Loading...
March 23, 1995 Steering Committee MinutesAPPROVED MEETING OF THE ELK RIVER STEERING COMMITTEE HELD AT ELK RIVER CITY HALL THURSDAY, MARCH 23, 1995 Members Present: Chair Minton, Committee Members Dick Hinkle, Dave Anderson, Mark Lucas, Merry Sipe, Mary Eberley, Hank Duitsman, Pat Dwyer, Chris Kreger, Arne Engstrom, Keith Holme and Bill Birrenkott. Members Absent: Committee Members Lloyd Barthel, Mary McDevitt and Marty Glines Staff Present: Stephen Rohlf, Building and Zoning Administrator; Terry Maurer, City Engineer, Debbie Kleckner, Recording Secretary 1. Call Meeting To Order The March 23, 1995 meeting of the Elk River Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee was called to order at 7:05 p.m. by Chair Minton. 2. Consider Steering CommiHee Agenda HANK DUITSMAN MOVED APPROVAL OF THE 3/23/95 STEERING COMMITTEE AGENDA. BILL BIRRENKOTT SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 12-0. 3. Consider Steering Committee Minutes DICK HINKLE MOVED APPROVAL OF THE MARCH 6, 1995 STEERING COMMITTEE MINUTES. MARY EBERLEY SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 12-0. 4. Consider Options for Expanding Urban Service Area Chair Minton stated that the Meadowvale Heights subdivision will not be included in the discussion for extending water and sewer. Terry Maurer, City Engineer, provided information regarding Option 6 and Option 7 to extend the urban service district. Option 6 - Add the Brady property to the current urban service district, add a portion along the eastern part of the city which would extend east from the current urban service district over to the eastern city limits, down to Highway 10, and take in much of the property between the highway and railroad tracks over to the river, excluding the Hidden Creek Estates subdivision. Option 7 - A combination of two previously discussed areas, Options 3 & 4. Terry referred the Committee to the table which was distributed in their packet, comparing Options 6 and 7. Steering Committee Meeting Minutes Page 2 March 23, 1995 Option 6 - 1,900 developable acres left after deducting the wetlands and floodplain and 25% lost for right-of-way, easements, parks, etc. Under this option, the sewage generation and water consumption would be the equivalent of 14,700 people. Option 7 - This option has a net developable acreage of 1,350. The sewage generation and water consumption population equivalent fully developed of 10,700. Terry explained that the greatest difference between the two plans is the cost to cross the wetland and floodplain areas to extend the water and sewer. Dave Anderson used overlay transparencies to identify the following: -Power lines -Developable land -Wetlands -Businesses along Highway 10 -Specht and Cargill properties -Plat map identifying property owners He summarized that if the owners of the Specht and Cargill properties are not interested in developing at this time, it would not make sense to extend sewer and water beyond the existing commercial and industrial area in the Highway 10/165th Avenue location. He stressed the importance of listening to the property owners regarding what they want. He discussed issues related to expanded residential development including loss of productive farmland, wildlife displacement, destruction of forests, increased traffic delays, additional demands on the school system, and increased need for city services. Dave stated that all the residents he has spoken with feel that extending the urban service district will force development of 10,000 acre lots. They feel this will result in a loss in the quality of life they moved to Elk River to experience. Chris proposed Phase 2 to include the Specht and Cargill properties so that if they petitioned, services could be extended and that the pipe be sized for this option. Chris Kreger stated that he is in favor of a phasing plan for 5, 10, 15 and 20 years in order to give property owners as much notice as possible regarding the City's plan for future growth. Chair Minton stated that it was his understanding the industrial, commercial and residential growth would be directed eastward. Hank Duitsman stated that he did not feel there would be any controversy regarding Area 1, since the developers are petitioning to have city sewer and water. He suggested that Areas 6, 7, 8 and 11, 13, 15, an 16 be the first phase in extending the urban service district. Hank then suggested that 2, 3, 4, 9 and half of 11 and 14 in the second phase. This would be an extension of the residential and also allow for commercial development. Steering Committee Meeting Minutes March 23, 1995 Page 4 Jerry Richoias, property owner on County Road 12, questioned why the City is pursuing the extension of city water and sewer, rather than waiting for a petition from the land owners. He stated that if his property is assessed he will be forced to sell his property. Jerry Hofhenke, 15860 228th Avenue NW, stated that residents in the southeast area enjoy their peace and quiet and their privacy. He added that the smaller lot sizes and road to be discussed