02/24/2003 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 24, 2003 APROVED • 1 Councilmember O'Donnell stated his only issue is with the local determination. He thought that was 2 legislated and would want to be sure they were not giving anything up. City Attorney Hawkins 3 clarified they were talking about a general statement, just making sure they were not giving up any 4 local authority. Councilmember Carlson indicated this was correct. She stated in Item g. it says 5 `Interchange impacts must be evaluated in conjunction with Anoka County and the Minnesota 6 Department of Transportation, and a plan must be prepared to determine improvements needed to 7 resolve deficiencies'. She indicated her concern would be that they do not change the city's 8 ordinance. 9 10 City Attorney Hawkins suggested he sees no problem with the language. 11 12 Mayor Bergeson stated it was also suggested to change from `streets' to `streets and/or intersections', 13 which is just clarifying language, and asked if anyone had a problem with that, which no one did. 14 Councilmember Carlson added the additional clarification of Lake Drive and Main Street. Mayor 15 Bergeson stated that anytime the City can be more specific, he feels it is an improvement. He asked 16 City Planner Smyser to give a brief review of how the Council got to this point for Councilmember 17 Dahl. 18 19 City Planner Smyser indicated they were all working with the December 19 draft, and have been 20 making tweaks to it since then. He stated no new draft has been issued or printed since then. He 21 explained that at the last couple of meetings, quite a bit of discussion has taken place regarding 22 transportation. He stated that after one of the City Council's discussions when it was determined 23 what we had was not sufficient, Staff took another try at wording, which was discussed at the work 24 session, and the language from that went out this morning. He admitted there have been a lot of 25 changes, but stated unfortunately that is the process. He reiterated that no one has any other copies or 26 changes than anyone else, but that this ordinance has gone through several versions. 27 28 Councilmember Dahl stated if she understands correctly, a plan is being put in place for deficiencies, 29 and if the development is premature, the City would not finance improvements. City Planner Smyser 30 stated the City would not finance any of it. He stated this is trying to get clear criteria, which says if 31 you degrade the road by this much, you have to pay for improvements. He added that an impact to a 32 certain degree is acceptable, but if more, the developer has to have it fixed. He indicated this section 33 walks through that criteria. He added that just as when there are not sewer pipes, and the developer 34 has to provide them, this is addressing the transportation infrastructure in the same way, with specific 35 criteria. He stated if the Council approves a development in spite of an impact to LOS, fine, but if 36 not, it gives the City the legal right to deny. 37 38 Councilmember Reinert stated the main issue the Council is struggling with is intersections, with 39 specifics on the interchanges. 40 41 Councilmember Carlson stated that looking at the items regarding improvements, Items D. and E., as 42 bringing development in regard to roadways, she asked if that pulls in interchanges and addresses •43 Councilmember O'Donnell and Councilmember Reinert's comments. City Planner Smyser indicated 44 they were talking about two different things, and asked if she was talking about intersections or 45 interchanges. 13