01-25-1982 PC MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

January 25, 1982 Planning Commission Minutes Page Three of Third Avenue and south of the proposed Barthel PUD. This area Mr. George Dietz presently has an option to buy . He then indicated that the City Administrator and himself would like to see a smaller PUD for sewered and water areas. He also informed the Commission that the staff feels that a pun is more useful because of the number of different occupancies and the control the City has over uses, landscaping, etc. Commissioner Gunkel asked if that meant does the City supply sewer and water or is it privately o\vued. Rick Breezee stated that it was--but it also could be possible for a large private water and sewer system, but because of the cost, it would not be feasible. "Commi~.~.,.~_~_~,,~r Gunkel indicated that she does not like the propo_,~.9:1___fD_L~,-the. chang e . S he'~"'-~~olrl'd---"li-k-e~--to..,-s_~,~__ it b e kep~,,_,,_,g.,t.-,_-2~Q,-'''a'e'r'e~--'PUI:r'~---'~'''-S he i nd i cat ed t ha t the main p urp~.~...... Q:f_a-P-UDwas-tl?cpra:n=a- rarg.erra:ct--o~and--in-an-0rde;t:..4>" fas-h,i,en'~.'~''"'''''Slie'' did not feel the change should be made to the 10 acre minimum. Chairman Tracy agrees with Commissioner Gunkel. 20 acres seems to be a worka- ble and already established way. Commissioner Pearce then asked if any PUD must be sewered. Rick Brezzee indicated that it does require sewer. Commisisner Gunkel indicated that do we make changes with just 2 or 3 requests or do they follow an established ordinance that is presently in existence. Mr. Tony Hipp, of the East Side Concerned Citizens, agrees with Commissioner Gunkel's PUD concept idea. He feels that the 20 acre minimum is a good amount. Commissioner Tracy closed the discussion to the public at 8:05 p.m. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER GUNKEL, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PEARCE, TO DENY THE ZONE CHANGE AMENDMENT TO ALLO\\f 10 ACRE PUD' S IN SE\\TERED AREAS. PASSED 4-0. 6. Consider Review of the Preliminary Do\vuto\vu Development Plan Zack Johnson, City Planner, was present to answer any questions the Commission had regarding the do\~to\vn re-development plan. He was representing the BRA of Elk River. Commissioner Gunkel asked several questions regarding the HRA's re-development plan. She indicated that she felt that the HRA plan in every area recommends that existing building be removed. She states that the plan should a) state which ones HRA specifically intends to remove, and b) is relocation intended in any instances. \\That and \vhere \vould this be done. C) Removing many of these buildings is removing a lot of character of the City of Elk River,