5.12 Item#5. 12.
y of /' MEMORANDUM
,lk� •
River TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Steve Ach, City Planner,_
DATE: July 22, 1997
SUBJECT: Consider Comprehensive Plan
Amendment to Adjust the Urban
Service Boundary, Public Hearing
Case No. OA 97-10
•
Issue
The City of Elk River has initiated a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to
adjust the urban service boundary in eastern Elk River.
Location
• The area considered to be included in the urban service boundary is bounded
by County Road No. 12 on the north, the Tyler Street alignment on the west,
175th Avenue on the south, and Fillmore Street on the east.
Background
One of the major components of the updated Comprehensive Plan was to
consider expanding the urban service boundary for future urban development
opportunities. This would include city water and sewer services and a
variety of urban densities similar to the development pattern found within
the city's current urban district. After reviewing several options of expanding
the urban service boundary, the City Council approved the expansion of the
urban service boundary as shown on the attached Exhibit A.
The Planning Commission may recall within the past six months a
preliminary plat was submitted for a site of approximately 80 acres within
the area identified to be considered for expansion of the urban service
boundary. The proposed plat was a 2-1/2 acre subdivision which basically
included a half mile cul-de-sac to serve the property. During review of this
preliminary plat, a few Commission members made a comment relative to
. the inappropriateness of this 2-1/2 acre development in an area which may be
13065 Orono Parkway • P.O. Box 490 • Elk River, MN 55330 • TDD & Phone: (612) 441-7420 • Fax: (612) 441-7425
considered for city utilities sometime in the future. However, based on the
present zoning of Ria, the preliminary plat was allowed to proceed forward.
The development was eventually withdrawn, due to some problems the
developers experienced with the property owner.
Overview
The area to be included within the urban service boundary totals
approximately 480 acres. This 480 acres can be broken down as follows:
• 80 acres is Hillside Park which is currently owned by the City
• Approximately 50 acres in consumed by Clever's Marsh
• Approximately 20 acres owned by Minnesota Department of
Transportation
• Approximately another 30 acres is identified wetlands according to the
National Wetland Inventory Maps.
Therefore, based on the ownership of the properties, wetlands, and other
restricting factors, the area probably has approximately 280 - 300 acres for
development potential. By including this area in the urban service boundary
there would be no immediate or foreseeable impact for the property owners in
terms of assessments for utilities. As presented to the Planning Commission
41 in the past, typically, the costs associated with extension of utilities has been
initiated by the development community and absorbed by those properties
directly affected. It is anticipated that if this area is included in the urban
service boundary, it would basically be reserving this area for possible
development to an urban standard. If this area is included in the urban
service boundary, it would be appropriate to consider rezoning the properties
from the current Rla zoning district (2-1/2 acre minimum lot size) to a
residential zoning district consistent with other areas within the urban
service boundary.
The area that has been selected to be considered for inclusion in the urban
service boundary appears to be a logical extension of the existing boundary
that has been adopted by the Council. The proposed area is bounded on the
east by a large lot rural subdivision which is typically difficult to serve with
public utilities because of the cost associated with such an improvement and
also bounded on the south by Cargill. The extension of trunk utilities into
east Elk River may improve the efficiencies of some of the utility
improvements necessary in the east Elk River project. It is not anticipated
that this area would be served until a petition has been submitted by any of
the affected property owners within this area. The subject area south of
County Road 12 may possibly stand on its own and could be developed after
• the entire area between County Road 12 and 13 is built out.
\\elkriver\sys\shrdoc\planning\pc\oa97.10.doc
• Recommendation
It is recommended the Planning Commission approve the Comprehensive
Plan amendment expanding the urban service boundary to include the area
bounded by County Road 12, Fillmore Avenue, 175th Avenue and the Tyler
Street alignment. Also, if the expansion is approved it is recommended the
Planning Commission recommend to the City Council a rezoning of the
affected properties occur to be consistent with other residential areas within
the urban service area.
•
•
\\elkriver\sys\shrdoc\planning\pc\oa97-10.doc
I .y.i
,/ ((./ - -' 187TH
n 158TH
U
Rpic, 7. 1asT>i
i 1 154TH
- - - --- -- .--tii\NN. ,
-- - 183eD
152ND
Nail
._
Rid :1.. •• r:+ �u :r'"'= •+o;�_ — oet
,,, -- 179TH
-
ir.'ZIT...PIAK.' "...▪......▪.............................'...... .......1 1
,� 175TH
,i,"......iiiiiiiii 11-1:
• • • • • . :�: r,.— - ,.1 --- 177TH
•, w: 178TH
•
• File .
