12-16-2016 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

EDC Minutes November 18, 2016 Page 3 of 8 to help the private sector developers in making the project financially feasible. Once built, the buildings increased tax value helps to reduce the tax burden overall on the residents and makes the area aesthetically pleasing which increases the quality of life in the community. Ideally, the government would not need to get involved and the private sector would create the development without any subsidies to fill the demand. In fact, subsidies like a TIF have a statutory requirement that doesn’t allow Cities to use this type of financial assistance unless the project passes the “But For” test. The “But For” test essentially means the project would not occur on its own “But For” the assistance of a TIF. Cities can also pass this type of test for tax abatements if desired. That is why government would need to step in on a development; otherwise there wouldn’t be a need for the government to get involved financially. Therefore, this is a good time to reevaluate the project and define what the City envisions for this area. Commissioner Rieland asked if there was any interest from a grocery store. Beeman said there was not and the closest thing to a grocery store is requests from restaurants. Beeman said the area is too small for this type of use unless there was an express grocery store. Wal-Mart, Target, and Amazon have all experimented with the concept of express stores and while the early stages of the trend seemed promising, the trend has seemed to stagnate. Beeman said the City had talked about a mixed-use development at one time but when talking to the developers on the developer tours last year, all of them cautioned against the mixed-use idea based on their experiences in other parts of the metro where they have vacant store fronts. They also said in a mixed-use development what normally happens are the existing businesses in the community flock to the new development leaving behind vacancies from their original locations. This robbing Peter to pay Paul effect doesn’t create any new businesses for the community and the developers felt that no new net gain is the result at the end of the day. One of the original ideas was to create a destination down town but there isn’t enough room for this concept. The City could require the developer to add amenities such as ponding and landscaping to create the desired effect, however Greenfield Ave splits the property and the water and wastewater utilities are already installed under the roadway. Relocating those utilities comes with an added cost that some developers may find financially unreasonable. The other challenge is the corner of County H2 and Mounds View Boulevard. That corner is a safety concern if making a left hand turn into the Crossroad Pointe development. Reconfiguring the intersection or only allowing a right-in may help with the safety aspect, but if the Crossroad Pointe site is not easily accessible then this is a deterrence to retail uses on the site. The City would need to work with the County to come up with a road ingress and egress plan that makes sense depending on the type of development that untimely is constructed. Beeman informed the Commission that the City had contracted with Stantec who had completed a concept drawing of the site and had met with the residents in a visioning session and documented their comments. The report was completed in 2014. So, the question is, should the City redo some of the reports such as conducting a new survey to residents and/or holding another open house to receive comments etc. or should the City use the existing Stantec reports. This is a question that the Council will need to address at their next Council workshop in December. Trends and economic factors change over time, like the recession. However, the economy seems to be improving and the fundamentals of the report are still usable.