2004-02-17 P & Z - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning & Zoning Commission February 17, 2004 Meeting Minutes the trails. Council Member Broussard Vickers stated that it was City Council and the Parks and Recreation Committee. Mr. Mehsikhomer questioned what Council was doing about the tax base in the town. Council Member Broussard Vickers stated that in years past, the tax differential between Commercial and Residential property had different taxing capacities with Commercial paying substantially more than Residential, a 3 to 1 ratio. Council Member Broussard Vickers stated that the law was modified in 2002 and that the differentiation no longer exists. Council Member Broussard Vickers stated that it currently is about one and a half to one ratio. Mr. Mehsikhomer stated that it is only because Residential increased to meeting Commercial. Council Member Broussard Vickers stated that what Mr. Mehsikhomer’s statement was untrue and that the state legislature changed how commercial property is taxed within the State of Minnesota right now so that the advantage that Commercial had in previous years to give cities more money no longer exists. Council Member Broussard Vickers also stated that on these particular pieces of property there are two very small, under developed commercial entities that are assisting the tax base very little and that the proposed development would bring in substationally more tax base than the existing properties currently do. Mr. Mehsikhomer stated that same is if there is no more burden on the City because of it and that he felt that this development would not increase the value of his property. Chair Hanson stated that the rear of the parcel in question, directly south of Sumac Court, was already zoned Residential and that the real argument was in regards to seven acres or less to be rezoned from Industrial to High Density, Single Family Residential with some of the existing property currently zoned for Residential and that PIMA Properties is th proposing to leave approximately three to four acres of the abutting property to 20 Avenue as Commerical. Chair Hanson stated that the rear piece or fifty percent of the entire development is already zoned Residential and did not need Council approval for residential development other than a developers agreement, etc. Chair Hanson stated that the only item needed would be access to the rear parcel and same could not be denied. Chair Hanson stated that he understand the concerns regarding the proposed roadway because he resides right off of Center Street and that he has experienced the same snowmobile traffic, cars in his yard, etc. Chair Hanson felt that there was no real impact on Center Street due to this development and that residents will continue to utilize Center Street to enter and exit their development. Chair Hanson stated that the City has no control over the proximity of the road, but Anoka County does and they will make that determination. Chair Hanson stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission and Council try to control development, find out what is best for the City and try to help mold the City into an image they and residents would like to see, but can not stop development. Commissioner McLean stated that the City gains Commercial from the proposal. Commissioner Wilharber questioned whether the Carpenter home would be removed along with other buildings. Mr. Keleher stated that they would be removed. Commissioner Wilharber stated that as the community grows, consideration is needed for safety regarding snowmobiles, 4-wheelers, and dirt bikes. Commissioner Wilharber also stated that other communities have banned them. Commissioner Wilharber stated that he Page 7 of 12