My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
8.2. SR 04-06-2015
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2011 - 2020
>
2015
>
04-06-2015
>
8.2. SR 04-06-2015
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/3/2015 12:49:36 PM
Creation date
4/3/2015 11:10:46 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
4/6/2015
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
95
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
mindmixer PROJECT REPORTS Idea Report 11 <br /> Survey: Alternatives Analysis <br /> Question: Which of the Land Use Alternatives Do You Prefer? <br /> Land Use Option #1 : 2 <br /> Land Use Option #2 : 2 <br /> Land Use Option #3 : 3 <br /> Question: What was your top reason for choosing the option you chose? <br /> I feel like we need more large businesses in Elk River. This option would <br /> provide businesses that people will be able to easily view as they drive <br /> through our town. <br /> It's a better mix of uses and does not include high density housing. <br /> Lesser of 3 evils. Possible modifications ... (1) the southern portion of the <br /> Rural Industrial area (more adjacent to 221st) may be more appropriate as <br /> Industrial; (2) perhaps change the SE Industrial area (the one between the <br /> two Highway Business areas) to Flex Use- I don't know if it might be better <br /> to have a complete Highway Business stretch vs breaking it up with <br /> industrial. The Flex Use currently shown may be a good place for hi-density <br /> residential at the 205th intersection. <br /> My home is directly adjacent to the affected area. I would rather be in a <br /> residential area rather than surrounded by industrial buildings. <br /> Residential is further removed from the landfill downwind zones. No high <br /> density residential zones. <br /> Question: What did you dislike about the other options? <br /> #1 - not enough Highway Business potential. #2 - putting High Density <br /> residential adjacent to the landfill may be a problem ---at least until all the <br /> methane gas gone. Also needs more industrial and Rural Industrial <br /> High density housing <br /> I cannot imagine someone wanting to live so close to the landfill -even after <br /> www.MlndMixer.com <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.