3.0. SR 02-19-1996!ty of
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Mayor & City Council~ ~/1~ //
Pat Klaers, City Ad~~
February 19, 1996 ~]'/2
SUBJECT: Capital Improvement Program
At the last Capital Improvement Program (CIP) meeting on 1/15/96, a
number of large special projects were reviewed and discussed. Additionally,
the list of street projects that are anticipated to happen in the near future
was also reviewed and discussed. With both the street projects and the
special projects, the determination of what can be accomplished, and when, is
based on City Council priorities and the availability of funds. Availability of
funds is the most important consideration as the street projects are in
competition for the same three or four sources of funding and the special
projects are also in competition for three or four different funding sources.
In February, 1995, a thirteen page update was provided on the status of city
finances as it relates to capital improvements. That information is not yet
updated for distribution in 1996, but will be available soon. Additionally it
should be noted that a CIP document, similar to the one completed in 1994,
will be put together for City Council consideration this spring. This plan is
needed because it is a required back up document when the city sells bonds,
and we are going to sell bonds this spring for the Wastewater Treatment
Plant project that has been authorized.
In spite of the CIP finances not being ready for distribution, it appears that
the agenda for the special meeting on February 19, 1996, is full. After the
joint meeting with the Planning Commission, the following CIP topics are
scheduled to be reviewed and discussed:
· Liquor Store annual report and CIP Plan for 1996-2000
· Ice Arena project update
· Review the Surface Water Management (SWM) Plan for western
Elk River
· Discussion on east Elk River public improvement project
· County Road 1 update
· Riverview Heights neighborhood meeting summary
· Cliff Lundberg request for Community Center Task Force
· Update on status of SWM Fund.
13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 · (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425
CIP Memo
February 19, 1996
Page 2
Liquor Store
Liquor Store Manager Fritz Dolejs will be in attendance at this meeting to
present his 1995 Annual Report. Additionally, Fritz will be happy to discuss
with the City Council his vision and thoughts on the future of the liquor
industry in Elk River. As discussed at the last CIP meeting, the City Council
decides when and if the city constructs a new Northbound liquor store and
when, if, and where the city buys land for a Westbound liquor store. At this
time it is staffs recommendation that we pursue a Westbound liquor store
site in 1996 and that we prepare plans for the construction of a new
Northbound liquor store in 1996. The actual construction of a new
Northbound liquor store is not proposed for 1996, and is subject to ongoing
evaluation based on the activities surrounding the existing Northbound
liquor store and the activities surrounding the future Northbound liquor
store site.
At this time, it is staffs recommendation that the highest priority is the
purchase of the Westbound liquor store site. A second liquor store will
definitely be needed in the future of Elk River, and it is appropriate to get the
best site possible at this time before all the appropriate sites for this activity
are gone. This site selection issue for a second liquor store is not a new topic
and, in fact, has been discussed for the past few years. Please see the
attached October 7, 1991, memo to the Mayor and City Council from the
liquor store manager on this topic. Based on City Council conversations that
started over four years ago, staff has evaluated a number of sites on the
north side of Highway 10 from UPA to the west. This evaluation includes the
old creamery site, the northwest and northeast corners of Highway 10 and
Proctor, the northeast corner of Upland Avenue and Highway 10 and the
northwest corner of Joplin Street and Highway 10. A summary of the issues
regarding the northwest corner of Highway 10 and Proctor Avenue is
attached. At this time staff is excited about the possible purchase of an
appropriately sized parcel of land at the northwest corner of Highway 10 and
Joplin Street and would like more formal Council direction in this regard.
Regarding the future Northbound liquor store in the northeast corner of
Highway 169 and 193rd Avenue, staff would like to have plans done for this
building project. We want plans completed so that when the time is
appropriate to build, based on activities and funding, the city will not lose
much start up time before actual construction can begin. The first step in
this process is to obtain a quote for architectural services from a firm that
has extensive experience in the construction of municipal liquor stores. Fritz,
being active in the liquor industry, has a number of firms he would like to get
quotes from rather than going out for the request for proposal process. The
CIP Memo Page 3
February 19, 1996
hiring of an architect is completely up to the City Council and no formal
process is required. Once a quote for services is obtained, we would request
that an architect be hired and that the first stages of the project be
completed. By the first stages I mean the site layout and actual preliminary
drawings for the liquor store concept. (This is much like where we are at now
with the ice arena project - before design documents are put together).
The actual construction of the new Northbound liquor store is mainly driven
by funding and then driven by activity surrounding the two liquor store sites
along Highway 169. Some liquor store financial status information will be
offered on Monday evening by Assistant City Administrator Lori Johnson. It
is a concern of the city to go into debt for the construction of the second liquor
store and we would like to have this project as fully funded as possible before
we begin. If the project is not fully funded, it would make the use of liquor
store funds for other special projects very difficult. In the past, as the
Council knows, we have not only used liquor store funds annually to offset
the general tax levy, but have also used funds for such projects as the fire
department equipment van, the fire department building expansion, the
street loader, and the Industrial Park purchase.
Ice Arena Project Update
After meetings of the Ice Arena Task Force on February 7th and 14th, it
appears clear that the Task Force has a strong desire to move forward with
this project in 1996. This is in spite of the project not receiving Mighty Ducks
funding last year. Nonetheless, the Task Force is optimistic that it will
receive a Mighty Ducks grant in 1996 if the Legislature approves more
money. The sports commission has advised the city that it does fund projects
that are under construction and there will definitely be more than
$250,000.00 worth of expenses that are not in the project that should be
added and could be financed with this Mighty Ducks money.
The project is being down sized to approximately 1,500 seats. Without any
sales tax, the estimate for this project is slightly under $2.7 million. There
appears to be slightly more than $2.35 million available for the project, so
there is still a gap between available revenues and the cost estimate of the
project. The Task Force believes that the cost of the project will be closer to
$2.5 million when additional items that can be supplied with volunteer labor
and equipment are removed from the bid package and also in the anticipation
of a good bidding environment. If this does take place, then the remaining
challenge to finance the construction will be to get the revenues up to the
$2.5 million range.
CIP Memo Page 4
February 19, 1996
The construction documents that are now needed in order to go out for bids
make up about 40 percent of the architectural fees. Youth Hockey has
committed money to this project and, in fact, have paid $15,000.00 to the city
for the Marquette Financial Feasibility Study. Staff will be sending Youth
Hockey a letter requesting additional funds to help finance the architectural
work so that our commitment, in case the project doesn't go forward, is more
equally shared on a 50/50 basis.
It is appropriate to move forward with this project in order to go out for bids
for two reasons:
If this facility is going to be open next winter, it must move forward
in a timely fashion, which means doing the construction documents
now and going out for bids in the near future.
If this project is not going to happen based on the cost of the project
and the available funds for the project, then we need specific bids to
point to as the reason and not just use cost estimates as a reason to
not proceed.
While the construction documents are being prepared, staff still needs to
work with Youth Hockey to finalize the financial framework of the arena
operation in order to sell bonds. Also, the city still needs to do some legal
work with the school and Youth Hockey prior to the facility being under
construction.
At the 2-19-96 City Council meeting, staff needs direction on two issues:
To receive approval to move forward with the construction
documents so that the city can go out for bids on this project.
To receive council approval that it will donate certain items for this
future city ice arena facility in order to help make it happen from a
financial point of view.
It should be noted that this will be a city facility and should be treated much
like how the city provided assistance for the City Hall. For the ice arena
project the city is being requested to forgive the building permit fees and the
sewer availability charge, have the street crew do some work with the
striping of the parking lot and the installation of handicapped accessibility
signs, and also have the city finance the extension of the sanitary sewer
service line to the north. The Utilities Commission has also committed to
finance a water line going around the building and connecting to the north,
provided that the city gets the easement for this connection at Lowell Circle,
and will be requested to donate the WAC fee.
CIP Memo
February 19, 1996
Surface Water Management Plan for Western Elk River
Page 5
The western Elk River Surface Water Management Plan (SWM) was
completed by the city engineering firm in November, 1995. This report is
basically technical information. Copies of the document are available for City
Council review if desired. The city engineer is scheduled to provide the
Council with a brief overview of this plan and how the plan will be used to
manage surface water as development takes place. This document was put
together to compliment the general overall plan that was completed as a
concept in the early 1990's. This plan provides the details of how surface
water can be managed when construction activities take place. This plan is
necessary in order to avoid the type of debate that took place in 1994 with the
development of the Lakoduk, Kincannon, and Moldenhauer farms.
This type of detailed SWM plan will also be needed for east Elk River prior to
development taking place.
East Elk River Public Improvement Project
At the last CIP meeting on 1/15/96, the Council discussed getting a quote
from Patchin and Associates for a more thorough appraisal report regarding
the benefit of trunk sewer and water to eastern Elk River. The Council also
requested a quote from the city engineer to complete topography work in
order to better determine trunk utility alignments and surface water
management needs. This quote from the city engineer was reviewed a few
weeks ago and should again be discussed at this meeting.
At the meeting on Monday, 2/19/96, Assistant City Administrator Lori
Johnson will have some information on the status of the east Elk River
project fund. The city has invested some funds in the preliminary work to
determine the feasibility of this large public improvement project. We are
not done accumulating planning expenses for the east Elk River area and we
will have to recapture our investment or expenses as the area develops and
projects are ordered.
Regarding the quote from the city engineer for topographical work, this
information will ultimately be necessary if a project is going to happen. If we
wait until a project is ordered before we authorize this work, we will be
behind schedule and may not catch up in order to have the information
available for the improvement project. Accordingly, even though it is
relatively expensive, it is recommended that this expenditure be authorized
as it is believed that some projects will happen in the next few years and that
the information put together from this study will not be outdated and will
still be valid in five or ten years.
