8.5. & 8.6. & 8.7. SR 05-15-1995

Home Browse Search

~" • 12. THE INTERSECTION ON H~~1Y 169 AND 197th WOULD REQUIRE I`iAJOR CHANGES AND CONSTRUCTION TO GAIN ACCESS TO THE OUTLOT. ANOTHER STOP LIGHT AT 197th WOULD ONLY FURTHER IMPEDE TRAFFIC FLOt~~ IN BOTI{`DIRECTIONS OF HWY 169. THIS INTERSEC`1'ION t9AS NOT DESIGNED FOR COMMERCIAL TRAFFIC NOR CAN IT BE CIiANGED TO ACCOMMODATE COMMERCIAL TRAFFIC WITHOUT SERIOUS, DETRIriENTAL, AND ADVERSE AFFECTS TO THE AREA, AND TO TI-IE RESIDENT TAXPAYERS. 13. THERE ARE CURRENTLY FOUR. (~I) STOP LIGHTS ALONG HWY 169; AT THE UNDERPASS, AT riAIN ST, AT SCHOOL ST, AND AT JACKSON ST. AN ADDITIONAL STOP LIGHT AT 197th WOULD FURTHER IMPEDE TRAFFIC ON HWY 169. THERE ARE FOUR (4) TRAFFIC LIGHTS ON HFdY 10 THROUGH THE NORTHTOWN COMPLEX. IT TAiiES FOREVER TO PASS THROUGII THIS AREA. TRAFFIC CRAWLS AT A SNAILS PACE IN BOTH THE MORNING AND AFTERNOON RUSH HOURS. IT CRAt~'LS AT A SNAILS PACE ON SATURDAYS, SUNDAYS, AND MAJOR SiiOPPING DAYS. IS THIS WHAT THE FUTURE HOLDS FOR HWY 169 THROUGH ELK RIVER. l~l. PRESERVE TI3E RESIDENTIAL AREAS NORTIi OF 193rd ST. WE DO NOT NEED THE ADDED Iv'OISE, THE Z~I-HOUR HIGH INTENSITY. LIGHTING, THE INCREASED TRAFFIC CONGESTION, NOR THE BLIGHT ON THE AREA THAT IS CURRENTLY PROPOSED BY A REZONING REQUEST. 15. THE CITIZENS AND TAXPAYING RESIDENTS OF THESE RESIDENTIAL t'1REAS PROVIDE THE CITY WITH A LARGER TAX BASE THAN DOES A SINGLE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. THE INTERESTS OF THESE TAXPAYERS Iv1UST BE RECOGNIZED AND I-IGNORED BY DENYING THIS SPOT REZONING REQUEST. FURTHERMORE, IT WOULD BE FOOLISH, HASTY, AND INAPPROPRIATE TO MAKE A REZONING CHANGE PRIOR TO GOriPLETION OF THE STEERING COi~iMITTEE AND THE PLANNING COMMITTEE STUDY. 16. ~dE RESIDENTS ARE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT OUR COMMUNITY OF ELK RIVER AND ITS FUTURE. CAREFUL CONSIDERATE PLANNING BASED UPOIvT HARD FACTS, LOGIC, NECESSITY, AND OVERALL INTERESTS MUST BE ADDRESSED IN ORDER TO ARRIVE AT SOUND MEANINGFUL DECISIONS THAT BENEFIT THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY AND NOT SINGLE OR SPECIAL INTERESTS. THE ONLY WISE AND CORRECT DECISION CONCERNING THE REZONING OF OUTLOT "A" IS TO DENY THE CHANGE IN REZONING AND INSIST IT REAfAIN RESIDENTIAL. 17. OUTLOT "A" COULD BE DEVELOPED INTO A PRIME DESIREABLE RESIDENTIAL AREA THAT HAS BOTH THE ASTIiETIC APPEAL AND PRESERVING QUALITIES NECESSARY TO BLEND jtitITH THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL AREAS. WE WOULD WELCOME SUCH A CONSCIENTIOUS EFFORT FROAi THE DEVELOPER. WE BELIEVE IT IS HIS RESPONSIBILITY TO COMPLETE HIS DEVELOPMENT IN IiARMONY WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA OF BRENTtti'OOD.