My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
HRA MINUTES 07311990
StAnthony
>
City Council
>
HRA Minutes
>
1990
>
HRA MINUTES 07311990
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/26/2016 1:13:58 PM
Creation date
7/26/2016 1:13:58 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Housing Redevelopment Authority
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
7/31/1990
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
• <br />• <br />C� <br />H.R.A. Meeting <br />July 31, 1990 <br />page 3 <br />I An associate of the City Attorney, Jerome Gilligan of Dorsey E <br />2 Whitney, prepared a letter responding to interest expressed in <br />4 the possible redevelopment of the Clark Gas Station site at Stinson <br />Boulevard and 33rd Avenue. <br />5 <br />The City Attorney, Bill Soth, reviewed portions of the letter he felt <br />7 were significant to the question of this redevelopment. <br />R <br />9 During the 1990 Legislative Session additional restrictions were placed <br />10 on tax increment financing and creating.new tax increment financing <br />11 districts. Tax increment financing districts established after April <br />12 30, 1990 would reduce the City's state aid funds relative to the amount <br />13 by which State paid school aids would be reduced if the tax capacity <br />i4 captured by the tax increment district were available to: the school <br />15 district. <br />16 <br />1s Soth noted that the Clark Station site could possibly qualify as a <br />redevelopment tax increment district if it could be determined that <br />19 the building is "structurally substandard." The City Attorney felt <br />20 it was questionable [ha`[ this conclusion could be reached. <br />21 <br />22 Mr. Gilligan's letter stated it could be possible to use H.R.A. funds <br />23 which were not in the HRA General Fund nor were funds generated by <br />24 other tax increment districts of the H.R.A. to develop this site with - <br />25 out creating a another tax increment district. <br />26 <br />27 Soth stated the H.R.A. could prepare the parcel for development and <br />78 demolish the building thereby qualifying the parcel for tax Increment <br />29 financing. He noted that since considerable time has elapsed since <br />30 this property was rezoned to residential, it probably could not revert <br />31 back to commercial use. <br />32 <br />(33City Attorney Soth felt using the general funds of the H.R.A. would <br />34 be less restrictive and make it less difficult to find the "substandard" <br />35 aspect. <br />36 <br />(37J The City Attorney recommended the City and the H.R.A. not acquire the <br />38 site, but rather find a developer to directly take title to the pro - <br />39 perty. This recommendation was based on the potential liability for <br />40 environmental clean up costs which may materialize in that this pro - <br />41 perty formerly housed a gas station. <br />42 <br />43 Problems presently being experienced by the City of Roseville regarding <br />44 soil contamination were discussed. <br />LS <br />46 It.was noted that the underground tanks were removed from this site <br />47 some time ago, but that no soil borings nor ground tests had been done <br />48 to determine the condition of the soil. <br />49 <br />(50) Bill Soth suggested the property owner be contacted regarding any infor- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.