CIP Memo
February 19, 1996
Page 6
Attached for your review is a quote from Peter Patchin and Associates
regarding an appraisal to determine the benefit of trunk utilities to the
eastern part of Elk River. This is not a parcel by parcel appraisal, but a
quote for a much more detailed analysis of benefit to properties of various
zoning and land use classifications. This information as proposed from
Patchin and Associates, should be sufficient to determine benefit to various
types of properties and should be sufficient to get us through any public
hearing and ordering of a public improvement project. If we end up going to
court over the assessments of this project, then a more detailed, parcel by
parcel, appraisal will be necessary for the properties that are appealing the
assessment. This proposed work could be completed by April 29, 1996.
At the 1/15/96 meeting, the city engineer reviewed Options A-D. The Council
should note that we are not locked into any one of these options and that any
variation of these options can be looked at for a project area. At this time, no
project area is established. Also discussed on 1/15 was the merits of going
down Highway 10 or across Highway 169 with the project. It was clearly the
consensus of the Council that it desired the project to go across Highway 169
rather than down Highway 10. Also discussed on 1/15 was the merits of the
city pushing this project versus developers pulling this project across
Highway 169. Again, it was clearly the desire of the Council to have this
project developer initiated. Nonetheless, some Councilmember also
expressed a desire to get information about this project public and to go
through a public hearing on some type of public improvement proposal. It is
suggested that we not go through the public hearing until we get the Patchin
appraisal authorized and completed so that firm maximum assessment
amounts can be presented and discussed by the public.
County Road I Update
County Engineer Dave Schwarting has a scheduling problem and cannot
attend this meeting as originally planned. Dave will make a presentation on
this project to the City Council on February 26, 1996. Terry Maurer will be
in attendance at this Council meeting.
Riverview Heights
Attached for your information is a summary of the Riverview Heights
information meeting that was held on 2/8/96. This neighborhood meeting
was conducted in order to provide information to residents regarding the
various aspects of a public improvement project. The summary from the city
engineer is a good starting point for discussion at this 2/19/96 meeting.
CIP Memo
February 19, 1996
Community Center Task Force Letter
Page 7
Attached for your review is a letter from Cliff Lundberg regarding his
presentation to the City Council and EDA last December. This presentation
related to a multi-use auditorium facility. As a follow up to this presentation,
Mr. Lundberg has submitted the 1/10/96 letter requesting the city to renew
the existence of the Elk River Community Center Task Force.
With all due respect to this request, I believe that we should respectfully
decline at this time. Currently, our agenda is rather full and I don't know
that the city staff could do justice to another public facilities task force.
Additionally, the funding for such a facility is very questionable when looking
at a public referendum type of issue, especially when considering the needs of
the School District.
Update on Status of Surface Water Management Fund
The Surface Water Management (SWM) projects that were authorized in
1994 came in slightly over budget. This is due to expansions of the projects
and the extra attention that the project/city engineer provided to the affected
property owners. Additionally, the cost to the city for the western area SWM
project was greater than anticipated. The city really needs to reevaluate its
impact fees on developers for the benefit they are receiving for the SWM
infrastructure. Our impact fees for SWM are far lower than other developing
communities and, consequently, our taxpayers are picking up the balance of
this benefit while the developers are making the profit.
The SWM fund has been highlighted as a major concern ever since projects
began a few years ago and the funding mechanism was put in place. It is
very unlikely that any projects of significance can be undertaken in the next
few years until the fund catches up and we can afford more projects.
One way that this project fund may be helped is through using TIF No. 2
(Guardian Angels) for the Main Street/Evans Avenue project. As the Council
may recall, this TIF project was amended last December in order to allow use
of excess funds for other activities including this drainage project. The down
side of using the funds for this project is that fewer funds are available for
economic development activities. As discussed at the 2/12 economic
development worksession, there are a lot of expensive projects out there
including the riverwalk, the King and Main intersection, the downtown
sidewalks, the purchase of industrial or business park land, and the east Elk
River public improvement project, and a very limited amount of funds are
available for these activities. Use of TIF No. 2 for the Main and Evans
drainage project would affect the amount of money available for other
CIP Memo Page 8
February 19, 1996
activities. This whole issue of funding SWM projects and also funding
economic development projects with TIF funds can be discussed on 2/19/96 if
time allows.
s:\council\cip2-19.doc
CITY OF ELK RIVER
MUNICIPAL LIQUOR STORE
1995 ANNUAL REPORT
NORTHBOUND LIQUOR STAFF
.Staff:
Presently, Northbound has 4 full time and 7 part time employees.
Name
Fritz Dolejs
Mike Donais
Steve Tillman
Brent Behrns
Kris Hanson
Jean Sorenson
JoAnn Warren
Chris Schmidt
Chad Hinson
Mike VanGuilder
John Ebertowski
Date of Employment
June, 1984
September, 1976
May, 1984
May, 1984
May, 1986
September, 1988
May, 1990
March, 1991
April, 1992
May, 1993
August, 1995
2
OVERVIEW
Northbound set a new sales record in 1995 with sales totaling $2,420,704. An
increase of $86,047 over 1994.
Statewide municipal liquor stores had a sales increase in 1994 of $4.7 million
compared to a decrease in sales in 1993 of $1.4 million.
In 1994, seven cities opted to discontinue operations. Thirty-nine cities in
Minnesota reported net losses in 1994. (All are located in Greater Minnesota)
Northbound has continued senior citizen discounts twice a month. Northbound
also has continued its "supershot of the month" offering designated beer at a
marginal mark-up the entire month to go along with our monthly "cheapshot"
calendar.
1995 SALES AND PROFIT ANAL YSIS COMPARED TO 1994
Gross Sales
Gross Profit
Operating Expenses
Net Profit
Additional Income
(interest & misc.)
Total Net Profit
1995 !994
$2,420,704 $2,334,657
562,608 23.24% 545,493
$ 274,968 11.36% 262,856
287,640 11.88% $ 282,637
$ 30,653 $ 43,557
23.37%
11.26%
12.11%
$ 318.293 13.15% $ 326,194 13.97%
Comments:
Total labor costs and benefits 8.07% in relation to sales.
Sales increase of $86,047 over '1994.
- Operating expense includes depreciation of $'19,93'1
- Add this figure into net profit of $287,640 giving the city a net profit of
$307,571 in real dollars. This is prior to interest income ($36,146)
which I do not consider a part of true operating income.
- Retained earnings as of December 3'1, '1995, of $1,38'1,705
4
STATE AUDITORS REPORT FOR 1993
The following information is pertinent to you so you can judge how Nodhbound is doing compared to other municipal liquor
stores. Bear in mind that this is the 1994 report. The 1995 report will not be available until early 1997.
TOP 12 OFF-SALE LIQUOR STORES FOR 1994
Rank _b_y .... Rank by # of Cost of Gross % Gross Profit % of Expenses % of Net Profit
Sales - 93 Sales - 94 City Stores Population Sales Sales Profit relation/sales Expenses relation/sales Net Profit relation/sales
1 1 Richfield 3 35,261 6,838,300 5,333,174 1,505,126 22.00% 926,487 13.55% 578,639 8.46%
2 2 Edina 3 46,841 5,821,688 4,393,544 1,428,144 24.50% 839,710 14.42% 588,434 10.11%
3 3 Columbia Heights 2 18,882 5,517,257 4,475,098 1,042,159 18.90% 788,424 14.29% 253,735 0.05%
4 5 Eden Prairie 3 44,189 4,279,979 3,238,548 1,041,431 24.30% 714,774 16.70% 326,657 0.08%
5 4 Lakeville 3 32,978 4,48__O_, 554 3,369,582 1,110,972 24.80% 733,308 16.36% 377,664 0.08%
6 6 Apple Valley 2 39,188 3,498,888 2,608,954 889,934 25.40% 721,844 20.63% 168,090 0.05%
7 7 Fridley 2 28,104 3,083,966 2,486,129 597,837 19.40% 499,826 16.21% 98,Oll. 0.03%
8 8 Spring Lake Park 2 6,628 2,763,217 2,219,711 543,606 19.70% 401,741 14.54% 112,375 0.05%
9 9 ! Brooldyn Center 3 28,484 2,698,373 2,023,603 674,770 25.00% 526,645 19.52% 148,125 0.05%
10 11 Bk River - 1994 I 12,811 2,334,287 1,800,784 533,503 22.90% 266,204 11.40% 267,299 11.46%
Bk River - 1995 I 13,133 2,420,704 1,858,096 562,608 23.20% 274,968 11.36% 287,640 11.88%
12 14 Bemidji 2 11,494 2,351,828 1,762,424 589,404 25.10% 418,731 17.80% 170,673 0.07%
11 12 Anoka 2 17,509 2,314,068 1,792,226 521,842 22.60% 376,015 16.25% 145,827 0.06%
Statewide Averages for 98 Stores - 1994 23.40% 16.00% 7.40%
Average of the above stores excluding FIN, River 1.70%
I
Bk River 1995 23.20% 11.40% 11.88%
I
The above chart does not reflect non-operating income
Comments:
Nodhbound: Net Profit of 11.88% is the highest among the top 12 stores.
Operating Expenses of 11.36% is the lowest.
The above figures for Elk River do not reflect interest income ($36,146).
NORTHBOUND LIQUOR
STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES AND
CHANGES IN RETAINED EARNINGS
(UNAUDITED)
For Period Ended 12/31/95
Sales
Cost of Sales
Gross Profit
Operating Expenses
Salaries
Benefits
Operating supplies
Other charges & services
Contractual services
Depreciation
Total Operating Expenses
Operating Income
Other Revenue (Expenses)
Interest
Miscellaneous
Loss on disposal of equipment
Total Other Revenue
Income Before Transfers
Operating Transfers Out
Net Income
Retained Earnings, January 1
Retained Earnings, December 31
$2,420,704
1,858,096
562,608
161,783
33,590
8,482
40,785
10,397
19,931
274,968
287,640
36,146
637
(6,130)
30,653
318,293
(183,450)
134,843
1,246,862
1,381,705
23.24%
11.36%
11.88%
1.27%
5.57%
1994 REPORT
OFF SALE MUNICIPAL LIQUOR STORES # OF RANGE IN TOTAL
WITH TOTAL SALES BETWEEN STORES OPERATING EXPENSES
$ 40,000 AND $ 150,000 10' $ 7,724 TO $ 43,923
$ 150,001 AND $ 200,000 6 $ 38,193 TO $ 59,471
$ 200,001 AND $ 250,000 7 $ 37,627 TO $ 61,302
$ 250,001ANDS 350,000 4 $ 44,118TO $73,022
$ 350,001 ANDS 450,000 8 $ 68,987TO $102,052
$ 450,001ANDS 650,000 13 $ 83,314TO $116,506
$ 650,001 ANDS 950,000 11 $ 71,765TO $220,419
$ 950,001 AND $1,350,000 7 $132,826 TO $200~,310
$1,350,001 AND $2,000,000 13 $147,820 TO $318,266
$2,000,000 AND $3,000,000 6 $257,059 TO $526,645 *
$3,000,001 AND $6,900,000 7 $499,826 TO $926,487
*Northbound had operating expenses of $274,968 in 1995.
