My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
4.1. DRAFT MINUTES (1 SET) 07-03-2017
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2011 - 2020
>
2017
>
07-03-2017
>
4.1. DRAFT MINUTES (1 SET) 07-03-2017
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/29/2017 10:58:49 AM
Creation date
6/29/2017 10:58:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
7/3/2017
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
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
City Council Minutes Page 6 <br /> June 19,2017 <br /> ----------------------------- <br /> ■ The city should abandon the TIF District if the Council is not going to consider <br /> moving the building. He expressed concerns with gambling on whether the <br /> applicant will work with the city. <br /> ■ Could the city get a letter from the applicant stating they will continue to work <br /> with the city in redeveloping the area? <br /> ■ The city could end up spending tax payer money and get nothing out of the <br /> project. <br /> ■ The road location is the county engineer's expert opinion. <br /> ■ Concerns with duplication of storm water efforts and the applicant should be <br /> aware he will be responsible for creating a storm water pond on his property. <br /> Attorney Beck stated the best way for the applicant to work with the city is to extend <br /> the time period on the applications. <br /> Councilmember Westgaard noted the city doesn't have to build a storm water pond. <br /> He stated if the applicant moves forward with his project,the city is still going to <br /> want a transportation connection and the city could go back to its original plan to <br /> acquire the three parcels for the connection. He stated there are all kinds of <br /> alternatives to the Master Plan dependent upon what is decided. <br /> Mr. Wisner stated if the applicant moves forward with their project,if approved <br /> tonight, they would be required to install their own storm water treatment system on <br /> their property. He stated they originally proposed a system underground of their <br /> parking lot. He stated this is generally an expensive plan because it has to be <br /> structurally sound. <br /> Mayor Dietz stated there needs to be assurances on the city side. He questioned what <br /> the city would be left with;hoping the applicant will cooperate and do the master <br /> plan? <br /> Councilmember Westgaard stated yes and hopes they will continue to work with the <br /> city on what is the highest and best use for this whole redevelopment area. He <br /> questioned staff about what is magical about having 30 more days versus the <br /> previous 120 already taken. He noted Council is always in a situation where they <br /> have to pick and choose, and from a policy standpoint,it makes the decisions more <br /> difficult for them. <br /> Mr. Leeseberg stated we are not at the end of a process, but rather in the middle of a <br /> planning process in following our plans. He noted the city has already spent <br /> thousands of dollars on the project. He stated sometimes it is easier to react to <br /> situations versus planning ahead for them. He stated we don't want to react to a <br /> specific application but more to the bigger picture and what will be better for the <br /> whole city. <br /> Attorney Beck stated the biggest issue at the current time is acquiring the properties. <br /> UREJ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.