Laserfiche WebLink
Councilmember Hendriksen stated that he had spoken with Mr. Jankowski earlier and <br />had received the information he requested at the Council work session. He stated that <br />what he had received was sufficient but that he would like to see an appraisal done of the <br />value of the property at the proposed zoning. The site on the east side of Sunwood Drive <br />is about 4.2 acres. According to the appraisers, the value of the property was about <br />$200,000. The right-of-way we are taking for #47 is 50 feet on each side of the <br />centerline, which is a minimum amount. He suggested that while on the surface it <br />appears we are making use of these houses, the City is actually giving up in excess of <br />$200,000. If we had an appraisal of this property with the zoning proposed in the <br />Comprehensive Plan, it's above $221,000. If we are successful in terms of getting a <br />preservation status lifted, we may have to go back and condemn these houses a second <br />time. That's not in the best interest of the City of Ramsey. He felt that we could spend <br />$200,000 better than this to help people. Councilmember Hendriksen added that we <br />would end up with a bunch of houses, less than pleasing in appearance. If we want to <br />spend that kind of money, we could buy five townhouses and not have spent any more <br />money. If we give away that land, we are giving away $200,000. The Comp Plan <br />proposes a higher density zoning which would make it a higher value, and these houses <br />are too close to the road and maybe would have to be condemned in the future. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec stated that the past Council has made a commitment to go ahead with this <br />project. There are three past members on the Council still who feel it is a worthwhile <br />project. A commitment of sorts was made to ACCAP. <br /> <br />Councilmember Haas Steffen suggested that we do not have to let the land move out of <br />the hands of the City. <br /> <br />Jo Ann Wright with ACCAP stated they just want to use the land and it makes sense for <br />the City to retain it. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen noted that the minutes state the word "considered". If <br />someone made a commitment beyond that, then there should be more discussion. He <br />referenced a previous discussion about this project paying taxes at a level lower than the <br />residential rate. He expressed concerns about liability if the City owns the property. He <br />also referenced a comment by ACCAP about paying for the road and driveway. <br /> <br />Ms. Wright stated it would be the roadway that would provide access to the five <br />properties. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated that in the past, the City has assessed properties for <br />improvements and he wondered if this would be assessed. <br /> <br />Ms. Wright responded that this was not communicated to them. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen suggested that if these were townhomes, it would be a better <br />tax base, we would recoup the $200,000+, we would have no liability, and it would be <br />more aesthetically pleasing. This particular plan does not sound like a win/win situation <br /> <br />City Council/February 9, 1999 <br /> Page 6 of 13 <br /> <br /> <br />