My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-17-89 CCM
LakeElmo
>
City Council
>
City Council - Final Meeting Minutes
>
1980's
>
1989
>
01-17-89 CCM
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2025 7:22:29 PM
Creation date
10/2/2019 8:14:32 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 17, 1989 PAGE 9 <br />Bob Dreher., Section 32 landowner., asked what alternatives would the <br />City offer them for sewer and water improvements for this land. They <br />felt, without these services, they cannot sell. their land for <br />commercial development because they are unable to find buyers willing <br />to forgo the missing services. At this time, the remaining Section 32 <br />propertyowners have a signed petition requesting annexation to the <br />City of Oakdale. <br />Kit Richardson of Griffith Real Estate commented that while nearby <br />freeways make Section 32 a good commercial site, the land is not <br />necessarily easy to sell. He has been working with a company that is <br />considering a 125,000 SF corporate headquarters and Lake Elmo is their <br />first choice. He is also working with a developer who may build that <br />facility for them and will be coming to the City asking what will the: <br />City do for us. Richardson added, that the developer commented "Why <br />should we look at land in Lake Elmo when we can go to Oakdale and <br />build tomorrow?". <br />David Johnson, ConnCo Shoes, explained they have been involved in <br />discussion and meetings for seven years with the City and are still <br />sitting in exactly the same place today after all this effort. <br />Johnson added, that nobody is trying to change their address for the <br />sake of changing their address, but are recognizing the economic <br />potential of this property and are saying we need some help to be <br />competitive. <br />Councilman Williams asked the propertyowners "what are you going to <br />throw into the bargain?" He was not willing right now to put in sewer <br />without some contribution from the landowners. He would like to <br />establish some middleground and identify what help is needed. He has <br />not seen any proposed developments brought to the City for their <br />consideration. <br />Richardson responded that the problem is landowners are not <br />developers. He asked the Council if they can politically reverse the <br />so-called mandate of the last election. "Can you catch up and become <br />competitive?" Williams answered he has always favored dense <br />development in Section 32 within the MUSA Line. Hunt added Lake Elmo <br />does not want to be another Oakdale, but felt we offered something <br />better than Oakdale in terms of terrain there, the access and <br />population in the area and it is not a hodgepodge community like <br />Oakdale is becomming. <br />Bob Dreher and David Johnson suggested the City ask themselves if they <br />want to go through all the work and put the City at risk for 400-500 <br />acres out of the thousands of acres they represent. If they do not <br />have the support of the community, then why are they putting <br />themselves at any risk for such a disproportionate amount of the <br />community. If the City wants to have good, quality development, they <br />have to go out and create this atmosphere. They see a real problem <br />with this happening, partly based on the philosophy portrayed from the <br />last election. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.