Laserfiche WebLink
r <br />NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS INC. <br />MEMORANDUM <br />TO: little Canada Mayor and City Council <br />FROM: Brad Nielsen <br />DATE: 10 February 1981 <br />RE: Demont, Richard - Lot Size Variance <br />FILE NO: 758.09 (80.28) <br />In our staff report dated 5 January 1981 we recommended that a variance be granted to <br />Mr. Demont due to the uncertainty of Lake Street ever being developed. Since the <br />applicant had not appeared before the Planning Commission on 8 January, the City <br />Council referred the request back to the Planning Commission for a recommendation. <br />At its 5 February meeting the Commission appeared to favor the variance, but recom- <br />mended that a more comprehensive approach to the problem should be pursued. In <br />this regard, we discussed the possibility of involvement by the City in resolving the <br />problem through the use of what is called tax increment financing. We had intended <br />to present tax increment financing to the City at a future date in conjunction with <br />elderly housing, but feel that tax increment could possibly be used to address the issue <br />of substandard lots in the Lake Street area now under consideration. <br />Upon further discussing the Demont request within our office, we feel that while tax <br />increment financing remains a potential solution, U should perhaps be considered as <br />one of the last resorts, and that the City should first examine other, less complicated <br />options. The purpose of this report is to outline the possible solutions to the problem <br />at hand. <br />1. The City's first option may be to simply deny the variance. The applicant would <br />then be forced to either buy surrounding lots to come up with adequate square <br />footage or sell to surrounding land owners so they would meet the requirements. <br />Since the possibility also exists that the property would become tax forfeited, <br />this approach is not considered the best solution to the problem. <br />2. The City could approve the variance based on the reasons set forth in our 5 <br />January staff report. While this solves the problem for Mr. Demont, R also <br />prolongs the problem of the surrounding Tots. Further, it raises the question of <br />precedence for future variance requests. <br />15 <br />4820 minnetonka boulevard, suite420 minneapolis, mn 55416 612/925 -9420 <br />,1 <br />