04-11-2006 PC MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Minutes Page 8 April 11, 2006 --------------------------- Mr. Clark noted there is a disagreement between the applicant and staff's recommendation in regards to the park dedication requirements. He stated staff is requesting park dedication fees for the entire 17.671ot. He stated the two outlots will require park dedication fees be paid when they are platted. He stated this was reviewed by the city attorney. Commissioner Stevens stated he supported staff's recommendation and it is fair Steve Rohlf, Ford representative-Stated the city is interpreting the requirements incorrectly. He stated park dedication fees should be charged on the four newly created lots (two outlots) and the land being added to the dealership (former Red Carpet Inn site). He stated it would be approximately $80,000 in fees. He stated the existing dealership should not pay park dedication fees as consistent with Section 30-327 of the City Code, which states that park dedication fees apply to undeveloped property. He stated the city is confizsing undeveloped with unplatted. He stated the existing dealership has been developed for over 30 years. He stated the property is not being subdivided but being combined. He stated the only reason they are platting the property is because it is a condition to secure a building permit. He stated his interpretation of the park dedication fees is consistent with how it was handled in the past. He stated Ford has been supplying jobs and a tax base in Elk River for over 30 years. He stated they are asking to be treated reasonably. He stated to charge in excess of $100,000 to a business trying to expand and create more jobs is unreasonable. He stated there isn't anything in the ordinance that states you have to charge the maximtun fee. Commissioner Stevens questioned the city's policy for park dedication requirements. He questioned if Elk River Ford, when originally platted, paid a park dedication fee. Mr. Clark stated if the property is residential it will be charged for new units; if the property is commercial it will be charged for acreage and any fiuther replats would not be charged park dedication fees. Mr. Clark stated Elk River Ford was never platted. Commissioner Westgaard stated Section 30-327 discussed platting and replatting but not undeveloped land. He questioned whether a compromise could be reached. Commissioner Anderson stated this issue is a decision for the City Council. Commissioner Scott stated he would like to see the motion amended to state that the 8 acres currently being used only pay half of the park dedication fees. Commissioner Offerman concurred with Commissioner Scott. He stated the applicant made a good point in that the city gives TIF money to new companies but often doesn't recognize or give consideration to existing businesses that have been in Elk River for a long time employing people and paying taxes. Corrunissioner Anderson questioned how and why 50% was determined as a compromise on the fees. He stated it is not the role of this Commission to determine the percentage. He stated a vote needs to betaken on the current motion. Commission Offerman stated it is not an unreasonable request as the city gave Wal-Mart TIF money and also funding for the downtown project. Commissioner Westgaard asked to reconsider the motion.