later goes against what the residents have told them they want. He asked that the Committee listen to what the people want. Chair Minton stated that the City can not stop development and that the Committee's job is to see that it happens in an orderly fashion. Chris Kreger explained that the Committee is attempting to define an area that can accept city water and sewer eventually. He added that this does not mean it will actually go in; that is a City Council budget issue. Chris stated that he wants the City to have some control over the growth. Merry Sipe stated that she feels the plans being proposed are projecting 30 years into the future, not 5, 10 or 15 years. Hank Duitsman stated that there are commercial business owners east on Highway 10 who want sewer and water. He stated he does not feel there is a need for more residential property served with sewer and water at this time. Arne Engstrom stated that he would like to see those properties identified on a map whose owners want water and sewer extended. Chair Minton suggested Areas 5, 6, 7, 10, 12, and 13 be included in the extended urban service district. Ame Engstrom suggested that the extended urban service district include those properties which want it. Hank Duitsman stated that he did not feel it would be financially feasible to extend sewer and water to such a limited area. George Deschenes, 18513 Twin Lakes Road, expressed his concern that developers pay the cost for water and sewer out of their own pocket, not the property owners around them. Rick Kurth, owner of Broadway Bar and Pizza, stated that he would like it on the record that he is one business owner on Highway 10 that does not want city sewer and water. Milt TuHle, 13390 Ranch Road, questioned how other costs associated with development will be paid, such as streets, storm sewer, and parks. Terry Maurer indicated that Area 5 is the highway interchange area. He explained that the design of the sewer trunk line will be sized according to how Steering Committee Meeting Minutes March 23, 1995 Page 5 far east the line will be extended. The City will then need to determine how much of that area will be assessed. Terry explained that the line cannot be sized smaller to save costs now, and later add property further east. Hank Duitsman added that the pipe must be oversized now to allow for future expansion. Chair Minton questioned what the costs would be to serve the area in the 5 year plan under discussion, compared to what the costs would be to serve the "ultimate" area. Terry Maurer stated that typically in the past, the City has carried the cost for serving the ultimate area, so it would be hard to provide a dollar figure for that difference. Terry explained that in the western area improvement project, area 1 would have been close to $5,000 per acre, area 2 would have been somewhat lower, and by the time it was extended all the way out to area 4 the costs may have been approximately $2,000 per acre, since the lift station was already in and the pipes are smaller. Terry Maurer stated that the startup costs will be higher for the East Highway 10 to go through the Mn/DOT right-of-way highway interchange and UPA property. CHRIS KREGER MOVED THAT THE STEERING COMMITTEE DESIGNATE AREAS SHOWN ON THE MAP AS 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, PART OF 11 AND PART OF 12, AND 1 AS THE EXPANDED URBAN SERVICE DISTRICT FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS. Chris Kreger then proposed that the following motions be made: MOTION NUMBER 2. THAT THE COMMITTEE APPROVE INCLUDING APPROXIMATELY ONE-HALF (1 /2) OF AREAS 2, 3 AND 4 AS THE EXPANDED SERVICE AREA FOR THE NEXT FIVE TO TEN (5 - 10) YEARS. MOTION NUMBER 3. THAT THE COMMITTEE CONSIDER THE AREA DESCRIBED ON THE ATTACHED MAP, FOR THE EXPANDED URBAN SERVICE AREA FOR THE NEXT TEN TO FIFTEEN (10-15) YEARS. MOTION NUMBER 4. THAT THE COMMITTEE CONSIDER THE AREA DESCRIBED ON THE ATTACHED MAP, AS THE EXPANDED SERVICE AREA FOR THE NEXT 15 TO TWENTY-FIVE (15 - 25) YEARS. Hank Duitsman questioned the audience whether or not there was anyone in the audience that was interested in having sewer and water in the far south east Highway 10 area of the City. He explained that the City Council needs to know if this is all the further the sewer is going to go in order to determine the size of the trunk lines. Chair Minton noted that the first motion includes Mr. and Mrs. Leroy Brown's property. Arne Engstrom stated that if Brown's property included he would vote against the motion. Chris Kreger stated that Area #8 and # 1 1 would most likely be included and assessed if the City Council voted to extend the sewer and water. Arne stated that he felt that area should only be included if the property owners petitioned for sewer and water. Arne continued that it is known that property owners in Areas 5, 6, 7 and parts of 12 want sewer, but people in Areas 8 and 11 do not want it. Steve Rohlf stated that he was involved in the previous update of the urban service district in 1990. He stated that the Committee needs to look as