NORTHBOUND LIQUOR EXPENSES AND NET PROFIT
300,000,
O
C3 100,000.
OP INCOME
SOUR GRAPES:
Mystic Lake continues to operate an off-sale liquor store with no sales tax (.09%) being
charged to the purchaser.
A liquor tax is being proposed for the seven county metropolitan area to build a stadium
for the Twins. Should this pass during the 1996 Legislature, it will be voted on by the
people in the fall elections.
As of this date, I have not heard of any legislation being introduced regarding a one
grade of beer bill. (There would no longer be 3.2% beer and convenience and grocery
stores would possibly be allowed to sell strong beer).
According to the Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians, the Indian Gaming Industry is
now Minnesota's 5th largest industry.
Nationally, sales of all spirits continue to decrease, whereas wines continue to increase
in sales.
Northbound wrote off $965.21 of bad checks in 1995.
SWEET GRAPES:
A University of Minnesota study revealed only 9.8% of 18-20 year olds who drank
illegally obtained alcohol from a bar or liquor store. The rest came from other sources,
with 65% of them getting it from a friend 21 years of age or older.
1994 alcohol related fatalities were down 35% of overall traffic fatalities - the lowest in
ten years.
Former Minneapolis Police Chief Tony Bouza, who once called bars "scum", reportedly
has said if the Indians don't give the state 25% of gambling profits, the state should opt
for video in bars.
Northbound manufactures its own ice cubes for resale. In 1995, sales were 11,207
bags for a gross income of $11,365.
Northbound has a service charge of 1% to cash local payroll checks. In 1995, fees
collected amounted to $3,379.15. As of January 1, 1996, the fee was increased to 2%.
FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS:
Purchasing property on Highway 10 for a second liquor store when needed.
Monitor customer preferences, possibly rework/refine wine selections and micro brews.
New Northbound Store on Highway 169:
a) Profits will drop - until sales increase to cover additional expenses
b) Operating costs increase
c) More personnel on during shifts
d) Electricity, heat, cleaning
e) Parking lot maintenance
f) Garbage
g) New equipment needed:
1) Electric fork lift
2) Commercial vacuum
3) Cleaning service?
Elk River
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBSECT:
MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL
FRITZ DOLEJS, NORTHBOUND MANAGER
OCTOBER 7, !991
CONSIDERATION OF SECOND
LIQUOR STORE IN ELK RIVER'S FUTURE
POINTS TO CONSIDER
!. .08 National D.U.I. law.
2. Wine in grocery stores.
3. One grade of beer.
4. Consumption continues to decline.
5. What will Elk River's population be and which direction
will it grow in the next decade.
6. One liquor store can be profitable if it can serve 4,000
to 7,000 residents (Fritz's "rule of thumb").
7. Will Otsego issue other licenses (!01).
8. Location.
9. Will a second liquor store create enough profit to justify
the investment.
POSSIBLE LOCATIONS (You may have others).
Should the City decide that a second store will be justified,
the next question would be the location. Listed below are the
pros and cons of some possible sites:
Creamery Site
Pros
1
2
3
3
6
o
Highly visible.
Presently two entrances/exits to Highway 10.
Presently one entrance/exit to UPA Drive.
Close proximity to downtown business district.
30M.P.H.
Semaphore at intersection.
1990 traffic count was 20,200 per day (Northbound count
26,500 per day).
Ample parking.
City owns property.
Convenient to Otsego residents that shop our business area
(bridge).
Increase in traffic at Highway 10 and Main Street.
City could sell property and generate a profit.
Topography of property.
720 Dodge Avenue N.W., Elk River, Minnesota 55330 (612) 441-7420
Railroad.
As Elk River continues to grow, is this convenient to our
residents.
Would store generate enough profit to justify investment.
Proctor~v ~ ....... =~== and Highway 10
Pros
Less cross traffic.
Convenient to residential area.
Other retail business being
located in area.
developed and presently
COBS
2.
3.
4.
5.
Not directly accessible off Highway 10 (frontage road),.
Location not in prime retail area.
Residential area alone cannot support store.
Property would have to be purchased.
Would store generate enough profit to' justify investment.
Pros
Cons
3.
4.
5.
West of Bowling Alley
Creates no traffic problem.
Possible to lure other retail businesses to area.
Future residential development area?
Low population area.
Speed limit 55 M.P.H.
Limited number of retail stores presently in area.
No semaphore to slow traffic.
Would store generate enough profit to justify investment.
Pros
Cons
Feed Mill Area
Speed limit 30 M.P.H.
Close to semaphore.
Accessible off Highway 10.
Close to downtown business district.
Railroad.
Parking.
Limited to size of store because of size of property.
City would have to purchase property.
I have made some assumptions at this point (Not in stone!):
To be located north side of Highway 10 because of high
traffic count with travelers heading west.
Any other location off Highway 10 would not create enough
sales to justify the investment and would not be highly
profitable.
~ second store will decrease Northbound's sales (presently
we will do $2,000,000 in 1991) thus profit's will also
decrease.
A second store will increase present expenses:
a. Van to transfer products.
b. Employees.
c. For a period of time, liquor profits will be less due
to increased operating expenses.
Over the long term, profits will justify the investment.
SUGGESTION ~
Hire a professional firm to do a feasibility study as to when
and where a second store should be built or determine whether
the City should continue as it is presently operating.
~ty of
'ver
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
MEMORANDUM
Steve Ach
Scott Harlicke~''~
January 30, 1996
SUBJECT:
Placement of Liquor Store at the
Northwest Corner of Proctor Avenue
and Highway 10
Issue
The City is interested in the possibility of locating a municipal liquor store at
the northwest corner of Proctor and Highway 10. The site would have to be from
I 1/3 to I 1/2 acres in size. A preliminary review of the properties was done in
order to identify any glaring planning concerns.
Existing Conditions (Exhibit A)
The area under consideration is bounded on the west by Quinn Avenue, on the
east by Proctor Avenue, on the south by Sixth Street and on the north by
commercial and industrial uses. Sixth Street is currently used as a service road
for Highway 10 but its intersection with Proctor is to close to the highway for it
to function effectively as a service road.
The area under consideration is residential. The homes are generally older and
most appear to be in good condition. This is an isolated residential area with
Cretex and LeFebvre Transfer to the west and the Texaco convenience store on
the east. A CUP has been approved for a car wash, office space and a fast food
restaurant to the north of the convenience store. North of the residences is Houle
Oil, a carpet business and residence and small light manufacturing facility.
Analysis
Several different configurations were evaluated and in the end all of them had
planning concerns relating to access and property acquisition. The major
planning concern with locating any business at this location is access. Because of
the way that Sixth St., Proctor Ave. and Highway 10 intersect, there is no safe
and efficient means to provide access to a business located at the northwest
13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 · (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425
Placement of Liquor Store Page 2
January 30, 1996
corner of this intersection without realignment of the existing intersection.
Property acquisition is the other concern. Any development of this area will
require the removal of the residences and the relocation of the people living in
them. Depending on the amount of property needed, anywhere from five to ten
residences will have to be removed.
Because of the problem with access, property acquisition and the amount of
property needed, the possible configurations were narrowed down to two
different options.
Option I (Exhibit B)
This option would involve four lots fronting on Sixth Street between Quinn Ave.
and Proctor Ave. and one lot on Proctor. Five properties would have to be
acquired for a total of about 1.5 acres. The assessed value of these properties is
$345,700. It would also require the removal of five residences.
Access could be provided from Proctor and a second access could be provided
from Quinn. To reduce conflicting turning movements, the access on Proctor
should be aligned with the existing access to the Texaco station; however, this
would only allow stacking room for about six or seven cars on Proctor before the
access to the site would be blocked. This would not be an infrequent situation
given the fact that Proctor Avenue is a minor arterial road and a main access
point to Highway 10. A second access could be provided from Quinn Avenue.
Vehicles using this access would have to come from Sixth Street, gaining access
to Sixth Street near the existing entrance to Cretex.
Since there will be no residences fronting on Sixth Street, in order to keep from
increasing the traffic problems at the intersection of Highway 10 and Proctor,
Sixth Street should be blocked off from Quinn to Proctor. The old ROW could
then be incorporated as part of the developed parcel.
Option 2 (Exhibit C)
This option would involve three properties fronting on Proctor Avenue and two
properties on Sixth Street. Like option 1, the area under consideration comes to
about 1.5 acres with an assessed value of $338,000. It would require the
removal of five residences.
With this option two driveways would be provided from Proctor. As in option 1,
in order to limit the number of conflicting turning movements, one access would
line up with the existing access to the Texaco station There would also be the
same problem with cars stacking up on Proctor and blocking the entrance. A
second access could be provided further north on Proctor that would not be
s:XplanningXscott\liquor.doc
Placement of Liquor Store Page 3
January 30, 1996
blocked by cars stopping at the Highway 10 traffic light. However, it would
introduce another set of turning movements that could conflict with the access to
the approved commercial project north of the Texaco station. Because the access
to the approved project on the east side of Proctor is to far north, it would not be
possible to align a second access with the one approved across the street.
Introducing a third non-aligned access on this arterial road would create
additional congestion.