T : :1• :: . . . . . . . . .
• . . ._ • • - - I 175TH
_
Y • t111
• T -..,\E' r ,
. - 1 1 174Th
_ ..:_ ,„, „
,,
0......1.)
)
1
,m o.c ,......„, 1 - dA_._. -. _ 173R0
IP � qg
111112 172N0
. - I ._ 171ST
,i
VI.. , •. .
170TH
—— Ria — — — 189TH
1 P-c../ --"\-(
LOCATION N
City
Of ,� MAP
!E1R1ver
13065 Orono Parkway • P.O. Box 490 CASE: 0.4 97.-v
Elk River, SIN 55330
te\ ►1.•./f•♦<•♦♦♦...fh/.;•/• ♦Y/ ••/♦/fe.♦ •e♦1•10 ♦♦ *,,-7-1,.'.z-,, ,:.:-:.-„7.,1-.7-777-7-71---
I' 11 g•'•-1.r._ {_ _— r-----j-,7-
—-- ,' 7- i_ �
-
r.�"'r
-
7�"s
, •..-= =T,
`
?
,:i
•
11
II
Tl ••••••••ca••<•o • •• ♦ f•♦a I r! i �, Ir di
S D'�'• '4•:e+,:•••:•:•".:44 4e. •.0f •t•♦. • •4 r It ,,1 I' rF
_4 :vv:v...:......*:-....w....:.....wv.v.P.:•:.44,
_ . t- ..-_ T -. ...-1-.-1.
e_ .{ \ . � •••••••f• •♦~: 4:...< I I ! 1 + I , I...i„,,. fn ,•••••••••bf•• • •e , �' •Ji
.-►♦a• e♦•. •♦••ef•♦f1••••U •♦•••••o•••♦•••••U••••♦e•V• r� I C41—v� . t ,,, ,1- { L i,_,, - �
I 7
4w
—
.--- �i _"•. see•JI•e1.1a••t•O•1.O1♦••1♦•1..1� .1••I. •�-•»If•I•Oo•1e•••>•••1a•.I•*Wd.1/•s•iii•IWf•O♦i'it:-
•fW.1.1•i
1•d/ ,
O1•1•♦W•e'••.c�.'1/••1•1wL
•a•1.:x*:':':':,
x i •
.1•••*.L.1.10If• ':
.1.1f1.1•e/••fyf �Ief —! -• — i ;�i
I _iT
_- f •••1•♦•••/ :►teI•/ I•e•af•f•f/a.e/V.9S•'•t/ f/ •/i•/••♦.♦. •./eas•/? •.•• • .,, ` _� •y•• �f••••.. ••0•• y• •0••
•f• • •• •" ♦'• /•. 0/t• ♦ 4♦x \..4"
. I -„.:• If 1 i � ►••••vd•••••••••►•/6f.••� f••fy♦•,.♦•t•••./}V•♦•••<s•c ♦<.40.„• / •ve.,,•••••• •♦ ,'s •
tt tie.O=<=_ .♦1 �s , •,•:103t1I„ I •
• 1•• \. lf•.♦d•••I•d'•.••1•Y•••••a•.4••/.1••/d••1••By/••/�•♦••♦♦••••f•/♦ ►•.••••• ••.•'. -- —'1"
?ti
1 ,_ r
'llII { .:''..:***.::::*::::::::::::::::::::::•:
•d♦•*♦•f•i♦••♦••♦••••••1••••••••ed•.••••♦•.••••••• •Y•f•••f•••••••••e► i• • •.O•••••••••••f• 1••o•1•1</b./, � I 1I.iIg! ! •••./e/a/ •.1iNI/A:!46►/•".%8►•,e••• 1=0.id/4f♦1404*1.4V/•.'2/•111.1• �,:s • �- �:i-• — - - — - �iciii :.,.__.,_,',
,-,-;..
