9.1. SR 02-03-2014 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Preliminary Plat • Park Dedication-The key discussion point relevant to the preliminary plat was park dedication. The applicant is combining seven parcels (two previously occupied by a motel, three lots that the existing dealership parcel is on, one house parcel on 1715`and an industrial oudot). The end result will be the creation of one main parcel for the dealership and two outlots. Staffs recommendation is that since none of the properties have previously paid park dedication,all of the acreage needs to be calculated in determining the final dedication amount. The applicant believes that dedication should be charged only for the northern lots and not the dealership property (it was agreed upon that the outlots will pay park dedication at the time that they are platted,which is standard City policy). The park dedication amount is approximately$50,715 if only the northern lots (the existing lots previously occupied the motel) pay dedication versus $111,699 if all lots are calculated. (These figures do not include future oudot payments, assumes 2006 rates and the exact acreage figures will be determined at the time of final plat.) Staff reviewed the interpretation of requiring all parcels pay dedication, since none previously paid,with the City Attorney and he concurred with the interpretation. The following points were discussed by the Planning Commission: 1) A few commissioners were of the opinion that some mid-point (50% of the dedication amount attributed to the current dealership site) would be an appropriate request. This assumes 100%payment for the northern lots. 2) Some commissioners believed that it was not up to the Planning Commission to randomly negotiate a park dedication amount that has always been set at a given rate. Likewise, they were of the opinion that since the principle of a park dedication payment is that all parcels should pay a one time fee to capitalize the City's park system, there should not be an exemption for this applicant. 3) A commissioner stated that some reduction should be made since the applicant has not requested abatement or TIF and this was a way of assisting the project. 4) Some commissioners expressed concern that the deviations from standard policy and the introduction of mixing negotiated park dedication based on site plan considerations (e.g. closing off the Highway 10 access) starts to create policy deviations and a basis for future discussions that become unwieldy. The Planning Commission voted 5 to 2 in favor of requiring full park dedication. The Planning Commission minutes reflect some minority opinions and comments regarding the same. Conditional Use Permit • Access—The Commission discussed the location of the access from 171"Avenue and how it might be impacted by a future interchange on Highway 10. They discussed the need to move the access further east, away from Highway 10,to accommodate the possibility of a future interchange. The City Engineer provided information about the IRC study and the probability that any future interchange along Highway 10 would likely be to the south of 1715`in order to avoid impacting developed property. He also showed how the proposed access on 171"would align with future access for the property on the south side of 171St. The Commission's recommendation included keeping the 171"access as shown on the site plan. C:\Users\jbarnhart\Desktop\Park dedication issue 2014\P06-06 Staff report to CC 4-17.doc