Loading...
01-14-2003 CC MIN - SPECIAL-JOINTSPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE ELK RIVER CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION, AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE TASK FORCE HELD AT THE ELK RIVER CITY HALL TUESDAY, JANUARY 14, 2003 Councilmembers Present: Mayor Klinzing, Councilmembers Dietz, Kuester, Motin, and Tveite Councilmembers Absent: None Planning Commissioners Present: Pederson, Franz, Anderson, Jenson, Lemke and Offerman Planning Commissioners Absent: Commissioner Ropp Task Force Members Present: Gruys, Halpaus, Stanley, Dwyer, Lindahl, Scott and Lindberg Alternate: Lieser Task Force Members Absent: Kuester, Toth, Lundberg, Thompson, Gongoll, Kragness, Novotny, Zehringer and Bratlie Alternates: Nord, Peterson, Caswell and Mikols Staff Present: City Administrator Pat Kdaers, Director of Planning Michele McPherson, Senior Planner Scott Harlicker, Park Planner/Planner Chris Leeseberg, Utilities General Manager Bryan Adams; Building and Zoning Administrator Stephen Rohlf, City Attorney Peter Beck, Economic Development Coordinator Cathy Mehelich, Recording Secretary Debbie Huebner The meeting started at 6:33 p.m. Rusty Fifield, Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc. (HKGi) introduced himself and Brad Scheib. Mr. Fifield reviewed the overview of the process to date and the schedule of upcoming meetings including a public meeting to be held on February 20m at River of Life Church. Brad Scheib then reviewed the three future development options for future Elk River. The three options consisted of the Current Plan, the Market Trends, and the Guided Growth. He stated that each of the three options include creation ofgreenways and pedestrian connections between natural areas and open spaces. Mr. Scheib began the review of each of the three development scenarios by reviewing the different types of residential densities. The first type of residential is Low Density Residential, the second is Medium Density (3 units per acre), and the last is High Density Residential (apartments). Mr. Scheib went on to review the industrial land uses, pointing out the difference between the Market Trends and the Guided Growth plans. He noted that the market is not interested developing industrial properties; that the market is interested in additional housing development. He noted that the area near 165~h Avenue on the riverside of Highway 10 could support seven million square feet of industrial development. This would equal seven Anoka Industrial Parks. He noted that one issue City Council Minutes Page 2 January 14, 2003 that needs to be determined is the wastewater treatment plant capacity. Identifying sewered industrial development near Highway 169 and County Road 33 will need to be evaluated, in light of total plant capacity. Mr. Scheib went on to review the commercial land uses outlined on each of the three plans. In general, there is limited opportunity for commercial development in the Market Trends and Guided Growth plans. Area that is currently industrial has been identified as commercial near the Home Depot/Wal-Mart development. Under the Guided Growth, and expansion of downtown via redevelopment opportunities is proposed. The floor was opened for questions and discussions. Steve Rohlf, Building and Zoning Administrator, had the following questions and points regarding the proposed development scenarios: · What happens to the identified High Density Housing area near 171st Avenue if the commuter train station does not occur.> · He agreed with the need for additional industrial land, regardless of the market forces and suggested that the City plan for the accommodation of industries that do not need municipal sewer and water. · Existing residential areas should be buffered from new industrial development. · It would be preferable if industrial and commercial development occurred prior to residential development. · He would like energy savings to be included as part of the plan. The Woodland Trails/Elk River Golf Course/East-West Transportation Corridor should be re-evaluated and be included on the plan. · Highland Road should be identified as the East-West Corridor as opposed to 193~ Avenue. · The gravel mining area should have a realistic land use plan. Under the Guided Growth Plan, a regional park is proposed, and that is not realistic. · The open space area near the confluence of the Elk and Mississippi Rivers is appropriate, however, there are concerns regarding use of the land if it is guided for open space. He felt that the property owner should have economic use of the land. Mayor Klinzing noted that she liked the fact that the Task Force was planning for complete build-out of the community. She noted that the A-1 District was not to create 10-acre lots, but to preserve land around the gravel mines for a future sewer extension. She stated that she supported the 2 l/z- acre change north of County Road 33 and preferred the Guided Growth Plan over the other two. Mayor I~inzing noted that the open space identified around the Eagle Lake area is not realistic, due to the fact that it is inaccessible to the public by topography, ecology, and existing single-family homes. She suggested that the City look to other cities with gravel mines to identify a future plan for the gravel mining