far out Steering Committee Meeting Minutes Page 6 March 23, 1995 into the future as possible and come up with a plan. He added that the City needs to stick to that plan as much as possible, but that by reviewing the plan every five years, adjustments can be made as they are needed. ARNE ENGSTROM SECONDED THE MOTION NUMBER 1 WITH THE CONDITION THAT AREA 8 AND 11 BE STRUCK FROM THE CHRIS KREGER'S ORIGINAL MOTION. THIS AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION WAS ACCEPTED BY MR. KREGER. Chris Kreger explained that the 10 - 15 year plan included that part of Area # 1 1 which was previously blocked out. The (15 - 25) year plan would pick up area #8. He stated that he did not feel it would happen that way, in reality, because of the costs. Dave Anderson questioned whether or not Area # 13 is included in the motion. CHRIS KREGER ADDED PART OF AREA 13 TO MOTION NUMBER 1. Dick Hinkle stated that the cost would be prohibitive to put in sewer and water in the proposed area because it was too small. Terry Maurer stated that the City would have to carry a significant part of the cost initially for costs to put lines through the Highway 169 and Highway 10 intersection and UPA area, which would not be assessed. He explained that 5 - 10 year service area proposal does not extend this service area so the City would need to carry the costs at least 10 years. Rick Kurth, owner of Broadway Bar & Pizza, questioned whether or not there are plans for industrial or commercial development east of his business. Chair Minton stated that issue will be discussed at a future meeting. He stated that he did not feel there were enough businesses out there to support extending the sewer and water at this time. THE MOTION CARRIED 10-2. MERRY SIPE AND HANK DUITSMAN OPPOSED. CHRIS KREGER MOVED TO DESIGNATE AREA NUMBER 2 AS THE EXTENDED URBAN SERVICE AREA FOR THE NEXT FIVE TO TEN (5 - 10) YEARS. Wesley Hunt questioned whether or not there would be a public hearing before the second phase is implemented. Chair Minton stated that there would be a hearing before any thing was decided. Arne Engstrom explained that this is only a plan for the next 5 - 10 years and that it will be reviewed again in five years. Dick Hinkle questioned whether or not the zoning will be changed so that property owners cannot do anything with their property for the next 10 years or until sewer and water comes. Chair Minton stated that it would need to preserved somehow. Dick Hinkle stated that he wanted the property owners to be aware that the fact that they are included in the urban service district will affect the zoning of their property and what they can do with it. Mark Lucas indicated that areas and 2 and 3 should be reversed. Arne Engstrom stated that they could be combined to be just area 2. Pat Dwyer Steering Committee Meeting Minutes March 23, 1995 Page 7 stated that property owners must be aware there will be larger minimum lot sizes which will be enforced. CHRIS KREGER AMENDED MOTION NUMBER 2 TO CHANGE AREA 3 TO 2, AND ALSO AREA 4 WOULD BE 3, AND ALSO THAT IT WOULD BE A FIVE TO FIFTEEN (5 - 15) YEAR PLAN TO EXTEND THE URBAN SERVICE DISTRICT (PHASE 2). THE MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. DAVE ANDERSON MOVED THAT THE NEXT AREA IS NUMBER 3 THAT BE INCLUDED EXCEPT THAT AREA 13 IS INCLUDED AND NOT AREA 14, AND INCLUDES THE CARGILL AND THE SPECHT PROPERTY. Dave Anderson asked that the representative of Cargill speak on this issue. Rita Schmal, Cargill representative, stated that Cargill does not want to be in the real estate business and would like to stay in the farming business. DAVE ANDERSON WITHDREW HIS MOTION. CHRIS KREGER MOVED THAT THE AREA DESCRIBED ON THE ATTACHED SKETCH BE INCLUDED IN THE URBAN SERVICE DISTRICT FIVE TO FIFTEEN (5 - 10) YEAR PLAN. MARY EBERLEY SECONDED THE MOTION. Dave Anderson expressed his objection to the residential property being included in this motion. He stated that he has not heard of any residential development in this area that they want water and sewer. Brent Cotton, 19215 Tyler Street, expressed his objection to water and sewer. Mary Eberley expressed her agreement that the zoning must also be discussed, since zoning must follow the comprehensive land use plan. She suggested that it may be necessary to create a new zoning district to meet the intent of the comprehensive land use plan. She stated it may be too restrictive if extended urban service district plan is adopted, and zoning is put in place to preserve the land for future service. Ghost platting was suggested as a means of developing residential property so that it could be subdivided in the future to service more economically with water and sewer. Discussion followed regarding existing residential parcels of 2-1/2 acres and the difficulty to subdivide them to service with water and sewer in the future. Discussion also covered the exclusion of flood plain and wetland property from assessments. Dave Anderson questioned why the Committee could not only deal with the commercial and industrial target areas for extending