April 6, 2023 at 3:25 p.m.
St. Germain electors to decide on new pavilion for Fern Ridge Recreation Area
By Fred Williston-
Supervisors discussed the issue for nearly 40 minutes during a town board meeting March 23.
Supervisor Jim Swenson - who is also the board's member of St. Germain's Non-motorized Trails Committee - laid out plans for future projects at Fern Ridge, an 80-acre tract of land off of Forest Lane owned by the town and open to the public.
Fern Ridge is open year-round and has segregated trail systems which accommodate pedestrians, snowshoers, ATV/UTV riders, snowmobilers, mountain-bikers, and fat-tire winter bikers. The facility currently has a 100-by-150-foot parking area, a storage shed, and a porta-potty.
Trail construction had been ongoing for the past several years and was completed in 2022. The committee hopes to begin adding other facilities to the site, which would theoretically take place in phases.
The first phase - which could be completed this year - would include a bike work-station, air pump, dressing room, and a 24-by-40-foot open-air pavilion with a nine-foot overhead clearance. A steel roof would be supported by posts and sit above a concrete slab.
"Right now, this would cover the needs for the people who are using the property out there," Swenson told the board. "It gets people out of the sun; out of a passing shower; it gives them shade. And that's what we're looking for. That's what we're hearing the users are wanting. That can be done now."
The Non-motorized Trails Committee anticipates construction of the pavilion would cost approximately $70,000. The committee already has those funds on-hand, which were raised through donations or disbursements from the St. Germain Chamber of Commerce. Those funds from the chamber were generated by the town's room tax, which is paid by out-of-towners who rent lodgings in St. Germain.
"We have sufficient funds on-hand to cover the costs," Swenson said. "However, we will continue to pursue other funding sources and grants to offset costs and reserve funds for future maintenance...No money would be used from the town (property-tax) levy for the project."
While the pavilion would not cost the taxpayers anything to build, it would still be a town-owned structure, and state statute requires approval by electors before any such structures can be erected.
Swenson hopes to see the project approved "in the context of what we've done in the past, like with the shed. It was no cost to the tax levy and was paid for entirely from the funds of the non-motorized committee."
Swenson said if the project were to be approved and completed, the structure could also be reserved and used for private parties or functions, just like other already-existing pavilions and facilities owned by the town.
While the committee currently has no timetable for initiating future phases of additions to Fern Ridge, its long-term goals are to see the construction of a mountain-bike skills course, a sledding hill, an enclosed and heated building, and a proper bathroom facility.
During his presentation to the board, Swenson emphasized keeping phase one as simple as possible would maximize use while keeping costs down, specifically by not needing to hire an engineering firm for support. Using MSA of Rhinelander as an example, he listed one advantage to the phase-one project as being "simple design with state-approved specifications could eliminate the need for MSA oversight and related costs."
"It doesn't need state-approved plans because of the size of the building, and it meets state building codes," he told the board. "If you feel comfortable with the committee handling it, (committee member) Jimmy Vogel and I can be overseers. Or, if you feel that it needs MSA, we've got time to get MSA out there to take a look at the site and see what that price is going to be. We don't know what their figures are."
"I understand that you're looking out for the future of the town and everything," Swenson said. "But at what point do you want to keep on raising the price above the building?"
Whether or not to hire an engineering firm had been a point of contention for the board in its previous discussions regarding the Fern Ridge project. Town board chairman Tom Christensen said "Jim asked me to check in with MSA as to what the cost would be if they headed up the project for us, and I couldn't get an estimate from them because they needed more information... We've used MSA in the past to be sure that we have all of the bases covered."
In response to Christensen's inquiry, MSA sent an email in reply with several concerns listed. Christensen shared that correspondence with the board.
Some of the firm's concerns included compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the potential for bird-nesting inside the pavilion, and the opinion that the proposed four-foot-deep foundations would not be sufficient.
Swenson was able to address most of those issues immediately, stating the committee already had plans in place or could adapt existing plans as needed.
Several of MSA's concerns, however, dealt with long-term questions beyond phase one, such as whether tests must be conducted to confirm a septic system could be installed there and whether the parking area would drain water a sufficient distance from building sites proposed for future projects.