area. Dick Gruys noted that there is Twin Lakes Park in Anoka County, which can serve as an east side community park. Councilmember Paul Motin noted that his concerns are predominantly traffic and access. He is especially concerned with access from the east side to Highway 10 and that we plan for additional roads to allow residents to access the highway at more than one location. He stated that he was concerned with lack of increase in Highway Commercial areas to service additional "big box" retailers or additional restaurants such as The Olive Garden. Councilmember Motin noted that the Guided Growth is heavy on green space. City Council Minutes January 14, 2003 ............................. Page 3 Director of Economic Development Cathy Mehelich asked for clarification on the "mixed use" land use designation noted for the City-owned property on the east side. Mr. Scheib explained that use as a combination of live-work residential and other employment opportunities for that area. Utilities Manager Bryan Adams asked how much influence the City truly had on MN/DOT's transportation plans. Mr. Scheib and Mr. Fifield noted that the City can facilitate implementation by taking the lead on identified projects, or chose to ignore the proposed plans, which would slow down MN/DOT's implementation. However, there is a danger in to ignoring MN/DOT's plans, as the City could create two islands of Elk River divided by Highway 169. Planning Commissioner Dana Anderson stated that the difference between the plans is a reactive or proactive position. He noted that the key to the land use plan is transportation. MN/DOT is getting pressure from everywhere in the Metro area to move people through Elk River in a timely manner so that they can access the lakes area north of the City. He stated that the Guided Growth plan with its noted transportation corridors is good, but felt that more roads need to be identified on the plan. Commissioner Anderson stated he objected to the County Road 33-County Road 44 connection through Woodland Trails and the Elk River Golf Course and felt that it should not be included on the plan. Task Force Member Jim Stanley noted that more discussion needs to occur regarding the land use designations and what they mean. He stated that the City could take a proactive approach with MN/DOT to create the east-west corridors that are needed and to leverage MN/DOT funds. Councilmember Kuester stated that she has questions regarding the build-out based on the sanitary sewer capacity. She did not understand how much of any of the plans could serviced by sanitary sewer and felt that the sewer system could not handle all of the growth noted on the Guided Growth plan, especially in terms of industrial development. She also stated that she had concerns about the lack of space for high density housing in the future. Task Force member Kendra Lindahl stated that she hoped that once the plan was adopted, it would be used on a regular basis to evaluate land use proposals. She stated that there is too much industrial identified on the Guided Growth plan and that the City would not be able to build that much industrial. She stated that she liked the expansion of downtown into a larger town center. Ms. Lindahl noted that there will need to be political will to support the identified transportation corridors and to make them a reality. Task Force member Pat Dwyer stated that the Economic Development Authority supports identification of more industrial land that may be needed, due to the fact that this will be the last opportunity for the next 20 years to create space for industrial development. Once lands have been identified and utilized for residential development, it is difficult to create space for industrial uses. Task Force member Ron Halpaus stated that he would like the public to know what the public meeting will be for and to also understand that none of the plans are "cast in stone" and they do not have to pick one, and that they could discard each of the plans or select parts of plans for inclusion into the future land use plan. Councilmember Dan Tveite stated that he would like to see a discussion on the consequences of the decisions that are made. For instance, the transportation corridors or the expansion of sewer and water into various areas of the community will have a public cost to them, and that discussion needs to occur with the public as part of the selection of a land use plan. Mr. Fifield and Mr. Scheib noted City Council Minutes January 14, 2003 ............................. that some of those issues have been outlined as part of the narrative included in the packet this evening. Page 4 The group briefly discussed whether or not the development scenarios were ready for uploading onto the City's website. The consensus was that staff would wait to upload the information until immediately after the Task Force meeting on January 30m. Included in the upload would be a framework for discussion and the comments noted by Task Force member Halpaus that the public does not need to select a specific plan; that they can discard or pick and choose those portions of the plans which meet their idea of the future vision of Elk River. Having no further discussion, the meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Michele McPherson Director of Planning