water and sewer. Chris Kreger stated that if residential is not included in the second phase, it would be cut off from the ability to extend it anytime in the future. Dave questioned whether the residential needs to be included to support the industrial and commercial sewer and water extensions. Chair Minton and Chris Kreger agreed Steering Committee Meeting Minutes Page 8 March 23, 1995 that data supports that need. Dave Anderson expressed concern that the residents do not want 10,000 square foot lots; they want it to remain rural and keep the 2-1/2 acre minimum. Arne Engstrom questioned why the residential needs to be included now if there are enough residential lots within the present urban service district to serve development for the next 10 years. Chris Kreger explained that the inclusion of residential is for the 5 - 15 year plan. Janet Cotton, 19215 Tyler Street, questioned if they would have restrictions of 10 acre minimum lot sizes if they are included in the urban service district plan. She stated that if sewer and water may not come for 15 years, it would not be right for them not be able to do anything with their land, other than its current use. Chair Minton stated that there would be restrictions to preserve it for future possible development. Chris Kreger stated that there would likely be larger lot size restrictions. He stated that he would recommend that lots in Area 2 and 3 be a minimum of five acres when zoning issues are discussed by the Committee. Dick Hinkle stated that he would not be able to vote in favor of including residential property in the proposed urban service district, not knowing what the ramifications will be, in regard to minimum lot sizes and zoning. Stoffel Reistma, property owner in Area 8, stated that he is not interested in developing his property right now, but for someone that does, the impact of a rezoning is of great concern. He asked that Committee must first consider what is the desired maximum population of Elk River. He stated that the broader issue ? is where they see Elk River in the future. Hank Duitsman stated that the growth is going to come, and the size of the lots will determine the population. Chair Minton added that population issues will be addressed at a future meeting. Mr. Reitsma stated that he felt the extension of the urban service district should be discussed after the Committee makes a determination of the maximum desired population. He added that designating residential property at this time as being in the urban service district will determine the population will be. Mr. Reitsma stated that he felt this proposal for such a large expansion of the urban service district is a total contradiction of what the City determined five years ago. He stated he felt the Committee should be discussing whether or not the residents of Elk River really want to throw out the old plan and come up with a new one, and do we really want to grow that large. A young resident stated that he has lived here all his life. He questioned why the Committee wants to make the City bigger when there is not enough room in the schools now. Chair Minton called for a vote at this time. THE MOTION FAILED 5-7. Chris Kreger requested that the audience conduct themselves in an orderly manner. Hank Duitsman stated that this meeting is not the last chance for changes in the plan, and that a public hearing will be conducted by the Planning Commission and also the City Council before a plan is adopted. Steering Committee Meeting Minutes March 23, 1995 Page 9 CHRIS KREGER MOVED THAT THE COMMITTEE RECOMMEND THE AREA DESCRIBED AS AS THE FIVE TO FIFTEEN (5 - 15) YEAR PLAN FOR EXTENDING THE URBAN SERVICE DISTRICT. (EXTENDS EASTERLY; TAKES OUT THE WETLANDS AND SOME OF THE RESIDENTIAL). MARY EBERLEY SECONDED THE MOTION. Dave Anderson stated he did not support this plan. He stated there is a large working farm in this area, several small developments, a city park and a huge wetland in the proposed area. Pat Holzem, resident, questioned whether or not this farm is buildable and also stated that the property could not support such a large assessment. THE MOTION FAILED 2.11. DAVE ANDERSON MOVED THAT AN ULTIMATE SERVICE AREA INCLUDE THE PORTION OF AREA 13 THAT WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE FIRST PHASE, AREA 15, EXCLUDE THE MISSISSIPPI HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION, INCLUDE THE PORTION OF AREA NOT PREVIOUSLY INCLUDED, AND THAT IT ONLY BE SERVED WITH SEWER AND WATER WHEN THE TWO PROPERTY OWNERS PETITION FOR THE SERVICES. Dave stated that he wished to include all the existing industrial zoning in the motion. CHRIS KREGER SECONDED THE MOTION. Hank Duitsman stated that he supports the concept of the plan, but that when it comes down to defining an area for sewer and water, these plans will not work. Dick Hinkle stated that if both motions were included in a five-year plan, it may work financially. Arne Engstrom stated that he felt those that benefit the most from sewer and water should pay the most, and those benefiting the