Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />Planning Commission <br />July 9, 1987 <br />Steven <br />Feig CUP <br />Tax Incre- <br />ment Finance <br />District No. <br />1 <br />Mr. DeLonais recommended that the Steven Feig Conditional Use Permit <br />for auto part sales and repair service be subject to compliance <br />with the recommendations as contained in the Planner's report dated <br />July 6, 1987, and subject to the applicant meeting with the building <br />owner to determine if he will make the improvements to the property <br />as outlined in the Planner's report. <br />Motion seconded by Mr. Herkenhoff. <br />Motion carried 7 - 0. <br />The Planner presented the Tax Increment Finance District No. 1 plan <br />to the Commission regarding Thunder Bay 2nd Addition. The Planner <br />explained how tax increment financing will work in this instance. <br />Bill Davison questioned why the developer of the project did not <br />purchase the Wright property and why the City became involved with <br />tax increment financing. <br />• <br />The Planner explained that the builder felt the cost of the property <br />was too high, noting that the builder would gain two lots, but the <br />existing Wright home would be demolished. <br />Timmons commented that it was her feeling that the City did not <br />receive adequate road frontage adjacent to the Wright property, and <br />that it was her understanding that the road was have a 50 -foot <br />right of way and this was one of the reasons that tax increment <br />financing was used. What the City got was a 40 -foot wide road <br />with setbacks to a 40 -foot wide road. <br />The Planner explained that the developer dedicated a 40 -foot wide <br />road easement with an additional 10 feet of easement for snow storage. <br />Davison questioned the use of tax increment financing for this project. <br />The Planner explained that it was a small tax increment project, <br />and noted that the situation was unusual in that no bonds are being <br />sold and the City is paying the cost out of the General Fund. Also <br />the length of the project is only 2 or 3 years, while most tax increment <br />projects are 8 to 10 years. <br />Mrs. Timmons recommended approval of the Tax Increment Finance <br />District No. 1 Plan for the Thunder Bay 2nd Addition as presented. <br />Motion seconded by Mr. Herkenhoff. <br />Motion carried 7 - 0. <br />Page 4 <br />