In order to reduce the congestion at the intersection of Highway 10 and Proctor,
Sixth Street should be blocked off from Proctor west about 180 feet. This would
allow the remaining two residences on Sixth Street to access their properties and
would enable a portion of the old ROW to be incorporated into the project site.
Summa~
Incremental commercial development of the area between Proctor Avenue and
Quinn Avenue faces major problems no matter how it is done. Because of the
current street layout, the problem of providing safe and efficient access will be
difficult to address with incremental development. There is also the issue of the
remaining residences. Any partial development of the area will adversely impact
those residences that were not removed. Because of the concerns regarding
access and the impact on residences, it appears that the best way to redevelop
this area as commercial would be to do it with an overall plan for the entire
approximately six acres which includes the properties between Proctor and
Quinn, north of Sixth Street and south of the railroad tracks. This area has an
assessed value of $1,216,100. If the existing three industrial uses, adjacent to
the railroad tracks, are excluded from the redevelopment plans, the total area
involved is about five acres with an assessed value of $835,600.
s:\planningXscottXliquor.doc
8
120.00'
120.00'
AUDITOR'S
7
75-402-0070
SUB.
120.00'
7
75-40,.~--0070
TRACK
75- 40~-..00,50
5
180.00'
75-405-0071
75-405-0020
SUBDIVISION #3
6
9
~ 75-410- 07,*x~
8
W.H. HOULTON'$
75-410--0750
75- 4~ O- 07'Z5
1~4.25'
5
75-- ,I,10-- 07'ZO
5 12 1~ 10 g
°1
3 ADDITION
75- 410-0715
2
182. 91'
75-410-074.5 I 75-410-0740~75-'41°-0705 [~175_4~0_0710~ ~
102.00'
SIKTH STR~I~T
75-402-0045
AUDITOR'S
167.68'
8
75- 410- 08,50
168.13'
W.H. HOULTON'S
7
75-410-~
6
7~- 4.10-0840
176.04.'
87.54'
81.50'
4-I~ 7~-41(~
81.50'
STREET
8
120.00'
AUDITOr'S
75- 402- 007O
SUB.
120.00'
7
75-443.3--0070
'TRACK
75-.4433.-0071
"" 4
75--40,3-0020
180.00"
SUBDIVISION #3
1
7~-4~3---0010
6
75- 410-. 0735
8
W.H. HOULTON'S
75--410--0730
75--410--0725
184.25'
5
0
,3 ADDITION
75-410-'0715 t ~
10
!
~;IX'TH
75-402-00,I,3
AUDITOE'S ~
167.68'
8
75-410-0850
16&13'
W.H. HOULTON'S
7
75- 4.10-0850
7~-4.10-0~1~
176.t v
87.5.4,' 81.50'
75-41(
STREET
EXHIBIT D
PID #
75-403-0010
75-403-0020
75-403-0030
75-403-0040
75-403-0050
75-403-0060
75-403-0070
75-410-0705
75-410-0710
75-410-0715
75-410-0720
75-410-0725
75-410-0730
75-410-0735
75-410-0740
75-419-0745
Assessed value
$ 47,500
$ 53,900
$100,300
$ 22,700
$206,100
$ 58,800
$115,600
$ 88,600
$ 5o,3o0
$ 79,200
$ 58,000
$15,000
$138,700
$ 53,80o
$ 69,300
$ 58,300
COISI LTIM] i~NGIN~I~
] 326 Energy Park Drive
St. Paul, MN 55108
612-644-,4389
1-800-888-2923
Fax: 6] 2-644-94~6
CIVIL ENGINEERING:
ENVIRONMENTAL
MUNICIPAL
PLANNING
SOLID WASTE
STRUCTURAL
SURVEYING
TRAFFIC
TRANSPORTATION
ELECTRICAL/MECHANICAL
ENGINEERING:
HVAC
POWER DISTRIBUTION
5CADA
SYSTEM CONTROLS
OFFICES IN:
'~INNEAPOLIS
PRIOR LAKE
ST. PAUL
WASECA
January 25, 1996
File: 230-220-10
Mr. Pat Klaers
City Administrator
City of Elk River
13065 Orono Parkway
P.O. Box 490
Elk River, MN 55330
RE:
EAST TRUNK HIGHWAY 10 AERIAL TOPOGRAPHY AND
GROUND CONTROL
Dear Mr. Klaers:
As you requested, we have obtained a quote from Markhurd for 2-foot aerial topographic
mapping of the East Trunk Highway 10 area. The area involved is approximately 3,000
acres (4.7 square miles) and consists of the recently adopted urban service area. The
aerial topography would be based off of April 1993 photographs. I believe these are
accurate enough, since there have been no major changes in the last three years. They
would provide the aerial topographic maps on both an AutoCADD disk and a hard copy.
It would then be possible for us to manipulate the material on disk by either printing out
specific areas, enlarging or reducing it to any scale necessary.
In order to triangulate the aerial photographs, Markhurd indicated they would need
approximately 35 points located. Twenty-seven points would be for vertical elevation
only, and the remaining points would have to be located for both horizontal and vertical
locations.
The quote from Markhurd for their portion of the work is $17,850, and we have estimated
our portion at between $7,700 and $8,600. We have estimated this because we will not
know the exact location of these points until we give Markhurd the go-ahead and then they
will locate them on aerial photos for our survey crews to use in the field. It will take
approximately six to eight weeks from the time the work is authorized until the final
product is delivered.
If you have any questions or would like additional information, please call.
Sincerely,
MSA, CONSULTING ENGINEERS
T ~x"~/
erry J.~aurer, P.E.
TJM:tw
220-2503 .jan
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Peter J.
Patchin
& Associates, Inc.
Valuation Consultants
(612) 895-1205
101 West Burnsville Parkway, Suite 200, Burnsville, Minnesota 55337 FAX (612) 895-1521
February 9, 1996
City of Elk River
13065 Orono Parkway
P.O. Box 490
Elk River, MN 55330
ATTN: Mr. Patrick D. Klaers
RE:
Assessment Benefit Analysis
of Water And Sewer Trunk
I m provements
Dear Mr. Klaers:
At our request, we have prepared the following letter of engagement for the purpose of
rendering assessment benefit analysis of the proposed East Highway 10 public improvement
project for the City of Elk River.
Our understanding of the proposed improvement project is to eventually extend municipal
trunk utilities to the southern portion of Elk River. Initially, the area to be served by these
improvements include 400+ acres of commercial and industrial zoned land lying southerly
of the U.S. Highway 10 and U.S. Highway 169 interchange and northerly of 165th Avenue,
between the Mississippi River on the west and the Burlington Northern Railway on the east.
Included in this "Alternative A - Urban Service Area" is approximately 82 tax parcels,
consisting of both developed and undeveloped properties.
In addition to properties along the U.S. Highway 10 corridor, several commercial, industrial
and single family residential zoned properties in the vicinity of County Road 12 and County
Road 13 may incur trunk assessments in the more immediate future. This area will also be
analyzed.
Based on review of information provided by the City and our previous limited, restricted
appraisal, dated October 25, 1995, the cost to appraise the market value benefit of trunk
assessments of each individual property (tax parcel) within the proposed assessment area
would be at least $70,000. However, we would only recommend such a comprehensive
appraisal if every property owner within "Alternative A" were anticipated to appeal or contest
the proposed trunk area assessment. We do not believe this will be the case.
As an alternative to performing before and after value estimates of each tax parcel within the
study area, we would propose that a broader but more thorough appraisal be performed of
each property type (single family residential, commercial, and industrial) as to the market
benefit on a per acre basis. This type of assessment benefit analysis would be sufficient for
setting trunk assessments for the area as whole prior to public hearings.
While certain property owners may still appeal the proposed assessments, we believe the
preceding benefit appraisal on a per acre basis will be sufficient to satisfy most concerns of
those effected properties. The estimated cost of an assessment benefit per acre by property
type would be $13,000 to $15,000; substantially less than the individual property analysis of
$70,000 +.
It is important to note that anything less than a complete appraisal on each individual
property is not sufficient to defend the proposed trunk assessments, if appealed and court
proceedings are necessary. However, only those properties which appeal the benefit need to
be appraised both before and after the extension of municipal trunk improvements.
If you have any further questions or concerns, feel free to contact me at our convenience.
Thank you for considering our firm.
Respectfully submitted,
PETER J. PATCHIN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Jason L. Messner, MAI
JLM:prj
Peter J. Patchin & Associates, Inc.
CONSULTINGENGINEERS
1326 Energy Park Drive
St. Paul, MN 55108
612-644-4389
1-800-888-2923
Fax: 612-644-9446
February 14, 1996
File: 230-286-10
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Elk River
13065 Orono Parkway
P.O. Box 490
Elk River, MN 55330
RE:
RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS/GRANDVIEW 2ND ADDITION
INFORMATIONAL MEETING
Dear Council Members:
CIVIL ENGINEERING:
ENVIRONMENTAL
MUNICIPAL
P~NN!NG
SOLID WASTE
STRUC!URAL
SURVEY'~NG
TRAFFIC
TRANSPORTATION
ELECTRICAL/MECHANICAL
ENGINEERING:
HVAC
POWER DISTRIBUTION
SCADA
SYSTEM CONTROLS
As you are aware, the Administrator, Pat Klaers and I conducted an informational meeting
with the Riverview Heights/Grandview 2nd residents on February 8, 1996. Attached is
a hand-out that was provided at the meeting and a copy of the sign-up sheet. It appears
that approximately 27 households were represented there. A brief presentation was
provided along with approximately 45 minutes of questions and answers. A brief
summary of the topics covered by the questions is as follows:
There were a few questions about driveways and how either a newly constructed
street or an overlay project would tie into existing driveways. We indicated that
with a newly constructed street, the street would likely be lowered, and concrete
curb would be placed with a concrete driveway apron. If necessary, the driveway
would be cut-back and matched in as part of the project cost. If an overlay project
were undertaken, there would be no curb and gutter. Milling would be
accomplished where appropriate at flat driveways to ensure that there is no trapped
water within the driveway.
