My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
6.4. SR 01-21-2003
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2000 - 2010
>
2003
>
01/21/2003
>
6.4. SR 01-21-2003
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/21/2008 8:32:11 AM
Creation date
1/17/2003 5:02:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
1/21/2003
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
City Council Minutes <br />November 19, 2001 <br /> <br />Page 7 <br /> <br />6.4. <br /> <br />COUNCIJ2VFF. MBER MOTIN SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION <br />CARRIED 5-0. <br /> <br />Request by the City_ of Elk River for a Land Use Plan Amendment to Include Cer'cain <br />Property. in the Urban Service District <br /> <br />Senior Planner Scott Harlicker indicated that the City is requesting to amend the <br />Comprehensive Plan to include approximately 80 acres in the Urban Service District <br />along the south side of 175~h Avenue east of Twin Lakes Road. Scott stated that the <br />Planning Commission recommended denial of the request and staff recommends <br />approval of the request. <br /> <br />Scott reviewed the staff report. He distributed and read into the record a letter from <br />Geraldine Graham, 17451 Tyler Street that was addressed to the Council. Ms. Graham <br />indicated that she was opposed to the request. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dietz questioned whether the existing property owners would be <br />assessed for trunk sewer and water. City Administrator Pat Klaers indicated that the <br />Council typically does not assess existing homeowners for trunk utility extensions. He <br />further indicated that the Council could put any type of time stipulation on the trunk <br />assessment to the undeveloped areas, much like what was done for the area north of <br />175~h Avenue. <br /> <br />The Council discussed the request and stated it was not in favor of the request due to <br />the following reasons: <br /> <br />· Most of the residents are not in favor of the request. <br />· Although the area will be included in the urban service district at some time, <br /> the Council wanted the request to come from the residents. <br />· The Council is not interested in assessing residents for sewer and water if they <br /> don't request it. <br />· Tke Council felt it was important to updat~ the Comprehensive Plan prior to <br /> making these types of land use decisions. <br /> <br />COU-NCILMEMBER MOTIN MOVED TO DENY THE LAND USE PLAN <br />AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE CERTAIN PROPERTY ON THE SOUTH SIDE <br />OF 175TM AVENU-E IN THE URBAN SERVICE DISTRICT. <br />COU-NCILMEMBER KId-ESTER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION <br />CARRIED 4-1. COUNCILMEMBER DIETZ OPPOSED. <br /> <br />The Council requested that the Planning Commission discuss the need to revise the <br />Comprehensive Plan. The Director of Planning indicated that she would discuss this at <br />the December Planning Commission meeting. <br /> <br />Other Business <br /> <br />No other business. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.