My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11/08/76
10.0.0.9
>
City Commissions
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
1970's
>
1976
>
11/08/76
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/15/2009 12:10:31 AM
Creation date
10/14/2003 1:36:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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
-3- <br /> <br />name <br /> 'Sol c <br /> <br />Mrs. pinke <br /> <br />Mr. Olson <br /> <br />Mr. Solac <br /> <br />Mr. Olson <br /> <br />Mr. Schmidt <br /> <br />Gommissioner Kramer <br /> <br />This development may have a serious impact <br />on the schools and that result would be <br />increased taxes for the property owners ~ the <br />c ornrnunit y. <br />The Dakota County Assessor's records indicated <br />that the average trailer in Dakota County <br />is worth $6,500 and it generates $93.50 in taxes. <br />A mobile home park owner pays property taxes <br />in addition to t~xes paid by the individual owners <br />of the mobile homes; and in addition, normally <br />not many children live in a mobile home park. <br />Would assessments be levied against surrounding <br />property owners for improvements constructed. <br />in regards to the project? <br /> Since this proposal has been before the City <br /> for many months, he questioned why this item <br /> was being comsidered be£ore his proposal <br /> involving land which was recently ana~exed from <br /> the Tov,~ship of Marshan. <br /> Has the Planning Commission decided on what <br /> their recommendation will be or do they want <br /> petitions from adjacent property owners? <br /> If petitions are submitted in opposition, people <br /> should indicate why they are opposed and not <br /> just that they are opposed to the project. A <br /> petition indicating that the individuals are <br /> opposed to the project but state no grounds for <br /> their opposition is of little value to the <br /> Plan~ing Cornmis sion. <br /> <br />~a_fter all people present were afforded an opportunity <br />to be heard, the public hearing was closed at 8:32 P. Iv[. <br /> <br />Chairman Stoffel indicated that the matter will be <br />referred back to the Kramer Committee and placed <br />on the next Planning Commission agenda for further <br />dis cus sion. <br /> <br />Commissioner Fischer reviewed the .~0rnmi~ee report <br />and indicated that prior to the meeting, there did not <br />seem to be any definite consensus among the three <br />members of the Corn_rnittee regarding a recommendation. <br />Items which Commissioner Fischer felt were impogtant <br />were: 1. What is the purpose of zoning? Z. Is the area <br />in question of residential, commercial or industrial nature? <br />3. Should the City encourage multiple industrial sites? <br />4. What is best for the City? 5. IA;hat is best for the <br />homeo~vners? 6. What is best for industrial and commercial <br />owners? An overriding concern to Commissioner Fischer <br />was that the C~ty should be promoting new industrial development <br /> <br />zONING AMENDMENT <br />BLOCKS 130, 134, AND <br />135, TOWN OF HASTINGS <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.