4.0. SR 03-29-1993 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . arrangement could be documented and guarantee the Fair certain use of the property. However, the concept of a Board to manage the use of the parking lot that the City own needs more evaluation by the Counci l. Boan.i Joint would The final issue discussed at the 3/22 meeting relates to future assessments. Depending on future road alignments and the extension of uti lities, it is anticipated that the fairgrounds wi II have some future assessments. The amount of these assessments is unknown at this time. All of the fairground has been assessed for trunk uti Lities so this is not an issue. The only issues remaining are lateral uti lity assessments and street assessments. Future street alignments within a Lakoduk plat wi ll, in part, determine future County assessments. IBa~SeQBlallQ~_lSSUES The City has recently adopted a resolution requesting the County to proceed with a County Road 1 improvement project in Elk River in 1994. This resolution is attached for your review. It is very important to the City that this project move forward in 1994 in order to provide better arnj safer access for Meadowvale School, for the Elk River Industrial Park, and for future residential development near the golf co uro",..e. Another issue that has generated a great deal of discussion by the City Counci l is Anoka County Road 22 as it enters into the City of Elk River from Anoka County. Concern has been expressed about how a Large number of vehicLes in the future wi Ll make their way in a LogicaL manner to Highway 169. The City hopes to review this issue during a discussion on its Master Transportation PLan, but Anoka County Road 22 enters into the City on a Sherburne County road and this issue wi LL need both City and County cooperation in order to avoid future t,-.:tnr:.po,ootation prOoblo(,,'ms in EI.I.~ I:~ivf.-n-. SIQBt:.1....x:!r.~al~aGE Two major ditches run through the City of Elk River. One is Ditch 28 on the west side of the City and one is Ditch 10, mainLy on the east side of Highway 169. County Ditch 28 flooding and repairs that took place in 1991 were discussed at the Last Joint meeting and there was a decision by the County Board to take no further action on this ditch. It may be appropriate for the City Courn:i l to formalLy request that the County Board firn1 out how much a redetermination of benefit would cost, and once this amount is analyzed, evaluate whether or not the redetermination of benefits should take place. Above and beyond the redetermination of benefits is the issue of ae:tui~Ll.y doing i~ elitch imprO()v<,.;>m~~nt P,-oJ(~~ct or' additional. ditch repairs/maintenance.