My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7.1. EDSR 09-21-2020
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Economic Development Authority
>
EDA Packets
>
2014-2020
>
2020
>
09-21-2020
>
7.1. EDSR 09-21-2020
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/18/2020 2:46:19 PM
Creation date
9/18/2020 2:44:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
EDSR
date
9/21/2020
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
37
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
<br />The Elk River Vision <br />A welcoming community with revolutionary and spirited resourcefulness, exceptional <br />service, and community engagement that encourages and inspires prosperity <br />Request for Action <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />To <br />Economic Development Authority <br />Item Number <br />7.1 <br />Agenda Section <br />General Business <br />Meeting Date <br />July 20, 2020 <br />Prepared by <br />Suzanne Fischer, Community Development <br />Director <br />Item Description <br />Chamber of Commerce Business Survey: Concern <br />#3 and #4 <br />Reviewed by <br />Amanda Othoudt, Economic Development <br />Director <br />Reviewed by <br />Cal Portner, City Administrator <br /> <br />Action Requested <br />• Receive information, provide feedback. <br />• Agree, by consensus, the action sufficiently meets or exceeds expectations to address <br />concerns/recommendations from the Chamber of Commerce Business Survey: Concern #3 and #4. <br /> <br />Background/Discussion <br />Citing undocumented concerns regarding the business atmosphere experienced by developers with the city, the <br />EDA commissioned a survey through the Elk River Area Chamber of Commerce to identify specific concerns. <br />Two follow-up meetings were held with participants of the survey with Commissioners Westgaard, Wagner and <br />Blesener. The information gathered was shared with the city administrator who developed a workplan to <br />address the concerns. <br /> <br />Concern #3: Clearly outline what is being inspected for the entire project and limit the inspection to that list. New items should <br />not pop up with every inspection. <br />There is no specific “list” of items to be checked for any particular inspection. The Minnesota State Building <br />Code includes seven code books. Project managers and their tradesmen are expected to not deviate from the <br />spirit of the codes. To facilitate communication, the following four practices have been implemented. <br /> <br />Citizenserve Community Development Software purchase and implementation. A demonstration will be <br />provided. <br /> <br />Formal Letters of Explanation. Following an inspection, the building inspectors document non-compliant <br />items identified along with the applicable code(s). This information is part of the record and is sent to the <br />applicants via email or letter. <br /> <br />Pre-Application Meetings. The city currently offers preconstruction meetings to further review plans and the <br />process with the project manager and whomever they wish to include. Our experience is very few choose to
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.