Laserfiche WebLink
<br />he did not know the Council's feelings. If Council's intent is to move forward, he would ask that <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 the problem in not doing 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 thinks they 'will fmd <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 hC/pes 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 there will 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 orfers 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 />Mr. Boe declined to comment. <br /> <br />Councilrnember 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 vv-ill be a problem in the 'long run. <br /> <br />Councilmember Olson stated she is concerned about the traffic, although it is only an average 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 comfOltable if the traffic into this development was <br />limited to a right-inlright-out, or at the very. least a right-out to linnt the opportunities for <br />collisions. <br /> <br />Councilrnember Dehen asked what the ramifications would be if this road were to come in from <br />County Road 5 and end, and what the City can do to encourage or force the road through where <br />it ends at the temporary cul-de-sac. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich replied the only thing jthe City can do would be to acquire or condenm <br />right-of-way at some point in the future. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen commented it seems that any type of negotiation has been exhausted. <br /> <br />City Council/August 14,2007 <br />Page 12 of 32 <br /> <br />P28 <br />