Laserfiche WebLink
401 <br />402 <br />403 <br />404 <br />405 <br />406 <br />407 <br />408 <br />409 <br />410 <br />411 <br />412 <br />413 <br />414 <br />415 <br />416 <br />417 <br />418 <br />419 <br />420 <br />421 <br />422 <br />423 <br />424 <br />425 <br />426 <br />427 <br />428 <br />429 <br />430 <br />431 <br />432 <br />433 <br />434 <br />435 <br />436 <br />437 <br />438 <br />439 <br />440 <br />441 <br />442 <br />443 <br />444 <br />445 <br />446 <br />there was a nexus or connection between the cost of rebuilding or improving a <br />road in front of a busy, commercial area (e.g. turn lanes, traffic signals) since the <br />business(es) created that additional traffic and they preferred to locate in that area <br />based on the high traffic volume. Chair DeBenedet suggested that the <br />Commission consider land uses when revisiting the Assessment Policy, such as <br />residential areas (LDR and MDR) versus commercial lots and base assessment <br />percentages on that land use. Chair DeBenedet supported assessing all properties <br />based on a 7 ton, 32' wide street, with commercial and residential treated the <br />same up to a certain limit. Chair DeBenedet noted previous comments of <br />Member Vanderwall on Rosedale Mall's property taxes benefitting the <br />community overall; however, he questioned wheth their other benefits (e.g. Fire <br />and Police services) were not part of the discus ' well. <br />Ms. Bloom noted that, duel <br />(TIF), use of that revenue f <br />Mr. artz <br />Works cia <br />utility in <br />funding sou <br />to base capital <br />capital improv <br />discussion; and also noted <br />osing 40% of those tax <br />ing it difficult for <br />ra rom the region <br />bas that traffic <br />for tax increment financing <br />,vere now limited. <br />ng, traffic controls, etc. <br />d /or sizes of businesses and <br />could be tied to square <br />kosedale Mall and how to apply those <br />access for one or more parcels. <br />it on g discussions among City engineer and Public <br />)rted street utilities being allowed, such as the City's <br />icing that would allow cities to have an alternative <br />I be area -wide; or addressed with transportation districts <br />ent projects on an area -wide basis specific to those <br />Ms. Bloom noted the support in the City of Minnetonka from their business <br />community based on identified improvements and area benefits (e.g. Highway <br />169 and I -494) and applicable assessments; however, she noted that such a <br />transportation utility policy did not move forward. Ms. Bloom reviewed the <br />fundamental basis for a transportation utility was based on trips generated and <br />assessed accordingly, similar to what was done for the Twin Lakes <br />Redevelopment Area. <br />Page 10 of 13 <br />