My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2007.06.18 EDA Packet
Hugo
>
Community Development
>
EDA
>
EDA Agenda/Packets
>
2007 EDA Packets
>
2007.06.18 EDA Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/25/2020 3:59:49 PM
Creation date
8/24/2017 1:52:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commissions
Meeting Date
6/18/2007
Document Type
Agenda/Packets
Commission Name
EDA
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
40
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
June 4, 2007 <br />Comments from participants regarding the future use of their property and/or <br />adjacent property <br />Name: Jeffrey and Lynn Dumroese <br />Location: 5815 135th St N <br />Keep the property to the west and south of me undeveloped. The wildlife is great. I <br />know Pulte Homes wanted to develop it in the past but I feel it would be better suited <br />to leave undeveloped. Especially for the residents all around the property. <br />Name: Mark and Dianna Olson <br />Location: 13315 Elmcrest Avenue N. <br />We do not want changes to our property. Too much development has already taken <br />place. Former residents sell property to developers. They leave, the developers <br />leave and their impact is left, which in most cases is high density development that is <br />not what people originally moved to Hugo for. <br />Name: Thomas Raster <br />Location 15227 Greene Avenue <br />No! We definitely prefer being left alone. However, we would be interested in <br />learning about programs that compensate landowners for preserving rural land, <br />particularly when that parcel includes lakeshore as ours does. Over the years, we've <br />planted over 4,500 trees on our 7+ acres ... and our property has become a <br />sanctuary for wildlife displaced by development west of Greene Avenue. We'd be <br />sick if to be forced to sell out and then have a developer destroy the character of our <br />property. In our specific case, can city officials resist pressures from the landowner <br />to our east for premature expansion of the MUSA, particularly when that expansion <br />would envelope properties whose owners don't want to subdivide but might be <br />forced to do so should their property taxes balloon to reflect the extension of city <br />water and sewer services through their properties ... or who might be forced to hook <br />up to city water and sewer. <br />Name: Pete Sampair, Hugo Investments LLC <br />Location: NE corner of 130th Street and Hwy 61 <br />A letter was sent to the City on May 9, 2007 specifically requesting an amendment to <br />the City's Comprehensive Plan to allow a 50 unit apartment complex on the <br />property. <br />Name: Thomas D. Benick, Thommes & Thomas Partnership <br />Location: PI D = R-08-031-21-33-0001 & R-08-031-21-34-0002 <br />A letter was sent to the City on April 1, 2007 requesting that these properties be <br />included in the MUSA boundary as part of the Comprehensive Plan update process. <br />4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.