There was a question from a gentleman who said he owned four lots with his house
on one. He wondered how many assessments he would receive. We indicated
that, with either a street and utility project or an overlay project, it would be by
buildable unit. If his lots each had a separate PID number, he would get four
assessments. If they were combined under one PID number, he would receive only
one assessment.
OFFICES IN:
MINNEAPOLIS
PRIOR LAKE
ST. PAUL
WASECA
There was a question regarding the process and how the ultimate decision would
be made whether or not to proceed with public utilities and new streets. We
indicated that the ultimate decision is the City Council's, and that a 4/5 majority
of the Council is required to move forward with the project. The process of the
informational hearing is to provide background for the City Council to make such
a decision. We noted that the City's history has been that if the overwhelming
majority are not in favor of public improvements and there are no health or safety
issues, the City Council has historically gone with the wishes of the residents.
230/286-1205.feb An Equal Opportunity Employer
Honorable Mayor and City Council
February 14, 1996
Page Two
There was a question regarding the cost to the homeowner for running services
from the property line to their home, and the filling and abandonment of the
existing septic tank. A member of the audience volunteered that the utilities would
cost approximately $15 per foot for both sewer and water, and approximately
$150-$200 for abandonment of the existing septic tank. He also added that, in
most cases, connection to the municipal sewer would require breaking up of the
basement floor to make the connection.
There was a question as to the cost of a new on-site sewer system and new well.
Members of the audience volunteered that a new septic system would cost
approximately $3,500, and there was a range for a new well from $2,500-$4,000.
There was a question about the inflation factor and its effect on the cost of
construction if this project is postponed. We indicated that, in the past several
years, construction costs have been relatively stable, probably less than the rate of
inflation. However, this is not always true. At times, the rise in construction
costs is greater than the rate of inflation. It is dependent upon the economy of the
area and number of projects versus number of contractors.
There was a question about the SAC and WAC charges. We indicated that
currently City Ordinance requires hook-up within four years, and the SAC and
WAC charges are collectable at the time of hook-up. We indicated that the SAC
charge has not been raised in approximately nine years, and the WAC charge has
not been raised in three years. The City Council and the Utilities Commission do
from time-to-time look at these numbers and make adjustments to them. The
amount paid is the fee in effect at the time of hook-up.
There was a question about the need for City sewer and water, given the 1-acre
lots, and no apparent problems with on-site sewer. We compared the area to
Westwood and their ~fi-acre lots. They were having problems with on-site sewer
and were unable to rebuild them because of the lack of land. We indicated that 1-
acre lots are substantially larger than ~fi-acre, but, in reality, they are substantially
smaller than the current 2~/2-acre minimum for on-site sewer and water.
One individual suggested that the City take another survey after the informational
hearing, indicating that he felt there would be a more resounding negative response
to the question of "are you interested in City sewer and water?" We indicated that
would not likely be necessary after we reported the outcome of the information
meeting to the City Council.
230/286-1205. feb
Honorable Mayor and City Council
February 14, 1996
Page Three
The question was asked as to how an overlay project would be undertaken. We
indicated that Phil Hals, City Street Superintendent, would bring forward his
recommendations for an overlay project in the Spring of 1996. That would be
forwarded to the City Council. If they decided to proceed with Phil's
recommendations, there would be a public hearing and assessment hearing held,
prior to the work being done.
At the end of the meeting, Pat asked if there was anybody in favor of pursuing City sewer
and water. No one raised their hands. At that point, the meeting was closed. After the
close of the formal meeting, a few people came up and indicated that they were interested
in pursuing City sewer and water further, but felt that they were in the minority and did
not express this concern when the question was asked. Even given a small favorable
response from some, the overwhelming majority of people in attendance at the
informational meeting were not in favor of proceeding with City sewer and water.
If you have any questions regarding this information, please call.
Sincerely,
MSA, CONSULTING ENGINEERS
Terry J. M'fit~i'er, P.E.
TJM:pd
Attachments
230/286-1205.~b
~¥~'~'~River
RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS / GRANDVIEW SECOND
STREET AND UTILITY
INFORMATIONAL MEETING
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY
6:30 - 8:00 p.m.
8, 1996
Pa[ Klaers, City Adminis[ra[or
Terry Maurer, City Engineer
NAME:
o
o
o
o
RESULTS AS OF 02/03/96
59 of 89 Returned
RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS QUESTIONNAIRE
ADDRESS:
What year was your home built?
What is the condition of your septic system'?
Good 45 Fair 4 Showing signs of failure 6
Don't know 2
When was your septic system last upgraded?
More than 10 years 15 5-10 years 14
0-5 years 15
Don't know 11
What is the condition of your well?
Good 45 Fair 7 Showing signs of failure 0
Don't know 4
When was your well last upgraded?
More than 10 years 13 5-10 years 19
0-5 years 11
Don't know 12
How is the storm drainage in your neighborhood?
Adequate 50 Needs improvement 6
How is the condition of the streets in your neighborhood?
Adequate 15 Needs some work 21 Needs major work 22
Your street is scheduled for overlayment in 1996. The estimated cost is $1,750 to $2,000
per property. The useful life of an overlay is 8 to 12 years, during which utility
construction would likely not be considered. Would you prefer that utilities and new street
construction be looked at and discussed prior to considering an overlay project?
Consider utilities and new street prior to overlayment. 19
Just consider an overlay project. 34
Given the financial information contained on the attached sheet, are you in favor of a
neighborhood information meeting to further discuss this issue with the City?
Yes 37 No 19
Additional Comments:
If you have any questions or would like to talk to somebody directly, please contact Terry
Maurer, City Engineer, at 6444389.
230/286-2514.sep
HOUSE
~/w UN~
CURB & GUTTER
PROPOSED WATERMAIN
PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER
ER286EX
GRANDVIEW SECOND
.~ TYPICAL LOT t lk iver
ROW
16' .!__ 16'
~B618 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER
TACK2531 CoATTYPE 4lA BITUMINOUS WEAR COURSE
~ 2551 TYPE 51B BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE
CLASS ,5 AGGREGATE BASE
ROW
TYPICAL STREET SECTION
ER286EX
CONSULT]NC ENCINERS
RIVERVIEW HIEGHTS
GRANDVIEW SECOND
TYPICAL SECTION
Cit:y ~
Elk iver
'~ty of
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Mayor & City Council
~tb rK~~ sl 9~ i~9~d mi n i s~
SUBJECT: Other Business
There are at least six Other Business items that should be discussed at this
February 19, 1996, meeting.
Economic Development Coordinator Task Force
At the worksession on February 12, the Council approved the composition of
the Task Force. This composition is as follows: two Councilmembers; two
EDA members (non-Councilmembers); one HRA member; one Chamber
member; City Administrator; and Assistant City Administrator. The
individuals and alternates should be known by this 2/19/96 meeting and the
Council should formally appoint the membership of this Task Force. The
Task Force is scheduled to meet at 3:30 p.m. on 2/19/96 so an update of this
meeting to the Council is planned.
City Attorney Fees
The second Other Business item relates to a proposal for the city attorney
fees. Some Councilmembers have expressed their disagreement with the
philosophy of charging two different rates - one discounted rate for the city
and another standard rate for non-city activities. Although this is a practice
that takes place in other cities and one that benefits the city taxpayers, it is
up to the Council to change this past practice, if desired.
Before we discuss a fee structure adjustment, I want to say that I support an
increase in the retainer fee. As the Council knows from reviewing the city
attorney bills, we are consistently obtaining $5,000 to $6,000 worth of
services under the retainer contract. The retainer contract is for day-to-day
activities, attendance at meetings, and miscellaneous items. The more the
city grows, the more activities that need legal review and the more expenses
that are charged against the retainer. It is appropriate to increase the
current retainer amount.
13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 · (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425
Also, before we evaluate a different fee structure, it should be noted that I
support the existing practice of having a discounted city rate. The city should
do everything it can to get the best quality services at the best rates for its
taxpayers, but people that are making a profit off of the municipality through
the development process should pay the going rate for the high quality legal
service that is provided.
With that being said, I would also support changes to take place that would
equalize the rates in the $135 range for both the city and the non-city
expenses. At the city level, we will simply have to be much more careful
about getting legal advice on some issues that are outside of the retainer. To
pay for the increases in legal fees in 1996, we will have to use the Council
Contingency fund. Please see the attached memo from Peter Beck on
attorney fees.
Additionally, it should be noted that I and the rest of the staff strongly
support the full service law firm approach to doing business in Elk River and
support Peter Beck, with back up from Dave Sellergren, as our city attorney.
The old saying is "you get what you pay for" and I strongly believe that we
get excellent quality service for the fees we pay Doherty, Rumble & Butler.
Minnesota Sports Federation
The third item under Other Business that I would like to update the Council
on is the Minnesota Sports Federation (MSF) proposal. The Mayor and some
staff members met with MSF representatives on 2/2/96 to discuss their plans
for a new facility. Before I put anything in writing regarding our preferred
site for the location of this facility, I would like to update the Council on the
priorities of MSF and some of the benefits of having this facility located in
Elk River. Based on the need for this 48,000 square foot facility be on the
city sewer and water system, plus some other issues that we will review on
Monday, the city is really only looking at one site for the MSF facility. Please
see the attached material from Bill Rubin on this proposal.
All Terrain Vehicles
The fourth item for the Council under Other Business is a request to
reconsider the award of the all terrain vehicle (ATV) quotes that were
reviewed on February 5, 1996. As the Council may recall, there was some
discussion on this issue about how close the local quote was to the quote from
a vendor from outside of the city. After discussion on this item, the Council
passed a motion awarding the quote to the low firm.
Following the award of that quote to the low firm, the Chief of Police received
additional information regarding the quote from the local vendor. This
additional information is discussed in the attached memo from Tom. Per
consultation with the city attorney, it is legal to reevaluate the quotes and to
award the quote to the local firm if desired, based on additional information.
It is staffs recommendation that the City Council rescind its action of
February 5 and approve another motion awarding the bid to the local vendor.
