Loading...
6.3. SR 06-19-2000'~ity of River TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Item # 6.3. MEMORANDUM Mayor & City Council . Michele McPhersoLr~irector of Planning June 12, 2000 Request by Brookstone, Inc. for Waiver of Park Dedication Fees Request Brookstone, Inc., representing the limited liability partnership developing the Elk River Business Park, requests that the City Council waive $63,940.00 of park dedication fees required by the final plat. Attachments May 26, 2000 Letter from Brookstone, Inc. February 22, 1999 City Council Minutes · Memo from Steve Wensman re: Park Dedication Fees Analysis The final plat of Elk River Business Park was approved on May 15, 2000. The resolution approving the final plat required the payment of park dedication fees at the rate currently required by the City ($2,000 per acre). The developer indicates that this fee was not discussed during the negotiations nor did they budget a contingency for unanticipated fees or increases in expenses. As the current staff was not a party to the negotiations with the developer, research was completed to determine if there was a change in the status of park dedication fees during the applicant's approval process. The applicant received preliminary plat approval in December 1998. In 1998, the City did not collect park dedication fees for industrial plats. In February 1999 (minutes attached), the City adopted increased residential park dedication fees and established industrial park dedication fees. The applicant's final plat was approved, after receiving an extension, in May 2000. During the February City Council meeting, discussion centered on phasing in the fees, and to some extent, the impact to industrial plats. There was discussion regarding "grandfathering" in plats that were in process; the final motion included a "break" for residential plats only. 13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 · TDD & Phone: (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425 Memo to Mayor and City Council/Brookstone, Inc. June 12, 2000 Page 2 The Council has three options to consider: ^. Require the developer to pay the fees at the current rate ($63,940.00). B. Waive the fees entirely ($0). C. Negotiate some level of fees between Options ^ and B ($0-63,940.00). The developer's letter seems to indicate a preference for not paying the fees. The developer did not indicate to staff an amount that would be acceptable. The Park and Recreation Commission has been informed of Brookstone Inc.'s request and will have representatives in attendance at the meeting. Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council consider Brookstone Inc.'s request to waive park dedication fees by selecting one of the three options presented by staff. Friday, May 26, 2000 Ms. Michele McPherson Director of Planning City of Elk River 13065 Orono Parkway PO Box 490 Elk River, Minnesota 55330 BROOKSTONE, INC. 7400 Metro Blvd., Suite 2_12 Edina, Minnesota 55439 612_,837.9167 phone 612_.837.8010 fax Dear Michele: I am writing with reference to your transmittal dated May 12, 2000 regarding the Development Agreement for the Elk River Business Park together with the letter dated May 16, 2000, from Debbie Heubner, planning secretary, regarding conditions attached to final plat approval. While we have continued to enthusiastically move forward on implementing both the land development component of this project and the first 50,000 square foot building, we need to resolve some issues that came out from the above referenced correspondence before we can start grading and the first building. From past notes of meetings with various City staff members, other d0rresp0ndence and from our discussions we are requesting reconsideration of the following matters: The requirement for a Letter of Credit. This did come up in discussions, particularly with former City Development Director, Paul Steiman, as well as Peter Beck and we had agreed that no Letter of Credit would be required. I believe it was initially part of the preliminary planning commission plat resolution but was clearly to have been eliminated for the reason that the public improvements were all being installed by the City and assessed to the property. While you indicated that there are some improvements we will be installing, I believe the only thing we have responsibility for is the mass grading, which is also reimbursed from the City. o With regard to the surface water management fee, we are in agreement that we have some responsibility in this regard. However, in our meeting of May 12, 1999, when we requested information on a comprehensive list of fees related to this project, it was indicated that the surface water management fee would be $136 per acre. This is less than shown in the draft Development Agreement. We are in agreement that we are responsible for the seal coating fee and it was indicated that this would be $0.40 per square foot of asphalted road area. I believe a preliminary estimate of that was only several thousand dollars. We would request clarification on this. REAL ESTATE ADVISORY SERVICES, INVESTMENT AND DEVELOPMENT The park dedication fee is a significant matter to us. We have not budgeted any funds for this expense. From my file information, it was not referenced in the preliminary plat approval and my understanding is that the City implemented this fee during the time that we were negotiating this transaction, and to the best of my knowledge, we were not informed of that. Certainly, if there was increased tax increment available, we could take another look at this. However, we have already had to absorb an increase in some of the special assessments costs without any commensurate increase in the tax increment reimbursement and have no additional cushion of any sort to absorb this. With regard to sidewalks, we have always understood that these were a part of the City's plans and costs and to be assessed to the property along with other public improvements. This was confirmed to us in our meeting with you of April 25, 2000. Our understanding was that our only responsibility was to provide a sidewalk connection to the property to the north, and we are in agreement with that. Finally, with regard to streetlights, we have not been aware of any requirement, and would certainly consider this a public improvement that would customarily be part of the street development cost. We again, have no budget cushion to absorb this. We are hoping that most of these matters can be cleared up in our meeting on Tuesday, May 30, 2000, but my understanding is that we will need to address the question of the park dedication to your City Council on June 19, 2000. We will attend that meeting and make this request and would ask that you use this letter