least should not be forced to pay more than they can afford. THE MOTION CARRIED 9-2-1. MARY EBERLEY ABSTAINED. Dick Hinkle explained that he did not wish to see the large residential included in the plan because of the fact that it could be 20 years before they would be able to use the system. CHRIS KREGER MOVED THAT PART OF AREA 11 AND 8 BE INCLUDED IN THE ULTIMATE SERVICE AREA, AND THAT IT ONLY BE SERVICED WHEN THE PROPERTY OWNERS PETITION FOR SEWER AND WATER. HANK DUITSMAN SECONDED THE MOTION. Steering Committee Meeting Minutes March 23, 1995 Page 10 Discussion followed regarding the Leroy Brown property and their desire to leave the property out of the urban service. Chris Kreger explained his reasons for including it in the ultimate urban service district. Hank Duitsman stated that sewer and water will not be petitioned by residents but rather, by developers, unless there is some type of ground water pollution problem. He added that the drive for sewer and water on Highway 10 is because of the desire for industrial development in the City. Mark Lucas questioned what the costs would be for extending the services. Terry Maurer stated that the costs and the actual assessments amounts may be different. Steve Rohlf pointed out the Areas 5, 6, 7 and 8 are already in the current urban service district. He stated that he felt that Area 8 was included on this map for discussion as to whether or not it should stay in the urban service district. Mr. Reistma stated that Area 8 was not included in the 1988 Comprehensive Plan but was added in 1990. Chris Kreger stated that if his motion passes, Area 8 would be included indefinitely, but that if it fails, Area 8 would still be included and a separate motion would need to be made if it is to be taken out. Merry Sipe stated that she opposes the plan because it was not her understanding that the Committee decided on these two plans and that they would be presented on plans for 5-10-15 year phasing. Chair Minton stated that the previous motion was to call for more detail from staff on the two plans that are now under discussion and that phasing was not included in the minutes. Chair Minton stated that the motion before the Committee is to include Area 8, and a line drawn down through the eastern border of 8 through 11. THE MOTION FAILED 5-7. 5. Review Transportation Plan Terry Maurer explained that the March 1993 transportation study was done to identify and preserve transportation corridors that may be needed in the future. Engineering staff modeled future development of the city, and based on the zoning, the predicted. They attempted to estimate traffic routes to and from industrial and commercial areas in the city, as well as commuter traffic through the city. They used current traffic counts from Wright, Anoka and Sherburne to project future What kind of corridors are needed so that it does have to go through the core city. Need to determine east -west corridor. One, route within City's corporate limits, one option discussed with the Sherburne County Highway Department, one Steering Committee Meeting Minutes March 23, 1995 Page 11 option as a result of discussions with the Park and Recreation Commission. Begin at Anoka County Road 22 and leave the city limits at 209th Avenue. Terry explained 3 options using a large aerial map of the area. Arne Engstrom questioned why the jog was made in the road line, rather than follow the north boundary of the park. Steve Rohlf stated the reason was related to wetlands. Terry Maurer stated the County is slightly behind the City in working on a transportation for the County. Hank Duitsman indicated that the reason for the corridor is to take some of the traffic off Highway 10 and move it north up to the proposed east -west road and over to Highway 169. He stated that the north route off Highway 10 is shown as Waco Street, and will be changed to Zebulon. Terry Maurer explained that flooddplain considerations dictate the Zebulon alignment, rather than Waco Street, as previously proposed. Anoka County's transportation plan identifies County Road 22 as a minor arterial. It is his understanding that Anoka County envisions that Mn/DOT may eventually take over the County Road 22 route through their county. Terry explained that 209th seems to be the best route to get through the city, over to Big Lake Township and then for the Sherburne County to find a route back down to Highway 10. Jerrry Hofhenke, 15860 228th Avenue NW, stated he lives in Big Lake Township but that he is affected by this plan. He stated that in speaking with Dave Fisher of Anoka County, he was informed they have no plans to expand County Road 22. He felt the proposed road would disrupt the lives of too many people. He stated he saw no reason to put a road through the County and felt the focus should be on improving traffic movement on Highway 10 in the downtown area. Milt Tuttle, resident, referred to a letter received by Troy Langer from the Sherburne County Highway dated July 13, 1994 which stated the County has no future construction plans for County Road 