St. Cloud Intern
The fifth item under Other Business relates to a graduate student who has
requested to do intern work for the city for 30-40 hours per week for two
months. This internship gives the student some work experience while the
city obtains some benefits or results from this work. Lori and Steve Ach are
meeting with this student on Friday and, if everything works out, I would
like to discuss hiring the intern for two months at minimum wage.
Lease Rental Agreement (Nord House)
A sixth item for the Council under Other Business is an update on the lease
agreement for the Nord house that the city owns by the golf course and
Woodland Trails Park. The city tries to keep this house occupied to help
monitor park activities. The current tenant will be leaving at the end of
February and the city has made arrangements for a new tenant on April 1,
1996. I would like to update the Council on this new tenant and on some
maintenance issues that should be accomplished in March plus some outside
maintenance issues that should be addressed this summer.
s:Xcouncil\othrbus.doc
Real Estate
Probate
Wills & Trusts
CLIFFORD C. LUNDBERG
Attorney At Law
400 Jackson Avenue
P. O. Box 326
Elk River, Minnesota 55330
Phone: (612) 441-1251
Fax: (612) 441-1258
Business Law
Taxes
Accounting
January l0, 1996
The Elk River City Council
13065 Orono Road
Elk River, MN 55330
RE: Community Center Task Force
Gentlemen:
As a follow-up to my meeting with you in December when I presented to you the Arts Council
art space plan for the Elk River Community Center, I wish to respectfully request that you
renew the existence of the Ell River Community Center Task Force with a view toward flushing
out a proposed floor plan for the Community Center and investigating methods of financing
construction and maintenance including the possibility of entering into a joint venture agreement
with the Elk River School District.
I know one person who, I believe, would like to sit on the task force is Murray Mills. He has
expressed a deep interest in this subject and, if you like, I would be able to provide you with
a list of other names of interested persons or you may wish to call together again the former task
force assembly..
Thank you.
Sincerely,
CCL:dmp
File:L89067
Real Property Law Specialist
Certified by the Minnesota State Bar Association
¥J ' River
PROJECT SCHEDULE
February 8, 1996
Informational Meeting
February 20, 1996 Report to City Council, order Feasibility Study
March 18, 1996
Present Feasibility Study, order Public Hearing
May 6, 1996
Hold Public Hearing, order preparation of Plans and
Specifications
June 3, 1996
City Council approve Plans and Specifications,
authorize the advertisement for bids
July 1, 1996
Present bids to City Council, order Assessment
Hearing
August 5, 1996
Hold Assessment Hearing, award contract to low
bidder
August 1996
Start construction
November 15, 1996
Utilities ready for connection, suspend construction for
winter
May 1997
First payment and real estate taxes
June 1997 Construction complete
iver
OVERLAY IMPROVEMENT
Life Cycle
Cost
Assessment Period
8-12 Years
$1,700 to $1,800/Lot
Five Years
TYPICAL ASSESSMENT
Project: Overlay Improvements
Interest Start Date:
Repayment Period:
Interest Rate:
01-Jan-97
5 Years
8.00%
Assessments:
Overlay Improvements
Quantity Unit Measure Unit Price
1.00 LS 1,750.00
Total Assessment
Amount
$1.750.00
$1,750.00
Year
Annual Principal Interest Principal
Payment Payment Payment Remaining
1996 $1,750.00
1997 $490.00 $350.00 $140.00 $1,400.00
1998 $462.00 $350.00 $112.00 $1,050.00
1999 $434.00 $350.00 $84.00 $700.00
2000 $406.00 $350.00 $56.00 $350.00
2001 $378.00 $350.00 $28.00 $0.00
$2,170.00 = Total of Annual Payments
E l° ' River
OTHER (NON-ASSESSMENT) COSTS
SEWER AVAILABILITY CHARGE (SAC):
SAC costs are the "buy-in to the sanitary sewer system. They pay for the
capital cost of the wastewater treatment plant and ongoing maintenance.
The current cost is $1,300, payable at the time of hook-up.
WATER AVAILABILITY CHARGE (WAC):
WAC costs are the "buy-in" to the water system. They pay for the capital
cost of wells, elevated storage, and water treatment facilities, along with
their ongoing maintenance. The current cost is $1,000, payable at the
time of hook-up.
HOME OWNER COSTS:
The home owner is obligated for the sewer and water connect from the
property line to the home. In addition, City ordinance requires the old
septic tank to be filled in when it is abandoned. These costs are difficult
to estimate and will likely vary from property to property.
Project:
Parcel:
Owner:
ASSESSMENT SCHEDULE
Constant Principal Payment Method
Riverview Heights/Grandview Second Addition
Lot:
Block:
Addition:
Interest Start Date:
Repayment Period:
Interest Rate:
Assessments:
a. Street & Utility
Improvements
01-Jan-97
15 years
8.00%
Quantity Unit Measure
1.00 LS
Total Assessment
Unit Price
12500.0O
Amount
$12,500.00
$12,500.00
YEAR
ANNUAL PAYMENT
PRINCIPAL INTEREST PRINCIPAL
PAYMENT PAYMENT REMAINING
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2O04
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
$1,833.33
$1,766.67
$1,700.00
$1,633.33
$1 566.67
$1 500.00
$1 433.33
$1 366.67
$1300.00
$1.233.33
$1 166.67
$1 100.00
$1 033.33
;966.67
;900.00
$20,5OO.OO
$833.33 $1,000.00
$833.33 $933.33
$833.33 $866.67
$833.33 $800.00
$833.33 $733.33
$833.33 $666.67
$833.33 $600.00
$833.33 $533.33
$833.33 $466.67
$833.33 $400.00
$833.33 $333.33
$833.33 $266.67
$833.33 $200.00
$833.33 $133.33
$833.33 $66.67
=Total of Annual Payments
$12,500.00
$11 666.67
$10 833.33
$10 000.00
$9 166.67
$8 333.33
$7 500.00
$6 666.67
$5 833.33
$5 000.00
$4 166.67
$3,333.33
$2,500.00
$1,666.67
$833.33
$0.00
02/05/96
~ity of
iver
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
MEMORANDUM
Mayor & City Council
Peter K. Beck, City Attorney
February 20, 1996
Attorney Fees
Several Councilmembers have asked that I propose an alternative fee
arrangement for Council consideration. The current fee arrangement is as
follows:
$1,650.00 per month retainer. The retainer pays for all legal
services for which a separate file has not been opened, including
most City Council and staff meetings.
°
Reduced hourly rates up to a maximum of $110.00 per hour on
files which will be paid from city funds.
Normal hourly rates, up to a maximum of $180.00 per hour, on
files for which a third party is reimbursing the city for fees.
This structure and these amounts have been in place since, I think, sometime
in the 1980's. I believe it was set up during Bob Middaugh's tenure with the
city.
Retainer. The $1,650.00 retainer amount was established at a time when
the city attorney's involvement in the day-to-day business of the city was
minimal. At that time, the city attorney rarely attended a Council meeting
or traveled to the city for staff meetings. As late as the early 90's, the
$1,650.00 retainer amount covered all of the time actually billed to the city
for general legal services.
In 1992, when the Council appointed me as city attorney, I made a
commitment to the Council to be more available to city staff and to regularly
attend Council meetings, including the Council's monthly planning and
zoning meeting. As a result of this increased level of service, the hourly
value of services rendered over the past 2 or 3 years (at $110.00 per hour) has
been between $5,000.00 and $6,000.00 per month.
13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 · (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425
I consider the difference between an hourly value for the services I am
rendering and the retainer amount to be my investment in a client that I
enjoy working for very much. I am not asking the Council to raise the
retainer amount to $5,000.00 or $6,000.00 per month. However, I would
appreciate the Council considering the change in the nature of the services
being provided since the $1,650.00 amount was established, and raising the
retainer amount closer to approximately one-half of the average hourly value
of services rendered over the past two years (somewhere in the $2,500.00 to
$3,000.00 per month range).
Hourly Rates. The city currently pays a reduced hourly rate, with a
$110.00 per hour maximum, for legal services rendered on separate files for
which payment will be made from city funds. Files for which the city will be
reimbursed by third parties are billed at normal hourly rates, with a $180.00
per hour maximum. Once again, I believe this structure was established by
Bob Middaugh. The theory behind the structure is that private parties
should pay at the same rates they would pay if the city attorney were
working directly for the third party.
From my perspective, my goal is to realize approximately seventy (70%)
percent of normal rates on the hourly work which I do for the city. The thirty
(30%) percent discount is, in my view, justified by the fact that the city is a
long time client which has a perfect payment record. By charging third
parties the rates they would pay if payment was not going through the city,
we have been able to keep the city's hourly rate even below the seventy (70%)
percent goal.
If the city were to go to a single hourly rate, in order to achieve my goal of
seventy (70%) percent of normal rates, the hourly rate would have to be an
across-the-board $135.00 per hour. This would be the hourly rate for all legal
services provided on all files. This rate is at the bottom of the hourly rates
charged by my present firm to other public sector clients.
There are, of course, any one of a number of options between the current
$110.00/$180.00 split rates and an across-the-board $135.00 rate. I would be
happy to come up with other split rates, or discuss with the Council other
alternatives. One idea I have heard suggested is that the city try the $135.00
across-the-board rate for a year to see what the impact is. I have no
preference between the existing split rates or a $135.00 rate, as long as I
have an opportunity to achieve somewhere close to seventy (70%) percent of
normal hourly rates.
s:kcouncilXctyatfee.doc
~,ty of
MEMORANDUM
River
Mayor and City Council
FROM:
William Rubin, EDA Coordinato~JP/~'
DATE:
February 19, 1996
SUBJECT: Minnesota Sports Federation Complex
Introduction:
On December 27, 1995, the City of Elk River received a proposal from the
Minnesota Sports Federation concerning its interest in developing an
integrated sports complex in the northwestern suburbs. The Sports
Federation is a non-profit organization which oversees amateur athletics
throughout Minnesota. Its board of directors authorized the construction of a
$2,300,000 comp]ex designed for indoor training, basketball, volleyball,
soccer, touch football, as well as a related outdoor soccer/softball complex.
