Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />City Council <br />Oct. 14, 1987 <br />Council again discussed the developer•s luncheon idea with Pelstr•ing <br />pointingout that the City would pr~esent mar•keting studies, financing <br />options, etc. to the developer~ which is wor•k a developer• will normally <br />have to do on a site, and this can inter~est the developer~ in the <br />site. <br />DeLonais pointed out that most of the lar•ge tr~acts left in the City <br />ar~e owned by multiple owner•s, which makes acquisition of the pr•operty <br />difficult for developers. <br />Pelstring r•epor•ted that in this instance the City can indicate to a <br />developer• that it is inter•ested in wor•king on site assembly and a <br />financing program. <br />Scalze noted that the alter•native is that the pr•oper~ty develops in a <br />piece-meal fashion. <br />Nielsen agr~eed noting that the r•esulting lay-out of the pr~oper•ty is not <br />as good as it could have been. <br />Fahey felt that mor~e pr~oper~ties needed to be tar~geted in the City, <br />wi th the i ncl usi on of the Mor•gr~en/Schr•i er~ proper~ty and the Ger•vai s <br />pr•oper•ty for~ a star~t. <br />Blesener• felt that #3 in the Use Guidelines needed to be discussed. <br />Wilson felt that the City should not include a specific per•centage in <br />this guideline noting a tax incr~ement pr~oposal will suppor•t a cer~tain <br />tax incr•ement, and this is what it takes to make the pr•oject wor~k. <br />Council discussed this guideline as well as what other~ cities ar~e <br />doing, with Fahey indicating that he would like the City to be <br />competitive with or have an edge over surrounding cities in this <br />r~egar•d. Fahey noted that Vadnais Heights, for• example, has many <br />mor•e and lar~ger~ sites available, and Little Canada should have an <br />edge to attr~act developer•s that might want to locate in Little Canacla. <br />Pelstr•ing r•eplied that ever~y site is differ•ent, noting that Shor•eview <br />is consider•ing becoming involved in tax incr•ement financing. <br />Fahey also noted the City's higher• tax r~ate that will be consider•ed <br />by a devel oper~. <br />Pelstring noted that issues of land costs and access ar•e also <br />consider•ed. <br />Wi 1 son noted that the number• was i r•r•el event as i t was a matter• of <br />what it will take to make a TIF pr•oject wor~k. Wilson pointed out <br />that setting a maximum cap might tend to scar~e a developer• away. <br />Council discussed the per•centage fur•ther~ and felt that the guideline <br />as stated should r•emain noting that the City has an additional 5% <br />Page -4- <br />