09/13/89 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

m al $ 179,6(K).0i}: Mr. }toln-; argued ~ha~ hc did no: have the oppomum imo th(' appraisal, re, or,. city Staff is recommendinz, that the ~ ,~i ,- ' , ..... m..~; lo." -- appraisal Mr. Norm ltolm ','as present and stared tha~ he has been averaging $5,()()(,)/acre for sales the HY-10 4th; deducting $55,000 for site developmen~ results in a ngl value of for the 15 acres; p~k d~ication should be ] 0~, of tim l~d ne~ value ($2,000); he is willing ~o pay up to $3,~)0 m resolve the p~k d~ication manet in order m ~ able ~o file final for HY-10 4th. Mr. Nolm noted thru cluing the platting process for HY-10 4th, flue City did amend ifs p~k d~ication requirements m ] 0~. of land value versus collection of park fees al the time of building peril issuance; this ordinance amendmem stoics ~ha~ developer ~d cra' will agree on p~k de, cation requirements a~ ~e time of pre} ~:ninaU, pla~ approval and that was aox done in the case of HY-~ 0 4th. Mr. Holm requened that thc p~k dedication fee for HY-]0 4th be established m $0,000: thru the $5,000 maimenance gu~amee be waived as the road was cons~uctcd almos~ one yea ago; the $500 appraisal dcposi~ be refunded. Mr, Goodrich noted it has been the City policy to establish the preliminary pla', approval date as the cutoff for consideration under changing ordinances; the park dedication ordinance requiring a cash payment of 10% of market value became effective Ju]v 30. 1988; HY-10 4th received preliminary plat approval on August 23, 1988. Mr. Goodrich also noted that Council is in the process of amending it's park dedication ordinance to reduce park dedication fees on commercial/industrial property ~o 5% of market value; Mr. Holm has the option to withdraw his plat and start the platting process over again, with a variance to the punic hearing, in order to accomplish reducing the park dedication fee for HY-10 4th to $4500. Council also has the option to recalculate the market value and park dedication fee based upon Mr. Holm's property sales figures. Based on Mr. Hoim's figures, park dedication would be 10% of $3,000/acre times 15 acres or $4500. The $4500 figure is comparable to what park dedication requirements would be if Mr. Holm reapplied for final plat approval of HY-10 4th Addition under the new park dedication ordinance inu'oduced earlier this evening. Motion by Councilmemty'~r Peterson and seconded by Councilmember Cich to establish a cash payment of $4500.00 to satis~, park dedication requirements for HY-10 4th Addition; to retain Mr. Norm Holm's $500 deposit for the purpose of paying appraisal fees for HY- l0 4th Addition; and to authorize that the $5,000 maintenance guarantee for H¥-10 4th Addition remain in effect for one year from the date of final plat approval (i.e., November i, 1989). Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Reimann, Councilmembers Peterson, Pearson and Cich. Voting No: None. Absent: CouncilmemberDeLuca. Motion by Councilmember Pearson and seconded by Councilmember Cich to grant a 120 day extension, effective June 27, 1989, to the time frame for recording the final plat of HY~ 10 4th Addition. Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Reimann, Councilmembers Peterson, Pearson and City Council/June 27, 1989 paoe I 1 of 15