For additional information on the Sports Federation and its proposed project,
please refer to the correspondence from Public Resource Group, Inc. Mr.
Patrick Pelstring of Public Resource Group has been retained by the Sports
Federation to assist with this project.
Background
On February 2, the City of Elk River hosted an introductory meeting with
representatives of the Sports Federation. Attendees from the city included:
Mayor Hank Duitsman, Patrick Klaers, Phil Hals, Steve Ach, Jeff Asfahl,
and the writer of this memo. A great deal of information was exchanged
concerning the Federation's project and what fit, if any, there might be for
such a facility in Elk River.
Please note that an important component of the Federation's proposal is the
donation of land by the host city. In exchange, the Federation would design
its complex to help meet the recreational and family programming needs of
the city.
As a wrap-up to this meeting, various assignments were agreed to. In
essence, the Sports Federation seeks a response from the city concerning its
preferred site for the indoor facility. The Sports Federation also asked that
the response include, in general terms, how the city and the staff of the
Community Recreation Board could help define the role the Federation may
play in providing facility space for various city programs or Community
13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 · (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425
Recreation programs. That is, the Sports Federation hopes to establish a
collaborative effort with the host community. The Federation is willing to
design its complex to help the host community fill certain recreational needs,
youth programming needs, senior activity needs, and parent/child
programming needs, etc.
Potential Sites
At the introductory meeting with the Federation, three sites were outlined:
· Area south of 165th Avenue NW
(100 plus acres for future recreational fields)
· 1991 - City purchase of E & O Tool and Plastics Property for Orono
Park Expansion (8 plus acres bounded by Gary Street, Orono Road,
Hudson Street and U.S. Highway 10)
· Non-city owned property at County Road 12 and County Road 13
Subsequent discussions suggest that the Federation's complex will require
municipal water and sewer. This eliminates the 165th Avenue site; and,
while the site at County Roads 12 and 13 is closer to city services, it is not
immediately served, and it is not city-owned. This leaves the Orono Park
Expansion site at Hudson Street and U.S. Highway 10.
Although it does not meet the Federation's long-term 25 plus acre threshold,
it is believed that the Federation could utilize a smaller site for its 48,000
square foot facility. Should that occur, the softball and soccer fields would
have to be programmed in elsewhere in the community or in adjacent
communities. Therefore, in its response to the Sports Federation, city staff
would indicate the availability of the Orono Park Expansion site.
Community Programs
Jeff Asfahl, Community Recreation Coordinator, developed an extensive
menu of potential city and Community Recreation programs that could be
offered through a newly-constructed Sports Federation complex. While this
list is not all encompassing, the recreation coordinator did a commendable
job in brain-storming such a list. Please note that the list is attached as an
exhibit to this memo.
The Federation may allow some of these programs to occur in its facility at a
discounted rate. However, it is generally anticipated that many of the
activities or programs would be programmed as a fee for service.
Financing
Much study is required in order for a complete elaboration on this topic.
Many opportunities come to mind - including a long-term land lease, revenue
bond financing, which requires the Federation's revenues to repay, say, a city
bond, etc. Discussions like these are intended to be fleshed out at a future
date - when it appears as though both the city and the Federation can
achieve some common ground on this project.
City Response
City staffis preparing a response from the City of Elk River. It will elude to
the Orono Park Expansion site as well as the various programs and activities
developed by Mr. Asfahl. Although no commitments are made by either
party, the intent of this letter is to demonstrate city interest as a host for this
project. There will be future opportunities for the Sports Federation to
present more detailed information to the City Council, the EDA, the Park
and Recreation Commission and other commissions in the near future.
Action Requested
Following its review and discussion on this topic, the Elk River City Council
is asked to authorize the submission of a response to the Minnesota Sports
Federation concerning Elk River's continued interest in pursuing the
Federation's proposed complex. The correspondence would indicate the
Orono Park Expansion site as the preferred area, and, various programs and
activities unique to Elk River would be offered.
NO. 30
SITE
~-- _ -- ____ __
M/SS/$$/PP/ ~/vE
0RON0 PARK
8.18 ACRES
I ! _1 ,~1 I ..I I ~ ~ ~ >- o
December 27, 1995
PUBLIC RESOURCE
G OUP,. Nc.
Business Development & Finance Specialists
Mayor Hank Duitsman
13065 Orono Parkway
P.O. Box 490
Elk River, MN 55330
Dear Mayor Duitsman:
I am pleased to provide information regarding a proposal from the Minnesota Sports
Federation to develop an integrated sports complex in the northwestern suburbs. Minnesota
Sports Federation is a highly successful private non-profit organization with over 200,000
members and participants in the State of Minnesota.
The Board of Directors has authorized construction of a $2,300,000 complex which would
be designed for indoor training, basketball, volleyball, soccer, touch football, and an
outdoor soccer complex. I have enclosed additional information on the proposal and
additional background information on the Minnesota Sports Federation for your review.
I will be in contact with you early in January to determine your interest in discussing this
proposal with your City Council. In the meantime please contact me directly at 550-7979.
Sincerely,
PUBLIC RESOURCE GROUP, INC.
PWP\dp
Enclosures
CC:
Perry Coonce, Minnesota Sports Federation
Bill Rubin, Economic Development Coordinator
4205 Lancaster Lane North , Suite 1D0 * Minneapolis, Minnesota 55441 * (612) 550-7979 * (612) 550-922i Fax
PUBLIC RESOURCE
G OUP, NC.
Business Development & Finance Specialists
Project Profile
Minnesota Sports Federation
Minnesota Amateur Sports Center and Hall of Fame
INTRODUCTION
The Minnesota Sports Federation is a private, non-profit organization (501c3)
organized in 1982 to promote Minnesota amateur sports. MSF currently has over
200,000 members throughout the State of Minnesota and manages over 150 national,
state, regional, and invitational tournaments in 6 different sports throughout the State
of Minnesota. In the recent year, over 650,000 people attended or participated in
these tournaments and activities. In addition, the MSF is committed to providing a
high quality, statewide, program to educate and train participants in the proper skills
necessary to compete. The organization is funded solely by membership/tournament
fees and corporate sponsorships.
Minnesota Sports Federation has received authorization from its Board of Directors
to initiate a site search for an integrated sports complex. The MSF is seeking
approximately a 10 acre site for construction of an indoor training and
basketball/volleyball/soccer/touch football/softball facility, as well as MSF's principal
office. In addition the complex could contain 5 outdoor softball/baseball fields which
would require an additional 25 - 30 acres. This complex would be designed to help
meet the Minnesota Sports Federation's needs for it annual tournament schedule, a
home for the Minnesota Amateur Sports Hall of Fame, as well as provide space for
local recreational activities.
This project profile has been prepared to provide an overview of the project and seek
your interest in participating to complete this exciting project.
ABOUT THE MINNESOTA SPORTS FEDERATION
The Minnesota Sports Federation successfully operates based upon its membership
and tournament fees, and memorabilia sales. The Sports Federation has an annual
operating budget of approximately $1,400,000 and has over 200,000 members and
participants in the State of Minnesota. The Sports Federation, as a private non-profit,
maintains significant reserves and has also retained a private fund raiser to support
this project.
4205 Lancaster Lane North · Suite 1D0 · Minneapolis, Minnesota 55441 ~ (612) 550-7979 ~ (612) 550-9221 Fax
PURPOSE OF THE FACILITY
The Minnesota Sports Federation conducts over 150 youth and adult tournaments and
special events on an annual basis. The majority of these tournaments ar~ outdoor
softball tournaments scattered at various sites throughout the State of Minnesota. In
addition the Sports Federation sponsors a large number of indoor basketball and
volleyball tournaments as well as clinics and schools. Finding indoor facilities of
sufficient size, without prohibitive costs continues to be a problem to meet its
tournament schedule and educational offerings.
The Board of Directors has determined to develop the sports complex adjacent to the
Minneapolis/St. Paul metro area to serve as the primary home base for Minnesota
Sports Federation's tournament schedule. This level of activity, the large number of
tournaments, and the number of participants and spectators, clearly justifies this new
complex. The Minnesota Sports Federation would like to seek participation from an
area community to complete this project.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The anticipated 10 acre site is expected to include one large facility of 48,000 square
feet which would house eight indoor volleyball courts, four basketball courts, offices,
locker rooms, concessions space, and meeting rooms for the Sports Federation. In
addition a second phase would be a "bubble dome" that would be constructed of
sufficient size to accommodate soccer, touch football, softball, and sports specific
training. The outdoor, adjacent acreage would be dedicated to parking, sand
volleyball, and a five field softball/baseball complex. In addition, the Sports
Federation anticipates an outdoor meeting/picnic area immediately adjacent to the
softball fields.
The Sports Federation has conducted a preliminary cost estimate and anticipates that
the total construction and equipment cost would be approximately $2,300,000.
The facility would house the ongoing administrative offices of the Minnesota Sports
Federation and its eight member staff. The majority of Minnesota Sports Federation's
indoor tournaments would be conducted at the site and it would additionally be
available in a cooperative approach with the local community to further enhance the
local community education and athletic programs.
Minnesota Sports Federation anticipates selecting a site by March 1, 1996 and expects
to initiate construction by approximately June 15, 1996. On this basis the indoor
facility would be available for basketball, volleyball, touch football, softball, and
soccer beginning in September/October 1996. The estimated costs of the complex are
as follows:
Land Acquisition
Facility Construction (office/meeting/lockers/indoor courts)
Equipment
SUBTOTAL
1,500,000
300,000
$1,800,000
Softball fields (5 fields at $100,000 each)
500,000
TOTAL USES OF FUNDS
$2,300,000
* Land lease and/or dedicated by City
SITE LOCATION CRITERIA
As referenced earlier, Minnesota Sports Federation is seeking a cooperative effort
with an area community to develop this facility. The ideal site/community would
have the following attributes:
Acreage - Minimum of 10 acres (without softball/baseball) or up to 35 - 40
acres with five softball/baseball fields.
