My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-11-05
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
04-11-05
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/17/2012 10:46:45 AM
Creation date
11/14/2006 4:23:52 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
245
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
<br />ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION MINUTES <br />MARCH 28, 2005 <br /> <br />PAGE20F5 <br /> <br />Ms. Kvilvang noted the County Assessor would review where the final purchase price was, land e <br />values of similar types of property, as well as what the future use was going to be. <br /> <br />Conncilmember Larson asked if they dropped the value because of the clean-up. Ms. <br />Kvilvang stated that was a possibility. She then stated that Ehlers would review this. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden asked how the present school levy would impact this. Ms. Kvilvang <br />asked which school levies she was referring to. <br /> <br />Councilmember Larson stated he believed right now they had one operational and one capital <br />school levy. <br /> <br />Couucilmember Larson stated at the public hearing there was a question about Falcon Heights. <br />He asked if staff had found out any further information. Ms. Wolfe stated they had a TIP district <br />established in the 1990's where the developer went bankrupt and another developer took over the <br />development. She noted this did not create difficulties because another developer took over the <br />agreement. She indicated the developer that had taken over the project requested the City <br />decertify the district, which the City did not want to do and this went to Court in which the <br />developer lost. <br /> <br />Bruce Kunkel, Economic Development Commission Chair, requested Ms. Kvilvang get back <br />to the Council regarding Councilmember Holden's question regarding the school levy. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Councilmember Larson asked ifthere would be a series of TIP Agreements. Mr. Barr replied <br />that was correct and each sequential phase of development could have separate a TIF. <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant asked if this was approved, how would CRR planned to use it. Mr. <br />Barr replied it meant the Council was facing the reality that for a property of this scale and <br />nature, it will require some amount ofTIF and for different cities, TIP could be an issue and that <br />was why they wanted to bring this to the table at this time. He indicated it was important to <br />know if Council was or was not in favor of TIP because that decision would change the <br />development. He noted it was clearly better to get a State and/or Federal grant as opposed to a <br />TIP note or a special assessment. <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant asked how CRR would use this document. Mr. Barr replied having <br />this public financing policy in place would assist them in obtaining third-party financing. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden asked if the County could use some of this money for improvement of <br />County roads. Ms. Kvilvang stated there was a provision requiring notification of the County it <br />there was going to be an impact to County roads in which the County could require the <br />improvement of the roads be used with this money. <br /> <br />Mr. Barr stated it was his experience that this could be negotiated in advance with the County. <br />Mr. Clark noted this was something they would be looking at with the County. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.