Christensen balked at the idea of the town taking on the project without professional guidance.
"That's probably what my stumbling-block is: it's that none of us are construction people," he said. "None of us do this for a living."
"I guess the example in town where we didn't do it (use MSA) was when the snowmobile barn collapsed - the north end of it collapsed - and the board stayed out of it," he said. "We didn't use MSA. And when we got approval from the electors to allow the club to build it, they hired a company to come in and put a building up. They put a building up, and because of the way that building was put up - if I understand the terminology - the drift load on the older part of the building caused that side to collapse the next year. So, there is strictly an engineering thing that was done wrong."
"This building obviously doesn't need to be engineered like that one was," Christensen said. "It's a totally different building. I understand that. But I think this is just going way too fast. I don't think it's the right thing. I'm sorry, but I don't know if it's going to go forward in the way it's being presented. I don't want to take this to the electors because I don't think it's laid out properly. I don't think we're putting our best foot forward. I think all we're doing is racing to try to get a roof with posts and a hunk of concrete out there, so I'm not in favor of doing it the way it's being done."
Supervisor Ted Ritter said, "I would argue that some of the points in the correspondence from MSA do not need to be addressed for the building that's being proposed. Why would we spend money on a perk test? We don't know if that second phase of this building is ever going to be built. That's so far down the road, it could be decades down the road."
"Some of what's in there isn't even applicable to the building that the committee wants to have built now," Ritter said. "I would say some of that stuff can be stricken."
"Then, there isn't a plan past the pavilion?", Christensen asked. "You're not going to lay out any kind of plan as to what you'd like to see at Fern Ridge over the next 20 years? Nothing is going to made out? I'm constantly criticized for 'no plan.' That includes a drain field, so why wouldn't you make sure that the drain field can be there? That this is part of the plan?"
"Because that part of the plan might happen someday in the future," Ritter answered. "We've got it on the plan in case it ever gets to that point. But in reality, it may never happen."
"The question isn't the money, I guess,"Christensen said. "That's fine that the money is available, but you're spending it very quickly with little planning, and in the past, that's created catastrophe."
Supervisor Brian Cooper pointed out: "We're deciding whether or not we're going to decide on notices for the electors meeting, and not to approve what kind of building and where it's built and future plans and whatnot."
"It's still got to come back to the town board," Cooper said. "It's still up to us whether we do it or not. So I'm OK with moving forward to the electors."
Christensen said without knowing whether or not MSA would become involved, "the numbers aren't there. You know that if you use MSA, this $70,000 isn't going to be realistic. So how can you say it's going to be all donations and room-tax? I don't know how you can go in front of the taxpayers and do that."
"Elector approval does not mean we have to do this," Ritter said. "Elector approval is 'the committee wants to build a building on this size and this character on this site. No property levy revenues will be used. Money will come from other sources, or it won't be built. We expect the number to be $70,000 - perhaps more, depending on which services we ultimately contract with. But it will be paid for without using property-tax revenues'."
Swenson said, "Once we get the electors' approval for a structure at the Fern Ridge property, which this would be, and the board could insist that we go with MSA... Then we get a number from MSA. Then if it's two grand, five grand, ten grand, then that's up to the board to decide. Where is the comfort level in a project such as this?"
"We're comfortable with the $70,000 number right now," Swenson said. "At the end of April, there's additional money from the Chamber (of Commerce) that can be applied for. So, that might allow us to get more money to raise that amount, but that's not guaranteed money, either. But there's still other options that we can find. And if the bids come in and it's too much larger than the figure, then it doesn't go forward this year."
"Elector approval just continues the planning process," Ritter said.
Ritter made a motion to table town board discussions on the specifics of Fern Ridge until after the April 18 electors vote.
Later, Swenson made a motion to "Put a notice in the paper for the electors meeting for approval of construction of a Fern Ridge pavilion with no money coming from the tax levy for the project."
Each motion passed by a four-to-one margin, with Christensen casting the lone "nay" vote in each case.
Comments:
You must login to comment.