•
( ! i
• Elk River City Council Minutes Page 7
November 27 , 1995
MEETING OF THE ELK RIVER CITY COUNCIL
HELD AT THE ELK RIVER CITY HALL
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 27 , 1995
Members Present : Mayor Duitsman, Councilmembers Dietz,
Scheel, Farber, and Holmgren
Members Absent : None
Staff Present: Pat Klaers, City Administrator; Sandra
Thackeray, City Clerk; Steve Ach, City
Planner; Terry Maurer, City Engineer; Dave Sellergren,
City Attorney
Also Present: Bob Minton, Steering Committee Chair;
Louise Kuester, Planning Commission
Chair
1 . Call Meeting To Order
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the meeting of
the Elk River City Council was called to order at 7
p.m. by Mayor Duitsman.
2 . Consider 11/27/95 Council Agenda
COUNCILMEMBER FARBER MOVED TO APPROVE THE NOVEMBER 27 ,
1995, CITY COUNCIL AGENDA. COUNCILMEMBER HOLMGREN
SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0 .
3 . Public Hearing to Consider Comprehensive Plan
Mayor Duitsman requested that the following items be
entered into the official record:
1 . Petition from Fillmore Street neighborhood
indicating their opposition to the extension
of sewer and water to their neighborhood.
2 . Letter from Ebner' s Live Bait, Inc . ,
• regarding their opposition to the proposed
water and sewer extension to eastern Elk
• River.
3 . Petition to Mayor, City Council, Planning
Commission, and staff submitted by Kathy A.
Specht regarding the opposition to the
extension of urban services .
Mayor Duitsman indicated that the Council would be
receiving public input on the Comprehensive Plan that
was currently drafted by the Steering Committee. He
stated that the Park Plan and Transportation Plan would
not be considered at this date.
Louise Kuester, planning commission chair, commented on
the process involved in putting together the
Comprehensive Plan. She indicated that the process
involved numerous Elk River citizens who were part of
the Steering Committee. She stated that many Elk River
residents appeared at the public hearings to give input
on the Plan. Louise Kuester further explained that the
Transportation Plan and Park Plan will not be
considered this evening.
Bob Minton, steering committee chair, reviewed the
steps that were involved in completing the
Comprehensive Plan. He further explained that the
Comprehensive Plan is an update of an existing
Comprehensive Plan from 1988 . Bob Minton thanked all
those involved in their efforts to draft the Plan,
including staff, Steering Committee members, and
citizens who attended the meetings .
Mayor Duitsman indicated that he would take public
input on each section of the Comprehensive Plan.
Utilities - City Planner Steve Ach presented the
information on the Utilities Plan of the Comprehensive
Plan. He indicated that the utilities section of the
Plan relates to the expansion of the urban service
boundary. Steve Ach explained that the Steering
Committee recommended a small area for urban service
expansion while the Planning Commission recommended a
larger area in order to accommodate long-term urban
growth.
111 Mayor Duitsman requested public input on this issue.
vi / lI-L7•gc
Si . Dave Cieslak, f&a:a4,2j, 10383 165th Avenue,
indicated that they have currently invested $3
million to the existing Cargill facilities in Elk
River. He indicated that there is no need for
sewer and water at their facility and they would
see no benefit to their current operations with
the extension of utilities or the urban service
district .
2 . Dwight Kirkeide, 11230 173rd Avenue North,
indicated that he dvas opposed to the extension of
the urban service area. Mr. Kirkeide stated that
he distributed a flyer to all residents in the
proposed urban service area relating to the
expansion of sewer and water facilities . He
indicated he felt that the proposed Plan would
harm the people in the community.
3 . John Benver, Fillmore Street, indicated he
recently moved to Elk River and stated that he is
opposed to the expansion of the urban service
district as he sees no benefit to his property.
• 4 . Dawn Beaudry, Fillmore Street, presented a
petition in opposition to the expansion of the
urban service area. She indicated she is against
the extension of sewer and water to her area.
5 . Tony Krelin, 181st Avenue, questioned the Council
as to when the assessments would begin for the
project. Mayor Duitsman explained that there are
no assessments proposed at this time.
6 . Joanne Rousseau, Ebner' s Bait, 17015 Highway 10,
indicated she is opposed to the expansion of the
urban service district and stated that if utility
extensions take place, Ebner' s Bait will go out of
business .
7 . Carl Shaw, 10596 191st Avenue, questioned the
procedure for hooking up to utilities . He
indicated that there are many homes in the area
that are a long distance from the road and
indicated that the cost would be very high for the
• laterals . Mr. Shaw indicated he felt the
residents should have a general idea of the cost
(2 Cv l ti4,7 .1
• prior to voicing their opinion on the issue. He
further suggested that the Council consider
different methods of assessment .
