My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
4.1. DRAFT MINUTES (1 SET) 06-21-2021
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2021 - 2030
>
2021
>
06-21-2021
>
4.1. DRAFT MINUTES (1 SET) 06-21-2021
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/17/2021 9:08:49 AM
Creation date
6/17/2021 9:08:48 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
6/21/2021
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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 7, 2021 <br />----------------------------- <br /> <br />Tyler Erickson, 9753 226th Lane, stated they have no alternatives. He said if they <br />build a septic system, they still must pay for it and have no way to collect the money <br />for it. He stated they hope to find a way in the future to ease the burden. <br /> <br />Council consensus to override policy and allow this project to be assessed for <br />30 years. <br /> <br />Mr. Beck discussed a possible option to allow platting and selling of additional lots <br />(conservation areas). He questioned how residents feel about this to help ease the <br />cost burden. He noted it’s a very grey area and a lot of details would need to be <br />reviewed and worked out. He further noted conservation easements could be <br />problematic, there are covenants that affect the land and would have to change, land. <br />use amendments by Council, along with parkland issues. <br /> <br />Residents in attendance expressed an openness to explore the option. <br /> <br />Mr. Portner asked if Council would be open to allow further development to help <br />offset the costs. <br /> <br />Council consensus to pursue if there is a legal way to allow development to <br />help offset costs. <br /> <br />10.2 Concept Review: MMPA Zoning and Land Use Amendment <br /> <br /> Mr. Carlton presented the staff report. <br /> <br />Stephanie Falkers, Planner with SRF Consulting, stated Minnesota Municipal <br />Power Association (MMPA) supports economic development and wants to partner <br />with Elk River to bring new high paying jobs into the community from a high energy <br />use perspective. She stated they are not looking to attract noisy or smelly businesses. <br />She stated they are seeking zoning and land use changes to make a development <br />ready site. She discussed the concept, which is to attract a high value environmentally <br />conscious industrial use (I3 zoning). She stated they have identified some high- <br />quality, high-energy industrial uses such as data centers and advanced manufacturing. <br />She reviewed site considerations, traffic, utilities, lot sizes, compatible residential <br />uses, comprehensive plan, and tax base. <br /> <br />Jim Richardson, MMPA Director of Energy Marketing, provided an overview of <br />MMPA. He stated it is nearly impossible to find large lots for this type of industrial <br />use. He further stated the companies that need this type of lot will build and pay for <br />the infrastructure and then turn it over to the city. <br /> <br />Councilmember Westgaard discussed impact concerns with adjacent property <br />owners and suggested reviewing how the zoning uses are guided. He discussed a <br />transition in types of uses from the highway toward the residential areas. He <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.