My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
6.3. SR 04-16-2001
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2000 - 2010
>
2001
>
04/16/2001
>
6.3. SR 04-16-2001
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/21/2008 8:32:13 AM
Creation date
2/5/2003 8:47:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
4/16/2001
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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
ADM; elr ur TRATOR <br /> <br />BRIAN BENSEN <br /> <br />March 22, 2001 <br /> <br />Michele McPherson, Director of Planning <br />City of Elk River <br />P.O. Box 490 <br />Elk River, MN 55330 <br /> <br /> 13880 Highway 10 <br />Elk River, MN 55330-4601 <br />(763) 241-2701 ~3 1-800-433-5229 <br />website: www. co. sherburne, mn. us <br />email: a dmin @ co. sherburne, mn. us <br /> <br />Re: Case No. OA 01-03 <br /> Request to Amend Section 900.08 and 900.10.5 - <br /> Government Office and Facilities <br /> <br />Ms. McPherson: <br /> <br />Thank you for meeting with our County Board to explain and discuss the proposals and <br />definitions. That was very helpful, and I appreciate your time. <br /> <br />I believe I understand the intent of the City Planning Commission is to allow most <br />County (governmental) functions to be Permitted Uses in the Residential District. The <br />exceptions, uses that could potentially create a larger impact on neighboring residences, <br />would be listed as Conditional Uses in the Residential District. These Conditional Uses <br />would inclUde jails, public works facilities and waste handling facilities. The proposed <br />ordinance changes would clarify the definitions and, I believe, would answer concerns of <br />our neighbors. <br /> <br />After discussion with the County Board, I am forwarding one request for your <br />consideration. If the Planning Commission and City Council feel the change in <br />definitions and the change in what is a permitted vs. a conditional use is a reasonable <br />solution, one change from the proposed language is necessary. The proposal put <br />"courthouses" in one definition while differentiating "county offices" in another. We <br />would have great difficulty deciding where a courthouse ends and a county office <br />building begins. Does the office of the County Attorney go in the courthouse or office <br />building? Does it matter when using impact on the neighborhood as a standard? I think <br />not, and request that "courthouse" remain in the definition of Governmental Offices, and <br />thus would be permitted in the district. <br /> <br />An Equal Opportunity Employer <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.