8 . Janet Kotter, 19192 Tyler Street, indicated she is
opposed to the extension of services . She further
questioned what restrictions would be placed on
her land if she were in the urban service district
and if the expansion of the district would affect
the value of her land.
9 . George Deschenes, Twin Lakes Road, indicated his
concern of utilities being developer driven to a
certain area. He suggested that no development be
allowed until services are extended from the core
outward.
10 . Dennis Chuba, 10451 175th Avenue NW, discussed the
issue of allowing property owners that are in the
urban service district to subdivide their
property.
411 11 . Roger McAlpine, Twin Lakes Road, indicated he was
opposed to the expansion of the district and
further indicated his concern regarding the cost
for sewer and water. He suggested that this
decision be based on a vote by the public .
12 . Stan Chase, 16800 Highway 10, questioned what the
procedure was for voicing an opinion regarding the
urban service district.
13 . Kathy Specht, suggested that the Council speak
into the microphones and that there be a
microphone available for each person at the front
table.
14 . Tim Schneider, 17119 Highway 10, indicated he was
not opposed to the extension of the urban service
district, but that he was opposed to the high cost
to the residents . He further questioned why the
Planning Commission recommended expanding the
urban service area from what the Steering
Committee recommended.
• 15 . Steve Bradford, Fillmore Street, indicated he was
.200.4441 4 24
411 not contacted by the Task Force regarding this
issue. He further questioned why the city needs
to: expand the Wastewater Treatment Plant at this
time if there are no plans to extend sewer and
water to the eastern area of the city.
16 . Jean Kieley, 14084 202nd Avenue North, indicated
she supported the City Council and Planning
Commission in approving the Comprehensive Plan.
She further indicated she would like to see the
City of Elk River develop in an organized manner.
17 . Truman Moyer, indicated that he was opposed to the
expansion of the urban service area and the
extension of utilities . He indicated it could
possibly mean higher taxes to the residents of Elk
River because of the Green Acres involved in the
district .
18 . Pat Holzem, indicated he is opposed to the
expansion of the urban and service district and
stated that he would have to move if a sewer and
111 water project goes through his area.
19 . Charlie Houle, 6th Street & 17069 Highway 10 -
Houle Oil, indicated that the city needs a
commercial and industrial tax base and stated that
the Council must look at what is best for the
community. He stated he supports the Council in
their decision and that he is in favor of the
sewer and water extension for the urban service
area recommended by the Steering Committee.
20 . Stoeffel Reitsma, County Road 12 , indicated that
he had a problem with the service area that was
amended by the Planning Commission. He questioned
why the Planning Commission recommended the change
and further questioned what the population
estimates were for Elk River.
21 . Dave Anderson, 14845 County Road 30, questioned
why the city could not develop as a rural
community. He indicated that the issue is what
type of community we want Elk River to look like.
• 22 . Roland Benson, Highway 10, indicated that a
• Comprehensive Plan would be good if it encompasses
the right needs of the community.
23 . Larry Hickman, business owner and resident,
indicated that the City of Elk River needs help to
draw more customers to the east side of the city.
He indicated that he is in favor of the extension
of urban services .
24 . Robin Tuttle, 13324 Ranch Road, questioned whether
the city was trjring to run people with large
quantities of land out of town.
25 . Richard Kurth, owner of Broadway Bar & Pizza,
indicated that he was opposed to the extension of
the urban service area. He stated that he has a
good septic system and good water.
26 . Mark Korthal, 17379 Tyler Street, indicated that
he has seven acres of property and stated that the
Council should think about the cost to the land
owners for the extension of the services . He
• stated that he is opposed to the extension of the
urban service area.
27 . Marilyn Van Patten, 10451 175th Avenue, questioned
what will happen to existing businesses if sewer
and water is not in their area. She expressed her
concern regarding these businesses being able to
expand.
28 . Harold Novotny, informed the Council that the
service district recommended by the Planning
Commission is dominated by swamp land and State of
Minnesota land. He questioned whether the state
would be assessed for the extension of services .
There were no other comments from the public regarding
the utilities issue.
Residential - Steering Committee Chair Bob Minton
indicated that the Steering Committee and Planning
• Commission took a firm commitment in recommending that
the ten acre minimum lot size in the Al zoning district