Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Case File: 06-03 <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />Overview <br /> <br />The purpose of this memo is to provide additional information or a specific response to items of <br />concern identified by the Planning Commission at their meeting on November 14, 2006. The <br />Commission may use this information on the evaluation of the Preliminary Plat and provide <br />recommendation or comments to the Council for their meeting on December 4th. <br /> <br />Concern: What does the City receive in exchange for extending the urban services <br />boundary? Once a decision has been made to extend the urban service district (USD) boundary, <br />the next question is where. It seems apparent that the present boundary may fluctuate over time, <br />based on comments from the Planning Commission and City Council, in response to market <br />demands and property owner desires. For the most part, the current boundary between urban and <br />rural services has been defined and development completed. Established rural development abuts <br />over 75% of the USD line. Of the remaining 25%, over half is frontage owned by Cargill, which is <br />unlikely to be included in the future. Of the remaining land the subject property represents some of <br />the best possibilities, in terms of cost-benefits based on incurred expenses for trunk line extensions. <br />The City went to great expense to extending the urban services to this region. The City can enlarge <br />the population to help pay these dollars with litde or no additional city cost. The developer will pay <br />for lateral extensions, including the lift station, and pay trunk assessments, including the assessments <br />for the school property. Lasdy, the developer has agreed to provide the 30 acre school site. The <br />value of this land in the urban service district is conservatively estimated at 1.5 million dollars. <br /> <br />Concern: What does the City receive in exchange for PUD <br />Staff had not provided clear information as to what the City received in exchange for the property <br />being developed as a Planned Unit Development (PUD). <br /> <br />In addition to the concessions granted by the developer for extension of the urban semces <br />boundary, the developer has agreed to: <br />1. Donate to the City the wedand credits created through the development. These credits, <br />approximately 30 acres worth, can be sold on the open market, or used to offset wedand <br />requirements on city projects. Projected worth is approximately $1 per square foot, or <br />approximately $1.3 million. <br />2. Enhancing the existing wedands, which are presendy low quality wedands. <br />3. Provision of County Road right of way (33 and 40), totaling approximately 6 acres. <br />4. Provision of a 30 acre school site with trunk sewer and water paid. <br /> <br />Concern: Density. Several comments were made regarding the density as too high. Density <br />is total units/ total acreage exclusive of Co Rd ROW. <br /> <br />Total acres <br />School acres <br />Park Acres <br />Co Rd ROW <br /> <br />276 <br />29.75 acres <br />10.98 acres <br />6 acres <br /> <br />units / acres = density <br />452/270 = 1.67 <br /> <br />While no density number has been established as a goal, the proposed density of 1.67 is considered <br />very low for an area being served by urban services. While Elk River is not part of the Metropolitan <br /> <br />S:\PLANNING\Case Files\2006\Plat\p 06-03 Liberty Heights Estates\StaffReport to PC workshop 11-28-06.doc <br />