Laserfiche WebLink
<br />enough east of the Highway, to accommodate a future right turn lane for 171st <br />Avenue, and far enough west to avoid wetlands when the roadway is extended <br />south of 171 st in the future. <br /> <br />There will be a cross access agreement for lots created from Outlots "1\' & <br />"B" in the future. Those lots will all gain access from Ulysses Street, and not be <br />allowed to have driveways exiting onto 171 st Avenue. <br /> <br />E. Curbina. <br /> <br />Our site plan reflects concrete curbing only in those areas necessary for <br />aesthetics or drainage control. Applicant is requesting that it not be required to <br />place concrete curbing around the rest of the car lot, because of the unique <br />nature of the automobile sales business, with large amounts of vehicle display, <br />and because it will hinder snow removal. Perimeter curbing around the entire <br />site is not necessary, and would be extremely wasteful on a site as large as the <br />subject property. Section of 30-901 (b) (3) of the City of Elk River Code of <br />Ordinances contemplates such a request. <br /> <br />F. Park Dedication. <br /> <br />Section 30-327(a) of the City's Code of Ordinances states that it is <br />reasonable to dedicate landequalin value to ten percent of tne undevelooed <br />land proposed to be subdivided. Section 3D-327(b) states that in lieu of land the <br />contribution is to be an amount of cash not to exceed the fair market value of the <br />undevelooed land required to be dedicated. (The underlining is added to <br />emphasize the ordinance's wording, which restricts the imposition of the fee to <br />"undeveloped land" only, and which imposes an upper limit on the fee, but which <br />allows the City discretion as to whether a lesser fee may be charged.) Section <br />30-327 (f) states the fair market value shall be determined in the same manner <br />as the county assessor determines fair market value of land for tax purposes. <br /> <br />In the context of the park dedication fee ordinance noted above, we ask <br />that the City consider the following: (i) the existing dealership site is not <br />"undeveloped land," as contemplated by the ordinance; (ii) the dealership <br />property is not being further subdivided (rather it is being combined); (iii) the use <br />of the property is not changing; and (iv) the current use does not, and will not, <br />place a high demand on the city's park system, as would, by example, a multi- <br />family housing development. This property is only being platted at this time to <br />satisfy a condition for securing a building permit. <br /> <br />Further, nothing in the City's ordinance states the City must assess the <br />maximum park dedication fee on this property. Payment of the park dedication <br />charge on the entire property, and for the maximum amount would result in an <br />unreasonable charge for a single, land intensive business to absorb. We agree <br />that if this site were to be divided in the future for a different use, park dedication <br /> <br />5 <br />