5.2. SR 05-28-1996ITEM 5.2.
~ity of
iver
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Mayor and City Council
FROM:
DATE:
Pat Klaers, City Administrato~_~)~
May 28, 1996
SUBJECT: Appraisal Summary Report by Peter
J. Patchin & Associates, Inc.
The appraisal for the east Elk River urban service area from Patchin &
Associates was previously distributed to the City Council. The authors of
this report will be present at this council meeting to review the information
and their conclusions. It appears that the benefit level in the industrial and
residential areas is $6,000 per acre.
In January, 1996, the City Council reviewed concepts A through D for
various public improvement projects (see attached minutes). It should be
stressed that no project exists at this time and the city is only in the
discussion stages of a public improvement project. Concepts for projects A
through D are again offered for your review. Additionally, a chart showing
the financial information displayed at the bottom of these options, plus, some
new data information related to the $6,000 per acre rate is attached.
It is my understanding from the 1/16/96 meeting that the City Council
desires that the project go across 169 with sewer rather than down Highway
10. This would lean the council towards options B or C ff a project is city
initiated.
It should be noted that obtaining easement for the pipes that go to east
Highway 10 could take anywhere from nine to twelve months. This process
can begin at any time ff the city knows the exact location of the pipes with or
without a project being initiated or ordered.
If a public meeting is to be held on a possible public improvement project in
the east Elk River urban service district, then it is suggested that this be a
public informational meeting and not a public hearing that begins the 429
assessment process. In this manner, the city can notify everyone in the
urban service district of the public meeting and advise them as to the results
of the Patchin appraisal and receive public input. Following the
dissemination of this information, the city could then wait for a petitioned
project and expand upon that petition with a city initiated project as the
council deems appropriate.
13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 · (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425
CIP Worksession Meeting
Janua~- 15, 1996
Page 2
After discussion, it was the unanimous consensus of the City Council to put
this issue on the .January 22, 1996, City Council agenda for consideration
of awarding the WWTP expansion bids.
b. East Elk River Public Improvement Projegt
The City Administrator provided an overview of this project from its
conception in 1989 to the present. It was noted that the urban service
district for east Elk River has been established with the update of the
Comprehensive Plan and that starting in 1996, the city would look at new
alternatives for a construction project and disregard the past options and
alternatives.
City Engineer Terry Maurer presented and reviewed alternatives A, B, C,
and D. Discussion related to the direction of the trunk sanitary sewer
either being along Highway 10 or across Highway 169; the need to
establish one assessment rate (plus COLA) for the entire east Elk River
project: and the difference between the city "pushing" the project to the
east versus a major developer "pulling" the project to the east.
Discussion at the Council level included a concern over how much of the
cost of the project the city could hold on a temporary basis until it could
be assessed out to benefited property owners...The Mayor indicated his
support for the approach of having the trunk sewer go across Highway
169 and also indicated his support to hold a public hearing on the project
in order to receive property owner feedback on the proposal...The
question was raised whether or not it would be appropriate to allow the
County Road 12 area to develop in a residential nature prior to the east
Highway 10 area developing and if this is feasible...The maximum
assessment rate per acre was reviewed...A number of Councilmembers
indicated that the project should wait until it was developer driven.
It was the consensus of the City Council to direct staff 1o obtain a quote
for a complete appraisal for this project area from Patchin and
Associates. It was the consensus of the City Council to get a quote from
the City Engineer for the cost of doing topographical maps based on air
photography. The Council asked for a clarification on the status of the
assessment manual and the need for an update in order to ensure that
one assessment rate can be established for the whole east Elk River area.
Co
Review of Current or Onqoinq Projects - The City Engineer reviewed his
1/11/96 memo on the status of current projects.
d. Streets
185th Avenue or Hiqhway 10 North Frontaqe Road Beqinninq at Joplin
Street
The City Engineer reviewed the timetable for this proposed project. Sherri
Emerson, representing the Guardian Angels Foundation, asked a number
of questions regarding development of the Guardian Angels property in
Alternalive:
A
C
D
AcJeage
464
621
9q~2
194
ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT RATE FOR POSSIBLE URBAN SERVICE ARE. A
CITY OF ELK RIVER
MSA CONSULTING ENGINEERS
MAY 1996
Restricted
Soil
76
109
194
53
Nel
Assessable
388
512
768 I
1411
Ol~erl
Acreage
0
69
Eslimaled
1,938,300
2,642,000
3.224,000 I
1.500.000 ]
Estimated
Walermain
2,123,0OO
2,123,000
2,g16,000
1,650,000
Total
ConstmcUon Cosl
4,001,300
4.765.000
6,140.0130
3,150,000
Assessment
Rale
10,464.57
g,306.64
7,997.92
22,340.43
Tolal Amount
Assessed at
2.328.6OO
3.072,000
4,606,200
846.000
Total Amount
NDt Assess ed
1,693,000
1,533,800
2,304,000
t
I
I
I
I
I
City of~
Elk ~iver
L
Cit7 of
Elk vet
!
I
I
I
I
City of
Elk ver
'.: I I
Cit. y of~
Elk ~iver