My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
08/03/2009 Council Packet
LinoLakes
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
1982-2020
>
2009
>
08/03/2009 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/28/2014 10:25:00 AM
Creation date
5/23/2014 11:20:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Council Document Type
Council Packet
Meeting Date
08/03/2009
Council Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
WS — Item 3 <br />WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT <br />Work Session Item 3 <br />Date: Council Work Session, August 3, 2009 <br />To: City Council <br />From: Michael Grochala <br />Re: 35E/CSAH 14 Interchange Funding <br />Background <br />As previously discussed staff has continued to work with Anoka County regarding the <br />cost participation for the I35E /CSAH 14 interchange. At the July 6, 2009 work session <br />staff reported that the city's share, based on a cost split of 50% of construction and 100% <br />of land acquisition, was $7.8 million. Staff shared that the proposed cost share, was not <br />viable from both a funding and financing standpoint. As the council is aware we have <br />proceeded with the improvement process assuming a $5.5 million contribution. <br />Anoka has recently proposed new parameters for the agreement that are more consistent <br />with our position. The cost share is based on the original cost participation percentages <br />discussed in 2005 regarding construction of both interchanges. Under this scenario the <br />city had a 35% share of total project costs and the county had a 24% share for both the <br />Lake Drive /35W interchange and the Main/35E interchange projects. Maintaining these <br />same percentages and adjusting for actual costs incurred, increased construction costs and <br />additional state and federal shares establishes a new base cost of $5.45 million for the <br />city. The county's share would be $3.8 million. <br />Overruns/Underruns: Since the local share of the improvements is a 60% city / 40% <br />county split all cost overruns / underruns are proposed to be based on this same <br />percentage. <br />New Grants: Both the city and county have grant applications out for consideration. If <br />any are successful the grant amounts would be based on the same percentage. <br />Cash Flow: The county will consider carrying the note for the full term of the bond. <br />However, this will negatively act against the county's bond capacity. It is likely that an <br />additional interest surcharge would be added if this is in the agreement. Alternatively, <br />the county would carry the city's share of costs for five years with the city paying interest <br />as it accrues. <br />1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.