33. Chris Kreger stated that the letter means that there are no plans "adopted" at this time. Dave Quarry, Sherburne County Highway Engineer, explained that during the discussions for a gravel permit, alternate routes were discussed for moving traffic through the city, possibly through mining areas when mining is completed. He stated that planning needs to be done now to minimize the impacts on affected property owners and also for financial considerations. Dave explained that the County currently has no transpiration plan and that the last one was done in 1970. This plan showed roads going through the City of Elk River which were never implemented. Since then, there has been development in areas which were proposed for roadways. He stated that if a transportation route is approved, it may be 20 years before it is ever built. The County will be working with the City to come up with a transportation plan that will work for everyone. Steering Committee Meeting Minutes March 23, 1995 Page 12 Robin Tuttle, 13324 Ranch Road, expressed her concern that there may be a four -lane road built near their property. She stated that the quality of life will be affected. Also she expressed concern for noise and safety issues, and splitting of farmland. She questioned how property would be acquired for the corridor. Steve Taylor, 10975 205th Avenue NW, stated it is his feeling that highway is being proposed to serve the gravel trucks. He expressed his concern for safety of his children if a four -lane road was constructed by his property. Chair Minton stated that the reason the roadway is being proposed is to serve the residents. He stated that traffic will only increase, since it is not likely that people would be willing to give up their cars, the City needs to plan for Mark Olson, 18778 Yankton Street, owner of Lots 1 through 8, 6th Plat of Camp Cozy, expressed his concern that if a bridge is constructed across the river, it would take out his the rental house he owns. Also, he was planning to submit a building permit application for an addition to his house and is unsure what to do. Matt James, 21272 Elk Lake Road, cited his concern that he did not understand how a corridor in the Country Road 33 area will help the traffic get through the city. He questioned why traffic lights cannot be set up in sequence so that traffic may travel at a specific speed and move through the city without stopping. Bill Zacharda, 13346 Ranch Road, questioned how long ago this road was planned. He expressed concern that building permits are being issued in areas where the proposed road may go through. Steve Rohlf explained the importance of road planning for future traffic needs. He stated that approximately one-half of the traffic traveling westbound across Anoka County to the intersection of Highway 169 and Main Street would not need to use that intersection if there was an alternate route to get to Highway 169. Also, another problem is congestion at School Street and Proctor caused by traffic coming from eastern Big Lake Township and western Elk River trying to get to Highway 10. He stated that a corridor needs to be identified before more development takes place, making the process even more difficult than it is at the present time. Lisa Green stated that she and her husband, Jeff, received a building permit to construct a new home at 13310 Ranch Road. The Green's stated that they would not have built there if they had known it would be in the way of a road. Diane Kohl, 20936 Ogden Street NW, was concerned that her home presently overlooks the gun club area now, and that view would become a major road there if this proposal goes through. She stressed the need to preserve the oak and prairie savanna located here, as it is one of the last ones remaining in the State. She stated that she felt most of the people in the audience moved to Elk River because of its natural beauty. Ms. Kohl urged that the residents make their views known to their elected officials. Steering Committee Meeting Minutes March 23, 1995 Page 13 Ed Archer, resident on Viking Boulevard, He felt it did not make sense to have the route go north to link up with County Road 33, since 90 percent of the traffic past his residence is traveling to and from the Highway 169 and Highway 10 locations. He expressed concern the it appears the road would cut through the center of his farm. Scoff Brobeck, resident on 211th Avenue NW, stated he moved to Elk River for the quality country life and was not in favor of the proposed road. Sue Stosser, 12772 210th Circle, expressed her concern that she was not told that there were plans to expand Country Road 33 when she bought her home 5 months ago, nor when she obtained a building permit to expand her drainfield. Claire Olson, 10476 205th Avenue NW, stated he felt 70 percent of the traffic on County Road 33 is gravel equipment. He indicated a widened shoulder for biking and pedestrians would be acceptable. He stressed that the Committee should listen to what the people want. Denise Henrichs, 11327 207th Avenue NW, she