as a basis to indicate our formal request with regard thereto. We obviously are hopeful that we can resolve this quickly; we are moving forward with the working drawings for our multi tenant building and are carrying on discussions with several prospects at this time. It is imperative that we resolve this in order to move forward. In order to meet the deadlines in our Development Agreement and to move this project forward, we need to start in early July with the first building. Our mass grading needs to begin in early June and from discussions with Dennis Cornelius, I understand that you are requiring that the Letter of Credit issue be resolved prior to start of that work. We look forward to meeting you next week and are hopeful of a quick resolution. Yours very truly, Richard V. Martens President Cc: Dennis Cornelius Mel Ammon Elk River City Council Minutes February 22, 1999 Page 6 Mayor Klinzing indicated that she would have supported the smaller project, however she will not vote in favor of the large project due to her concern regarding funding of the project. THE MOTION CARRIED 4-1. Mayor Klinzing oppdsed. COUNCILMEMBER DIETZ AUTHORIZED THE USE OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FUNDS TO MAKE UP FOR THE TRUNK SEWER LINE SHORTAGE OF APPROXIMATELY $200,000 OVER THE LIFE OF THE PROJECT. COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0. 6.4. Resolution Establishinq Park Dedication Fees for 1999 John Kuester, park and recreation commissioner, indicated that the Park and Recreation Commission is recommending the Council increase park dedication fees. He indicated that staff has researched park dedication fees in other cities and determined that Elk River park fees are not in line with surrounding communities. Commissioner Kuester noted that the Park and Recreation Commission feels their recommendation to increase the fees has been carefully thought through, is fair, and has been done in a strategic manner. John Kuester stated that people moving into the City want a park system to meet their needs. He further noted that land values have increased in Sherburne County by about 70 percent since the last time park dedication fees have been increased. Councilmember Farber stated that he concurs the City needs to increase its park fees, however he questioned why there is no graduation in the increase. He indicated that he is concerned with the fairness of increasing the fees so drastically at one time. Councilmember Thompson noted that he feels the proposal is fair, however, he is also concerned about not phasing in the increase. He further noted his concern as to how this increase would impact developers currently in the platting process. Councilmember Dietz stated that Elk River is in demand and this is not the time to be concerned about increasing its fees. He noted that the increase in the park dedication fee is a step in the right direction so people can have the park system they expect to have for a City the size of Elk River. Councilmember Dietz questioned the reasoning and necessity of charging park dedication fees for industrial property. Councilmember Dietz further indicated that he would not be in favor of phasing in the increase. Councilmember Motin indicated that Elk River must be compared to neighboring metropolitan. He further indicated that he has concerns regarding industrial property paying park dedication fees. He stated he would prefer to see plats that are in the planning stages be grandfathered-in some way so they are not stuck with the entire increase without having planned for the increase. Homer Tompkins, developer of Trott Brook Farms, indicated that they are proposing to develop a park and to pay their park dedication up front and questioned how an increase at this time would affect his plat. Elk River City Council Minutes February 22, 1999 Page 7 Stoffel Reitsma, park and recreation commissioner, indicated that he feels the increase is necessary as the City will need new schools, trails, and parks. He further indicated that he did not feel the park dedication fee would affect the industrial or commercial businesses moving into the City. COUNCILMEMBER MOTIN MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 99-17 AMENDING THE PARK DEDICATION FEE FOR RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CONTINGENT UPON AMENDING THE FEE STRUCTURE AS FOLLOWS: IN THE EVENT A PRELIMINARY PLAT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON OR BEFORE FEBRUARY 22, 1999, AND THE FINAL PLAT IS APPROVED WITHIN ONE YEAR OF THAT DATE, THE RESIDENTIAL PARK DEDICATION FEE SHALL BE $900 AND NO TRAIL FEE SHALL APPLY. COUNCILMEMBER FARBER SECONDED THE MOTION. Discussion pursued regarding the definition of the one year time period. The city attorney suggested that the final plat be submitted within one year from the preliminary plat approval. COUNCILMEMBER MOTIN MOVED TO AMEND HIS MOTION TO STATE THAT THE RESIDENTIAL PARK FEE SHALL BE $900 AND NO TRAIL FEE SHALL APPLY PROVIDED THAT THE PRELIMINARY PLAT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON OR BEFORE FEBRUARY 22, 1999, AND THE FINAL PLAT SUBMrrI'ED WITHIN ONE YEAR FROM THE PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL DATE. COUNCILMEMBER FARBER SECONDED THE AMENDMENT. THE MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED 3-2. Mayor Klinzing and Councilmember Dietz opposed. 6.5a. Consider Transfer of Cable TV Franchise The City Clerk requested the Council to approve the transfer of control and ownership of Jones Intercable to Bresnan Telecommunications Company. She indicated that the Sherburne/Wright Cable Commission is recommending approval of the transfer. COUNCILMEMBER FARBER MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 99-18 CONDITIONALLY CONSENTING TO THE TRANSFER OF CONTROL OF AND CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTEREST IN A CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE TO COMCAST CORPORATION AND ITS WHOLLY OWNED SUBSIDIARY, COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICATIONS, INC. COUNCILMEMBER THOMPSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0. COUNCILMEMBER MOTIN MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 99-19 CONDITIONALLY CONSENTING TO THE TRANSFER OF CONTROL OF AND CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS IN A CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE TO BRESNAN TELECOMMUNICATION COMPANY, LLC. COUNCILMEMBER FARBER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0. 6.5b. Cable TV Government Access Channel Guidelines COUNCILMEMBER FARBER MOVED TO APPROVE A MISSION STATEMENT, PURPOSE, OBJECTIVES, AND GUIDELINES FOR ELK RIVER GOVERNMENT ACCESS CABLE TV CHANNEL. COUNCILMEMBER MOTIN SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0.