My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
4.1 DRAFT MINUTES (2 SETS) 11-07-2022
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2021 - 2030
>
2022
>
11-07-2022
>
4.1 DRAFT MINUTES (2 SETS) 11-07-2022
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/3/2022 2:41:46 PM
Creation date
11/3/2022 2:40:58 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
CCM
date
11/7/2022
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
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 12 <br />October 17, 2022 <br />----------------------------- <br />Mayor Dietz asked if the city would need a water tower added and if they currently <br />own land to build one. Mr. Hanson stated the city would need two water towers and <br />may have land for one currently. <br /> <br />Mr. Femrite added that one of the reasons for the high cost is that current <br />infrastructure and pipe sizes are only large enough to handle a specific number of <br />users. These would need to be modified if more users were added to the sewer and <br />water supplies. The current wastewater facility has enough capacity to handle <br />additional users. <br /> <br />Mr. Femrite stated he is hoping for more specific information on cost when the <br />report is finalized. <br /> <br />Council asked how far sewer and water services are from the proposed Capstone <br />development. Mr. Femrite explained that sewer is close and could handle the first <br />phase or two of development. However, water services are miles from the proposed <br />development area. <br /> <br />Mr. Femrite asked the Council what the catalyst for driving utility extensions may be. <br />Extending utilities would affect the southern portion of the gravel mines. <br /> <br />Councilmember Wagner assumed that an industrial park would be the catalyst for <br />utility expansions, not a residential project. <br /> <br />Council discussed options for funding the extension including assessments based on <br />parcel size. <br /> <br />Mr. Beck stated there were some challenges when assessing utilities in the past <br />because the project must show that it increases the value of the property by at least <br />the value of the assessment. <br /> <br />Mr. Femrite stated the next step is to update the draft of the report by narrowing in <br />on the required improvements. He will solicit input from the Utilities Commission <br />and ERMU staff. <br /> <br />Council asked staff to determine whether the city should continue northeast or <br />northwest and give the council input. <br /> <br />Mayor Dietz asked to postpone Item 9.4 to the next meeting. <br /> <br />9.3 Consider Corridors of Commerce Grant Opportunity <br /> <br />Mr. Femrite presented the staff report. He asked the Council if they would like to <br />consider a project to be submitted for the current funding opportunity. <br /> <br />Council was in favor of submitting the ultimate vision for Highway 10 east of <br />Highway 101 to the county line. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.