4.1. SR 12-13-1993 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Elk River City Council Meeting October 26, 1993 Page 4 intersection are not appropriate for this level of development. He ~ further noted that School Street would have to be widened and this would be very expensive. He requested the Council to consider revising the traffic study that was done in 1993. He further noted that Freeport intersection is too close to Highway 169. He further suggested that the Maier Stewart traffic study which was completed was flawed. He noted that the numb~rs have doubled on Highway 169 from the original Maier Stewart study. Mr. Anderson questioned why the five lots south of the water tower were not included in the analysis. He noted that the basic problem is the fact that the two intersections are too close together, School street is too narrow, and the access is too close to Highway 169. He concluded that it is a bad development for this type of access. Duane Kropuenske, 12778 183rd Court, stated that the proposed PUD offers many possibilities to the City. He noted that when he was on the Council, the Council voted 5-0 to approve the proposed area as Highway/Commercial development. He stated he does not feel the project has been rushed through. He further indicated that a Planned Unit Development can be controlled and address the concerns of the citizens in the area. He noted that he cares about the quality of life and about controlling property taxes. He stated that the proposed development would provide an increased tax base. He noted that the development of Elk Park Center would provide some of the corrections to School Street. He further noted that tax dollars will be generated from this development that will be given to the School and the City to ~ help address and finance improvements for the traffic problems on ~ School Street. Tim Ostroot, 19333 Norfolk Street, stated that he is a member of Citizens Who Care. He stated that the City's perspective is narrow as many of the important issues have not been resolved. He stated that the burden of proof must be met by the developer. He indicated that the City's traffic studies are flawed and are based on assumptions. He further stated that Highland Road will not be a residential street if the Center is approved. He indicated that there would be an adverse affect on the neighboring residents and school children. Mr. Ostroot stated that the development borders a park, a cemetery, and a residential neighborhood. He indicated it is too big of a project for this small of site considering what the site is bordered by. He further indicated Elk River has many areas to develop and stated that the proposed site is the wrong fit for the development. He urged the City Council to deny the request for the conditional use permit. Don Schumacher, 212 Norfolk Avenue, stated that Kraus-Anderson is a responsible and capable developer. He indicated that the development will add to the tax base and employment base of the City. He informed the Council that he is in favor of the development. Charlie Houle, 101 6th Street, representing the Board of Directors of the Chamber of Commerce, indicated that the City must consider moving ~ forward for the growth of the community. He requested the Council to ~ consider taking a stand to help the project move forward. He further