Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Beresford council approves letter endorsing proposed West Town subdivision outside city limits
Summary
Council voted to write a letter of endorsement for a proposed 18‑lot residential and two‑lot commercial development outside city limits after a developer described plans and outstanding infrastructure issues.
Mayor Sealy and the Beresford City Council voted to send a letter endorsing a proposed residential and commercial development located outside the city limits, after the project's proponent described the plan and outstanding utility issues.
The developer, Mike O'Connor, said the proposal would rezone property from rural/agricultural to rural residential and start with 18 residential lots ranging from about 2 to a little over 6 acres and two commercial lots along Highway 46. "I am a resident of the city of Beresford now," O'Connor said during the public comment period and urged the council to support the project before the county commission.
The council's endorsement request followed presentations and public hearings at county planning and zoning; O'Connor said the plan had been engineered and that planning and zoning staff had reviewed it. He identified remaining infrastructure questions, most notably water service: the area lies in the Clearwater utility territory, and O'Connor said a hydraulic (flow) study was pending to determine whether Clearwater has capacity and what pipe upgrades would cost. He also said access would likely come from Highway 46 and a township road and that turnarounds had been added in design for emergency vehicles.
Council members discussed annexation as a possible future option and noted county jurisdiction over the site. Noah Westergaard of planning and zoning was referenced during the discussion by speakers as the staff contact for technical details, and the mayor noted the project could affect school district valuations.
After discussion, a motion to draft a letter of endorsement for the development was made, seconded and carried by vote. The council did not adopt any binding infrastructure commitment; the letter recorded support for the project as presented and noted outstanding items — including the hydraulic study and water‑service costs — that must be resolved through county and utility processes.
The mayor said the council would try to provide a draft for review within the week and that county action would depend on the pending hydraulic study. The council did not vote on annexation, did not obligate city funds and did not change utility service territories.