Reasonable visibility and access to major highways and transportation
system.
Adjacent to schools and/or educational facilities.
Adjacent to hospitality services including restaurants and availability of
+_300 hotel rooms within 10 mile radius.
Cooperative City/local participation
PROJECT'S ECONOMIC IMPACT
This facility will be designed to serve as a focal point of Minnesota Sports
Federation's tournament activities and training programs. The integrated sports
complex concept, anticipating both the indoor volleyball/basketball facility and the
outdoor softball/baseball complex would be expected to generate approximately 100
tournaments and events per year.
In addition to week night play and the tournaments, it is expected that the complex
would be utilized a minimum of 40 out of the 52 weekends per year which would
generate a significant amount of out of town travelers to the facility. On a
conservative basis, it would be estimated that the facility would be utilized by over
75,000 participants and spectators which would generate a minimum of $5,000,000
of local expenditures, in addition to having the facility available for local participants
and programs.
We have attached a preliminary economic analysis based upon just the
basketball/volleyball participants as well as an article assessing the economic impact
of the Amateur Softball Association of America's facility in Oklahoma City.
Although the facility in Oklahoma is a national facility, versus this statewide facility,
it is estimated that the National Softball Hall of Fame and headquarters generates over
$27,000,000 of local impact into their community.
COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION .
The Minnesota Sports Federation has a strong on-going annual membership base
which provides significant annual revenue for operations. The tournament and
membership fees, based upon trends already established, generates sufficient revenue
to operate this facility. As a non-profit organization, the Minnesota Sports Federation
is also in the process of raising a significant capital contribution to be utilized for this
project. Upon initiation of serious discussions with a community, Minnesota Sports
Federation will provide a detailed analysis of its organization's current financial
standing, status of its fund raising, and anticipated cash flows from the operation.
Minnesota Sports Federation is requesting direct participation from a community to
support this project. Based upon meeting the initial site requirements, the Sports
Federation would request direct assistance from the community in the form of making
appropriate land available for the facility and to provide bond financing for the
facility. The bonds would be repaid by the operating revenue generated by the
Minnesota Sports Federation.
The Sports Federation is not seeking any direct operating subsidies for the project,
only participation in the form of a financing vehicle, due to MSF's non-profit status.
SUMMARY
This project has strong potential of significantly enhancing recreational opportunities
available for local residents as well as providing the "importation" of a natural on-
going tourist attraction. As such, the location of this facility in your community will
provide increased opportunities for local residents as well as significantly enhanced
commerce in the local community.
We encourage you to review this profile and the attached information to gain a better
understanding of the MSF and proposed project. We would anticipate meeting with
you within the next two weeks to discuss the project in greater detail and to determine
your interest in participating in the project.
City of
February 6, 1996
Mr. Perry Coonce
Executive Director
Minnesota Sports Federation
592 Dodge Avenue NW
Elk River, Minnesota 55330
Dear Perry:
On behalf of Mayor Duitsman and the Elk River "team", I wish to thank you
for the opportunity to learn more about the exciting expansion plans of the
Minnesota Sports Federation. The presentation and subsequent discussion
was both well received and appreciated.
As we discussed, the City of Elk River will be communicating a more
thorough response concerning a preferred site and specific components of a
local collaborative effort. We hope to communicate these items to you during
the week of February 12.
Although discussions are still preliminary, we hope that there will be an
opportunity for Minnesota Sports Federation to present more detailed
information to the City Council, the Economic Development Authority, the
Park and Recreation Commission, and other commissions in the near future.
Thanks again for allowing us to learn more about your expansion plans. If
you have any questions or comments concerning last week's meeting, please
do not hesitate to call me.
Sincerely yours,
City Administrator
s:\admin\letters\coonce.doc
13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 · (612) 441-7420 · l~ax: (612) 441-7425
2/12/96
Potential community uses / opportunities associated w! MSF proposal
Assuming availability: Mon.- Thurs. daytime and evenings, Friday daytime use, &Sunday evenings.
The following was developed to demonstrate a wide range of leisure time opportunities for all, that such a facility could
host asw well. Though this list is quite comprehensiv~it does at this time lack some detail that would be required in
carrying many of them through.
~ Daytime senior citizen programming (work w/Sr. Center coordinator)
~ Daytime Parent / Tot opportunities ( work w/ECFE program
~ Industrial leagues ( for 2nd & 3rd shift personnel)
- After school programming for school ages ( transportation component required ) may well fit into plans for new
initiatives plan expected for implementation in fall of '96
~ Indoor walking / running area and possible In-line skating (could be designed to allow use during any other events
taking place, MSF or community)
- open gyms (various ages)
~ indoor soccer
~ youth bb practices (some after school, some evening)
- youth vb (some after school, some evening)
- Adult VB
- Adult BB
- sports camps / clinics / leagues *could also offer general non atheltic day camp programming
~ Non-athletic events / programming / special events (penny carnivals, etc.)
~ non-school day events ( if possible, open on school cancellation days for open gym )
- family open gym time / events
- HS aged bb and vb leagues (Intramurals)
~ various other modified leagues, Ex. 3 vs 3 bb, 4 vs 4 vb
~ archery range
- concerts
~ trade/craft shows
- intergenerational activities / programs
- parent / child programming
- challenge course / rock wall - (possible for business team building excercises)
- Adaptive recreationalopportunities
~ youth rec. hall / lounge. Which could house any or all of the following: table tannis, dart boards, variuos video arcade
type machines, variuos board games chess, backgammon, etc, (This could be designed to serve MSF clientele as well,
w/adjacent concessions)
-indoor batting cage and golf cage area
~ all night lock-ins for youth on special occasions such as evemings of non-school days
- shuffle board, bocce space (would require design)
* several existing youth associations would also benefit from additional gym use, but they currently do not pay for any
routine use for conducting their local program. Some travel teams / leagues do pay for gym rent currently w/district
facilities, they would also benefit fr: additional gym space. Understanding that these association programs are valuable to
the community, time and space should also be valued for providing other leisure time activites as suggested above that
would reach out to a more broad range of users / benefactors.
** Other considerations: (These would require additional construction / design in addition to what the MSF is proposing)
- Fitness area *Caution of competing w/private sector. Could develop partnership with those current service providers)
~ aerobic studio Same caution as above
~ indoor pool
~ indoor tennis
- racquetball
~ theatre, community meeting space (conferences, etc. )
· expanded gym space for increased community need and or MSF program needs. Logical that same need would occur
simultaneously
-Ice rink ( even modified in size to accommodate practices, skating lessons and other open skating and public use
programs
- meeting space for youth associations, storage as well
El Rive
r Date:
Police Department Subject:
Memorandum
Mayor and city Council
Thomas D. Zerwas, Chief of Police
February 9, 1996
ATV PURCHASE
This is to inform the City Council that the council action on
February 5, 1996, to purchase two (2) ATV's should be reconsidered.
On February 7, 1996, I received a telephone call from Riverview
Sports in regards to their quote. They indicated that they had
made several attempts to contact Sergeant Nierenhausen to change
their quote because of a concession they had received from Suzuki
Corporation.
Unfortunately, Sergeant Nierenhausen was on his days off, so
Riverview Sports left messages on his voice mail. I spoke with
sergeant Nierenhausen and there were, in fact, messages from
Riverview Sports on his voice mail in regards to the ATV's.
I have spoken with City Attorney Peter Beck and he feels it would
be appropriate to reconsider the quotes. First off, I have
discovered that the original low quote for a Polaris did not
include a speedometer which I feel is important. I spoke with Moon
Motors and they said it would be an additional $200.00 (two hundred
dollars) for the speedometer, which brings their quote up to
$10,737.44 (ten thousand, seven hundred, thirty-seven dollars and
forty-four cents).
Riverview Sports' quote, with the concession, options and a
speedometer is $10,750.00 (ten thousand, seven hundred and fifty
dollars).
If the council agrees to reconsider, I would recommend purchasing
the ATV's from Riverview Sports in the amount quoted ($10,750.00).
City Attorney Peter Beck will be in attendance at the council
meeting to assist with proper wording for rescinding the prior
council action if you feel it is appropriate. If you have any
questions, please give me a call.
TDZ/kma
13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 723 · Elk River, MN 55330 · (612) 441-2324 · Fax (612) 441-8937
THU 9 : i 1
.-"/o
PROPOSED
OPTIO
~ ~.':;'.: !~,:?:!'i:._:[."::';b,:'~:;: '.~;:.~,'.:(.: 3C.'LD TO ME
~... a ,::;,?.?:' :,',:. 4: :;':
!; ::':!. ii::.FE:: ~.:'h, ~
~ qC.I,T.%e~..Ni~[%W:.~R~' ' YEAR SIZE
.Ja: '.
TRADE-IN ALLOWANCE
AL~.r,'~WANGE
~.{1E ~XCLU~)EO B'Y YOU F~O~
G~DS SOLD.
~HA~OE~ER
~O.R.
REQU~
t UNDergO'AND ,THAT THERE
O~ CO~PON,~t4'r{s). YOU
01/29 '96 10:23 ID:MOON MOTOR SALES FAX:612-295-5254 PAGE 1
(~UOTATION
~£,,,,/ ,,~ /~/-~OON MOTOR SALES, Inc.
' 414 S. H~hway 25
MON~CELLO, MN $$3e2
Serial No. Engine No.
Factory F.O.B. Price ......................................................................... $ -"~'/74/7,, -
TOTAL $_
Freight ................................. F.O.B ................................................
Dealer Asseml~ly & Service ...................................................................
TOTAL .................................................................................. $
Less--Allowance for Trade-in ................................................................
Make Model Serial No. "-
Year Ucense Color _ Mileage. Engine No.
Tax ......................................................................................... $:5'
Uc.n., Tmo & ~oo, ............................. --/~.-.'-~-,~.,~,'~... ;~'""
' ' ' ~N.Ijl Caeh Delivered Price $
This quotation expire, _~~~/~~_._