expressed her concern that half of her front yard would be gone if the road came through. She suggested that if there is excess money to be spent, that it should go to the schools, since they are already over capacity. Cecilia Scheel, 10271 213th Avenue NW, Ward 2 City Council representative, expressed her concern that County Road 33 is crooked and would be costly to improve. She stated that she felt there are other places to put the road. Hank Duitsman stated there are wetlands which prohibit the road from going straight across the City. Ted Dahmen, 12662 Ranch Rood, questioned why the road could not be constructed in the northern part of the county. Hank Duitsman stated that the people that are going to use it live closer to the City of Elk River. Mr. Dahmen stated that he felt the people who use Highway 10 don't live in Elk River, they live in the Twin Cities. Mike Arnold, 20328 Smith Street, stated he was not in favor of the road, even though it would benefit him by reducing his commuting time. Debbie Leech, 210fh Circle, stated she would like to see the road moved further north. She felt County Road 33 was being upgraded for the benefit of the gravel trucks. Pam Tuttle, 13390 Ranch Road, stated she felt the preservation of homes was more important than preserving ski trails. Stephanie Arnold, 20328 Smith Street, expressed her concern that the road would take people's homes, farms and their quality of life. Mike Gwynn, 13200 Ranch Road, stated that he owned 20 acres at the corner of County Roads 1 and 33. He stated that he was told be a realtor that if he were to list his property at this time he would be required to inform a potential buyer Steering Committee Meeting Minutes March 23, 1995 Page 14 that a road project is proposed. Mr. Gwynn stated that even if the road never comes, it would affect his property value now. He added that the reason he moved out to Elk River was to get away from the traffic and now it was coming to him. Mark Martin, 11063 205fh Avenue NW, stated that the City does not have to grow larger than the citizens want it to grow. He questioned how a road going east and west is going to help the traffic problem when the majority of the flow is north and south. Marcia Cunningham, 20883 York Street, questioned what studies have been done on County Road 22 to determine a need for the east -west corridor. She further questioned how much right-of-way will be needed if Mn/DOT takes over County Road 33. She stated they would not have put an addition on their home if they had known this issue was coming up. Dean Jongquist, 20464 Vance Street NW, stated he was totally opposed to the corridor project. He was concerned that it would be the residents tax dollars that would be used to acquire property for a road they did not want. Kathy Deutchman, 20523 Smith Street, resident for 16 years, stated that she feels the road is being built to accommodate gravel trucks. She added that along with a four -lane road will come Tom Thumbs and S.A. gas stations, and there will be no more "country". Tom Mortensen, 10576 205th Avenue NW, stated he felt if the Committee was a trying to project future needs, they would realize an east -west corridor should be placed further to the north. Diane Olson, 18778 Yankton Street, expressed her concern that there may be a four -lane bridge going through he present home site. She questioned when a decision would be made regarding the proposed bridge. Mike Niziolek, 12275 Rush Circle, biology teacher, expressed concern for the preservation of the natural scientific areas in Elk River. He discussed the Woodland Trails Park, Sand Dunes, gun club, golf course and Shiely properties and their potential value. Mr. Niziolek explained his desire to have an environmental learning center located in the Woodland Trails area. Robin Tuttle cited concern that children could not get to the park without crossing a highway. Chair Minton summarized the comments of the meeting as follows: -No one wants a highway -No one wants the traffic to increase -If we do need a highway, residents do not want it to affect their quality of life -They don't want it to go through people's homes -They don't want it to go through open area or park area Steering Committee Meeting Minutes March 23, 1995 Page 15 Jerry Hofhenke requested that maps be made available to the public showing the proposed transportation corridors, in a reduced size, and also copies of the March 1993 transportation study. Richard Lesitco, 11122 205th Avenue INK suggested that the corridor be placed further north to hook up with Anoka County Road #24 and come out on Sherburne County Road 21. Also, he suggested that if Mn/DOT takes over Anoka County Road 22, they could continue on Sherburne County Road 12 down to Highway 169. ARNE ENGSTROM MOVED THAT THE MEETING BE ADJOURNED. CHRIS KREGER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 12-0. The meeting of the Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee was adjourned at 11:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Debbie Kleckner Recording Secretary