Laserfiche WebLink
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 21, 1991 PAGE 5 <br />identified by property description. Further, when Oakdale <br />subsequently sought to annex the properties that were not <br />petitioned, but were not within their City, the Municipal Board <br />decided "no". Going thru the property descriptions, staff <br />discovered they included only tax exempt land which means they <br />missed 5 residents in the southwest corner of Section 33. The <br />Municipal Board made an error by including these residents. <br />Washington County has sent out the tax bills and these 5 residents <br />are paying Oakdale taxes. The City Attorney was looking into <br />this. <br />Economic Development Committee: <br />Mayor Johnson stated he would withdraw his proposal for an <br />Economic Committee and will attempt to get our Lake Elmo business <br />community involved in doing a survey on existing businesses, <br />expansion plans, timeliness, and what we have that landowners feel <br />is appropriate for development. <br />Councilman Hunt suggested contacting SAEDC and informed the <br />Council that a PZ member is one of the directors on the Stillwater <br />Chamber of Commerce. <br />M/S/P Dave Johnson/Mottaz - to rescind the motion of March 15, <br />1991 to appoint an Economic Board. (Motion carried 5-0). As a <br />point of order, Councilman Williams raised the issue that a Mayor <br />cannot make motions, but was overruled by the Mayor. <br />Residential Development: <br />Mayor Johnson stated he has been talking to people about cluster <br />development, leaving unchanged the average density of residential <br />development, but clustering them on smaller lots, 1-1.5 acres. In <br />his mind the last approved Comp Plan has established an <br />unfortunate policy of siting homes on acreage of 3.3 acres per <br />homestead. What this intends to do is quickly gobble up our city <br />in large tracts leaving nothing as Rural that is so highly prized <br />by our residents. What we are being left with is a large lot <br />suburban territory that provides none of the expansive vistas that <br />one visioned when one thinks of country. He feels the policy has <br />both physical and sociological downside. The Mayor suggested <br />holding a town meeting between now and September 1, 1991 where the <br />risk and rewards of continuing down the current residential path <br />or establishing a cluster potential in our ordinances. Further, <br />after such a meeting, lie would like to see alternative positions <br />written and mailed in a newsletter to solict city-wide comment. <br />Councilman Hunt felt this was an excellent idea to have in a <br />Forum. Councilman Johnson indicated he has sensed from talking to <br />people a strong desire for large lots and that the large lot <br />developments are sold fast. He would be in favor of getting an <br />accurate assessment from the residents. Councilman Williams <br />indicated he certainly was in favor of public meetings. He was <br />against cluster development because he felt the large lots were <br />strictly holding zones so that it is easier to put sewer in and <br />other city utilities. We have seen that already in Lake Elmo <br />Heights, where the developer signed an agreement with the city to <br />