My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7. EDSR 09-11-2006
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Economic Development Authority
>
EDA Packets
>
2003-2013
>
2006
>
09-11-2006
>
7. EDSR 09-11-2006
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/30/2011 11:22:45 AM
Creation date
9/30/2011 11:19:24 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
EDSR
date
9/11/2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
36
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
This section of law also authorizes a local government to seek an administrative <br />warrant from a judge or magistrate to gain access to inspect a specific building in <br />a proposed development or redevelopment area upon showing of probable cause <br />that a specific code violation has occurred and that the violation has not been <br />cured, and that the owner has denied the local government access to the property. <br />2. Remediation of an environmentally contaminated area. Section 117.025, <br />Subdivision 8 defines "environmentally contaminated azea" as an area: <br />(1) in which more than 50 percent of the parcels contain any substance <br />defined, regulated, or listed as a hazardous substance, hazardous <br />material, hazardous waste, toxic waste, pollutant, contaminant, or <br />toxic substance, or identified as hazardous to human health or the <br />environment under state or federal law or regulation; and <br />Comment: This definition is fairly broad, and does not include a sguare- <br />footage test as in earlier versions of the bill. However, given the rarity of <br />"blighted areas, "this definition will provide the only basis for redevelopment <br />takings in most cases. The 50% requirement will limit the scope of <br />redevelopment efforts even where contamination is present. <br />(2) for which the estimated costs of investigation, monitoring and testing, <br />and remedial action or removal, as defined in section 115B.02, <br />subdivisions 16 and 17, respectively, including any state costs of <br />remedial actions, exceed 100 percent of the assessor's estimated <br />market value for the contaminated parcel, as determined under section <br />73.11, for property taxes payable in the year in which the <br />condemnation commenced, or for which a court of competent <br />jurisdiction has issued an order under law or regulations adopted by <br />Minnesota or the United States, that clean up or remediation of a <br />contaminated site occur and the property owner has failed to comply <br />with the court's order within a reasonable time. <br />Comment: The cost test will limit the applicability of this definition to the most <br />severely contaminated sites. There will be many sites with significant <br />contamination that is costly enough to preclude redevelopment without public <br />intervention, but costly not enough to satisfy this defnition. <br />3. Reduction of an abandoned property. Section 117.025, Subdivision <br />5 defines "abandoned property" as property that: <br />(1) has been substantially unoccupied or unused for any commercial or <br />residential purpose for at least one year by a person with a legal or <br />equitable right to occupy the property; <br />(2) has not been maintained; and <br />BI-4 Kennedy & Graven <br />200 South Sixth Street, Suite 470 <br />Minneapolis, MN 55402 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.