Laserfiche WebLink
Elk River City Council Meeting <br />September 8, 1997 <br /> <br />5.1. <br /> <br />5,2. <br /> <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />approximately 7 acres and divides the properh/into two commercial lots. <br />Discussion was held regarding the need to require the developer to submit a <br />revised concept plan to the council for review and approval. Mayor Duitsman, <br />indicated that he would like to ensure that the road and parking lot are <br />maintained a reasonable distance from the residents. It was the consensus of the <br />council to include a 50 foot setback distance from the east for the parking lot or <br />building as a condition in the final plat. If was the consensus of the council to <br />delete conditions 7 and 9 relating to grading and drainage as these issues can <br />be dealt with at the time of concept review. The council also consented to <br />delete Item #11 requiring a revised concept plan to be submitted to the council <br />for review. <br /> <br />COUNCILMEMBER FARBER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 97-88 GRANTING FINAL <br />PLAT APPROVAL FOR HILLSIDE CROSSING SOUTH TWO - CASE NO. 97-7. <br />COUNClLMEMBER THOMPSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 4-1. <br />Councilmember Diefz opposed. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dietz indicated he voted against the memo as he did not feel <br />that condition number 11 should be deleted. <br /> <br />Consider Leqal Action Reqardin.q Non-Conforminq Billboards <br /> <br />Steve Rohlf indicated that staff is recommending legal action against sign <br />companies who have violated the city's sign ordinance. He explained that <br />several billboards were damaged during the July 1 storm. He indicated that a <br />majority of these signs were nonconforming billboards and were red-tagged by <br />the city indicating a permit is required prior to reconstruction. Steve Rohtf <br />explained that many of the nonconforming signs were reconstructed without a <br />permit and therefore, in violation of the city's sign ordinance. <br /> <br />COUNCILMEMBER HOLMGREN MOVED TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO PURSUE LEGAL <br />ACTION AGAINST THE SIGN COMPANIES WHO HAVE VIOLATED THE CITY'S SIGN <br />ORDINANCE. COUNClLMEMBER THOMPSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION <br />CARRIED 5-0. <br /> <br />Consider Elk River Eastern Urban Service Area Environmental Assessment <br /> <br />Worksheet <br /> <br />Building and Zoning Administrator Steve Rohlf explained that notice of the East Elk <br />River Urban Service Area Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) has been <br />published and posted and the comment period expired on August 13, t997. <br />Steve Rohlf reviewed his memo which included responses to comments on the <br />Environmental Assessment Worksheet. He indicated that staff recommends that <br />there is not a need for an Environmental impact Statement (ELS) on this project. <br /> <br />Attorney for the Dorsey Whitney Law firm, representing Cargill, requested <br />additional time to allow Cargill to prepare comments on the EAW. She indicated <br />that Cargill would like to address issues that relate to road construction and the <br />ultimate expansion and development of the urban service area. She requested <br />the council to delay a decision on the EAW until October 20. <br /> <br />MAYOR DUITSMAN MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 97-89 REGARDING THE <br />ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS FOR THE EAST ELK RIVER URBAN SERVICE AREA <br /> <br /> <br />