2012-06-26_PWETC_AgendaPacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

170 Ms. Bloom advised that the assessment policy addressed traffic: the number of 171 trips generated per day, accessibility and usage; with the idea that a 32' wide 172 street is sufficient for residential properties. In considering the neighborhood 173 business, Ms. Bloom advised that staff was cognizant that those businesses may 174 be in a residential or a commercial area. However, Ms. Bloom advised that the 175 idea was to establish a threshold; and since commercial property was valued 176 higher than residential properties per square foot, the concept of an appraisal 177 became critical. 178 179 Discussion ensued regarding examples of types of neighborhood businesses that 180 could be located on a residential street; whether those businesses were seeking 181 additional traffic and the justification for properties not zoned R -1 and R -2 to be 182 assessed up to 50% of the project cost versus 25% based on traffic generation, 183 unlike a typical home business; with the consensus of Members being that most 184 commercial businesses, with few exceptions, could be found on major roadways. 185 186 Chair Vanderwall spoke in support of the 50% assessment level for properties 187 zoned other than R -1 or R -2. Chair Vanderwall rWted that assessments specific to 188 a commercial property (e.g. stoplight at intersection into Rosedale) would be 189 billed directly to that business at 100% if specific to that business; but the City 190 wouldn't want that to apply to smaller businesses. 191 192 Ms. Bloom advised that part of the planning philosophy was for a higher density 193 and intensity of uses on major streets, and lower intensity on local streets. Ms. 194 Bloom reminded Mem that the 25% and 50% were to serve as a threshold. 195 196 Section l.e 197 Using past development as an example, discussion ensued on the various 198 assessment rates, or lack thereof, at Har Mar Mall and the signal at Victoria Street 199 and Larpenteur Avenue, and applicable cost if any to the City. 200 201 Section 2 202 Ms. Bloom reviewed the formulas, and their rationale, for various zoning 203 breakdowns, corner lots, and the philosophy for addressing the short/long sides of 204 lots as applicable without consideration of access points; and commercially -zoned 205 lot calculations and the rationale for those as well. Ms. Bloom noted that the 206 current assessment policy had been revised in 2001, compiling prior, but separate, 207 ordinances. 208 209 Section 2.b 210 Chair Vanderwall noted that he did not see the actual reference to short or 211 long sides in the language of the policy, with Ms. Bloom concurring, and 212 noting that she would revise language to include it. 213 214 Chair Vanderwall asked that staff come prepared to the next meeting with 215 pictures providing examples of irregular- shaped lots. Page 5 of 14