street reserve
$450,000 - $360,000 from state funds; $90,000 from city
capital projects reserve (another $15,000 from city
reserves may be needed for easement acquisition)
$60,000 - from city street reserve
$170,000 - 100 percent assessed to benefited property
owners
?? - NSP reserve
$55,000 - capital projects reserve
$50,000 - park dedication funds
Page 1 of 2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Equipment/Vehicles/Trucks
Developer Initiated Projects:
~jy Hillside 8th.
~\ Nord Property West of County Road I
COST AND FINANCING
$500,000 - $120,000 from the general fund budget
(taxes); $220,000 equipment certificates (taxes);
$160,000 equipment reserve
100 percent financed by developers
100 percent financed by developers
Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Year - 2000
Page 2 of 2
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PRO iAM (CIP) YEAR . 2001 SUMMARY
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Business Center Drive Extension/Wac&Highway
10 Signal and North Frontage Road Improvement
Project
County - County Road 12 Project
County - County Road 1/77 Signal (this is a city
goal and has yet to be programmed by the county)
County - Begin County Road 33 and 77
Intersection Project (this is a city goal and is not
in the county program)
Central Business District Sidewalk Replacement
-~outh Athletic Complex Phase II '
Start City Pavement Replacement Program
hase I)
Upgrade of Ditch 28 ~ b0 ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ e ~
Water Treatment Improvement at Ice Arena
Neighborhood Park and Trail Improvements
COST AND FINANCING
$1.7 million - $800,000 assessed to benefited property
owners; $300,000 from state funds; $600,000 from a
combination of the city MSA fund and the capital
projects and street reserves
$1.2 million - $1 million county funded; $200,000 city
funded from TIF 19
$140,000 - $105,000 county financed; $35,000 from city
capital projects reserve
$500,000 - 100 percent county financed with some
assistance anticipated from the gravel mining
operations
$120,000 - city NSP reserve
$150,000 - $100,000 park dedication funds; $50,000
from NSP reserve (hopefully repaid by youth softball
and baseball organizations)
$800,000 - $400,000 assessed to benefited property
owners; $200,000 capital outlay tax levy; $200,000
street reserves
$100,000 - city surface water management reserve
$20,000 - equipment certificates (taxes)
$45,000 - park dedication funds
Capital Improyement Program (CIP) Year - 2001
Page 1 of 2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Equipment, Vehicles, Trucks
Developer Initiated Projects
COST AND FINANCING
$500,000 - $140,000 general fund budget (taxes);
$220,000 equipment certificates (taxes); $140,000
equipment reserve
100 percent developer financed
Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Year - 2001
Page 2 of 2
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) YEAR - 2002 SUMMARY
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Complete Business Center Drive]Waco Project
Continue Pavement Replacement Program
(Phase 1)
~/ Begin City Expansion Project
Hall
(.~) \ ~Northstar Corridor Depot/Parking Lot Project
City Overlay Program
County Road 44 Trail
School/City Recreation Fields and Land
Neighborhood Park and Trail Improvements
EquipmentNehiclesfrrucks
Developer Initiated Projects
COST AND FINANCING
SEE 2001 CIP NARRATIVE
SEE 2001 CIP NARRATIVE
$2 million - government building reserve and
contribution from city cash flow reserve
???
$200,000 - 100 percent assessed out to benefited
property owners
$60,000 - city street reserve
??? (even if no joint project takes place, the city will
need to spend about $150,000 from the NSP reserve for
additional open space for recreational fields. Hopefully
this will be outside the city sewer and water district)
$50,000 - park dedication funds
$500,000 - $140,000 general fund budget (taxes);
$220,000 equipment certificates (taxes); $140,000
equipment reserve
100 percent financed by developer
Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Year - 2002
Page 1 of 1
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) YEAR
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Complete City Hall Expansion Project
Start Pavement Replacement Program (Phase II)
County Road 1/Proctor Avenue at Highway 10
Intersection Improvement
Southeast Water Tower and Well
Community Center
Westbound Liquor Store
Ice Arena Bleachers
Neighborhood Park and Trail Improvements
Equipment/Vehicles/Trucks
Developer Initiated Projects
- 2003 SUMMARY
COST AND FINANCING
SEE 2002 CIP NARRATIVE
$800,000 - $400,000 assessed to benefited property
owners; $200,000 capital outlay tax levy; $200,000
street reserves
$150,000 - $40,000 county; $40,000 developer; $70,000
city street reserve
$1.5 million - municipal utilities funded
$4 million - public referendum bond (THIS PROJECT
WILL ONLY PROCEED IF THE REFERENDUM IS
SUCCESSFUL IN NOVEMBER 2002)
$1.5 million - liquor store revenue bonds
$80,000 - NSP reserve
$60,000 - park dedication funds
$550,000 - $150,000 general fund budget (taxes);
$250,000 equipment certificates (taxes); $150,000
equipment reserve
100 percent financed by developer
Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Year - 2003
Page 1 of 1
NON PROGRAMMED PROJECTS
DP, AFl
STREETS:
Railroad Drive and 3~ Street Reconstruction
Island View Drive
198m Avenue
Elk River Bridge
3'a Street a~,d Gates Avenue Intersection
Old Liquor Store ~Road'
Alley Improvements
Highway 10 and Main Street Reconstruction
Additional Lanes on County Road i and Proctor Avenue at Highway 10
Old Township Roads:
225m Reconstruction
213m ReconstrUction
Cleveland Avenue Improvements
Edison Avenue Improvements
Jarvis Street from 221st to 229m
Jarvis Street and 156m Avenue, North of Highway 10
Long Range Transportation Plan Routes:
193'a Avenue
201,t Avenue
County Road 31 Extension
Fillmore Street Extension
PARK & RECREATION:
Orono Park West Expansion
Downtown Trail (Riverwalk)
Riverbank Protection Program
Aquatic Center
BUILDINGS:
Community Center
Senior Center
Fire Department Station #2
Police Gun Range
All of the listed non-programmed projects have been previously discussed by
the City Council at one time or another. Some of these projects are very high
priorities, but no funds are currently available to finance the project. The
projects listed can, and most likely will, change in scope from the initial
discussions depending on the perceived need for the project, the priorities of
the City Council, and the amount of funds available. It is anticipated that as
a project gets closer to being undertaken, it would be moved to a specific CIP
year during the annual update of the CIP. Nonetheless, any of the projects
listed in the non-programmed category could happen in any year based on
action by the City Council.
It should be noted that most of the street projects are in competition for the
same source of funds. These sources include MSA funds, for those projects
that meet its eligibility criteria, the street reserves, and the capital projects
reserves. Additionally, the city will have to consider public referendum-voter
approved bonds for some of the major buildings listed in this non-
programmed category.
It should also be noted that some of the non-programmed projects are very
long range in nature and it may be many years before they are fmanceable
and undertaken.