2024-06-12 CC Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

()- TAX INCREMENT FINANCING REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 18 4 70% of the land in the district is made up of occupied sites and that more than 50% of the principal structures in the district are substandard. These conditions are reasonably distributed throughout the district. The physical characteristics of the district meet the requirements for a Redevelopment District for Tax Increment Financing under Minnesota law. Compliance with State Statute State Statute for Redevelopment TIF Districts state: Subd. 10.Redevelopment district. (a) "Redevelopment district" means a type of tax increment financing district consisting of a project, or portions of a project, within which the authority finds by resolution that one or more of the following conditions, reasonably distributed throughout the district, exists: Inspection Report (1) parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area of the district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures and more than 50 percent of the buildings, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance; Sections (2), (3) & (4) do not apply to the proposed district. Then, the statue states: (b) For purposes of this subdivision, "structurally substandard" shall mean containing defects in structural elements or a combination of deficiencies in essential utilities and facilities, light and ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout and condition of interior partitions, or similar factors, which defects or deficiencies are of sufficient total significance to justify substantial renovation or clearance. (c) A building is not structurally substandard if it is in compliance with the building code applicable to new buildings or could be modified to satisfy the building code at a cost of less than 15 percent of the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square footage and type on the site. The municipality may find that a building is not disqualified as structurally substandard under the preceding sentence on the basis of reasonably available evidence, such as the size, type, and age of the building, the average cost of plumbing, electrical, or structural repairs, or other similar reliable evidence. The municipality may not make such a determination without an interior inspection of the property, but need not have an independent, expert appraisal prepared of the cost of repair and rehabilitation of the building. An interior inspection of the property is not required, if the municipality finds that (1) the municipality or authority is unable to gain access to the property after using its best efforts to obtain permission from the party that owns or controls the property; and (2) the evidence otherwise supports a reasonable conclusion that the building is structurally substandard. Items of evidence that support such a conclusion include recent fire or police DRAFT AS OF JUNE 5, 2024 22