Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Elk River city Council Meeting <br />October 26, 1993 <br /> <br />Page 4 <br /> <br />--------------------- <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />intersection are not appropriate for this level of development. He <br />further noted that School street would have to be widened and this <br />would be very expensive. He requested the Council to consider revising <br />the traffic study that was done in 1993. He further noted that <br />Freeport intersection is too close to Highway 169. He further <br />suggested that the Maier Stewart traffic study which was completed was <br />flawed. He noted that the numbers have doubled on Highway 169 from the <br />original Maier Stewart study. Mr. Anderson questioned why the five <br />lots south of the water tower were not included in the analysis. He <br />noted that the basic problem is the fact that the two intersections are <br />too close together, School Street is too narrow, and the access is too <br />close to Highway 169. He concluded that it is a bad development for <br />this type of access. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Duane Kropuenske, 12778 183rd Court, stated that the proposed PUD <br />offers many possibilities to the city. He noted that when he was on <br />the Council, the Council voted 5-0 to approve the proposed area as <br />Highway/Commercial development. He stated he does not feel the project <br />has been rushed through. He further indicated that a Planned Unit <br />Development can be controlled and address the concerns of the citizens <br />in the area. He noted that he cares about the quality of life and <br />about controlling property taxes. He stated that the proposed <br />development would provide an increased tax base. He noted that the <br />development of Elk Park Center would provide some of the corrections to <br />School street. He further noted that tax dollars will be generated <br />from this development that will be given to the School and the City to <br />help address and finance improvements for the traffic problems on <br />School Street. <br /> <br />Tim ostroot, 19333 Norfolk street, stated that he is a member of <br />Citizens Who Care. He stated that the City's perspective is narrow as <br />many of the important issues have not been resolved. He stated that <br />the burden of proof must be met by the developer. He indicated that <br />the City's traffic studies are flawed and are based on assumptions. He <br />further stated that Highland Road will not be a residential street if <br />the Center is approved. He indicated that there would be an adverse <br />affect on the neighboring residents and school children. Mr. Ostroot <br />stated that the development borders a park, a cemetery, and a <br />residential neighborhood. He indicated it is too big of a project for <br />this small of site considering what the site is bordered by. He <br />further indicated Elk River has many areas to develop and stated that <br />the proposed site is the wrong fit for the development. He urged the <br />City Council to deny the request for the conditional use permit. <br /> <br />Don Schumacher, 212 Norfolk Avenue, stated that Kraus-Anderson is a <br />responsible and capable developer. He indicated that the development <br />will add to the tax base and employment base of the City. He informed <br />the Council that he is in favor of the development. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Charlie Houle, 101 6th Street, representing the Board of Directors.of <br />the Chamber of Commerce, indicated that the City must consider moving <br />forward for the growth of the community. He requested the Council to <br />consider taking a stand to help the project move forward. He further <br />