Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br /> <br />he did not know the Couffcil' s feelings. If Council's interitlsto mo~eforward: llewould <br />the motion include a contingency that the grading plan be reworked. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig stated he is not interested in creating growth but these are challenged <br />properties. On Potassium Street he was not in agreement, but theprobletn in not. doirig this is... <br />that these folks have the right to put driveways right onto County Road 5. A developer can only <br />hold property for so long. His concern is that the property adjacent to this has access of two <br />driveways, and this one has the right for three or four driveways. If they do not stimulate proper <br />growth, and road access they may find themselves in a bigger mess. He thin.](s they will find <br />people who will step up to the plate following this. From that standpoint he is encouraged to <br />move forward with the single access here in hopes that they do not get in a troubled situation <br />with potentially six accesses later. <br /> <br />Councilmember Look stated he had the opportunity to speak with all three of these parties after <br />the conversation they had at the City. It appeared as though the church was interested in <br />developing, Mr. Boe is of course, and the party in the middle did not feel he could cash flow due <br />to the zoning on the property; He does not know that they will overcome that feeling from the <br />standpoint that unless that individual is allowed to put in an apartment complex as per his <br />original plan he does not think he can cash flow. Councilmember Look stated he is concerned <br />from the standpoint of saying if they put in this development it will encourage other development <br />down the road; he does not think that is true. He is concerned that therewlll be what was <br />intended to be a temporary access to Highway 5, but it will be more of a permanent access to <br />Highway 5. He read in the information that Mr, Boe had made offers to the two other parties. <br />He asked if Mr. Boe would feel comfortable in communicating what happened in those offers or <br />why they were denied. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Mr. Boe declined to .comment. <br /> <br />Councilmember Look stated from that standpoint he does not know that they will be able to <br />succeed in getting a street through to 146th, and he does not know that it will present a solution in <br />the long run; he. thinks it will be a problem in the long run. <br /> <br />C01.lncilmember Olson stated she is concerned about the traffic,.although it is only an ayerage'of <br />14 cars. However, there are a lot of opportunities to push 14 cars out onto Highway 5, and this is <br />not the only one. She would feel more comfortable if the traffic into this development was <br />limited to a right-inlright-out, or at the - very least a right-out to limit the ,-opportunities for <br />collisions. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen asked what the ramifications would be if this road were to comein,frQm <br />County Road 5 and end, ahd what the City can do to encourage or force the road through where <br />itends at the temporary c~l-de-sac. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich replied the only thing the City can do would be to acquire or cond~mn <br />right-of-way at some point in the future. <br /> <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen commented it seems that any type of negotiation has been exhau~ted. <br /> <br />~;:V/:';';' ,'," <br /> <br />/<~,...:;~ <br /> <br />City, Council / August14, 2007 <br />Page 12 of32 <br /> <br />,....._.....~.-.....I' <br />c_ _:"C':':'<". <br />~,- '-4~-:;";,,-<: <br />::-----.-::.,:?-:_;,;.:,-Jt~1; <br /> <br /> <br />. ".;,'-,>-- <br />