2019.05.21 Planning Commission - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Preliminary Planned Residential Development Planning Commission Report; 5-21-19 Page 22 (cont.)  Analysis on many of the concerns raised via public comment are addressed throughout this report: 1. Traffic (page 37) 2. Proposed Roadway Changes (page 27) 3. Building Heights (page 15) 4. Parking (page 29) 5. Infrastructure Upgrades/water pressure (page 28) 6. Public Safety (page 38)  Analysis on traffic, air pollution, and noise pollution is also addressed directly in the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the project which is summarized on page 35.  Concerns about the impact this development will have on local schools and concerns that local taxes will go up to cover the costs of more students are all unfounded. Schools in Minnesota receive their funding via a State established formula, and the payment to each school is specifically tied to the number of pupils enrolled at that facility. Tax dollars at the state level for education are set aside based on the overall number of expected students in the State, and that has absolutely nothing to do with individual developments in any community. Whether little Johnnie goes to school in New Brighton, Rochester, or Roseau, the communal education cost to Minnesota taxpayers is the same. With regards to referendums, School District upgrade plans are based on regional projections for growth within the district and not on individual developments. In the case of the Mounds View School District which would serve this proposed development, New Brighton is only one of nine municipalities that sends students to their facilities, and we make up only 16% of the district’s overall land area. Accordingly, planned changes in New Brighton have only a minimal impact on the long-term plans of the district and their referendum requests (which voters have final say on). Furthermore, given that the Mounds View School District just recently went through the referendum process, it’s highly unlikel y they’ll ask for another consideration from voters anytime soon.  Concerns over the use of Tax Increment Financing (TIF) and its alleged impact on taxpayers are unfounded. There will be no reduction in tax revenue for the City, State, or School District as a result of this development. Establishment of TIF District #34 requires the City to identify the existing base tax value of these properties, and those taxes will continue to be paid and will continue to be distributed throughout the life of the TIF district. Additionally, the vacant land previously owned by the City will now be privately owned, so additional taxes for that land will also be collected thereby resulting in an increase in tax dollars being