My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-16-15-WS
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
2010-2019
>
2015
>
11-16-15-WS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/9/2024 12:08:50 AM
Creation date
12/3/2015 9:05:27 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION—NOVEMBER 16, 2015 3 <br /> Community Development Director Hutmacher indicated that Park A is a small park on the west <br /> side of the spine road between the commercial and office area, and Park B is located by the water <br /> treatment facility. It was noted the Town NH park is along the pedestrian corridor and the two <br /> parks in the Hill area are combined in this table. <br /> Mayor Grant asked how the cost per acre was calculated. <br /> Stacie Kvilvang noted that while the improvement and financing costs listed in the table are <br /> approximately $8 million, her initial estimate was closer to $9 million and that the City had settled <br /> on $7 million. She said she is concerned $7 million may be too little if costs come in higher. The <br /> table includes $7 million in park development costs and approximately $1.2 million in financing <br /> costs. <br /> Stacie Kvilvang stated that to determine the per acre cost, she took the total land value of <br /> approximately$66 million and broke it out based on residential, office, retail, and commercial. She <br /> used the initial model from Ramsey County as far as what they were anticipating for land sale <br /> proceeds and the fair market value. The land dedication percentage would be based on an actual <br /> sale price. <br /> Stacie Kvilvang discussed the three fee structure scenarios: <br /> Land Dedicated r Land Dedicated& <br /> Scenariot .the Land r <br /> Park Develop Developmen Park Development ' <br /> Both Fees Imposed <br /> Fee Paid Fee Paid <br /> Park Dedication Fees $ 8,206,135 $ 8,272,272 $ 12,254,732 <br /> Land Acquisition $ 0 $ (3,413,709) <br /> Park Improvements $ (8,206,135) $ (8,206,135) $ (8,206,135) <br /> Over/(Under) $ - $ 66,136 $ 634,887 <br /> Per Unit Residential Fee $ 4,293 $ 2,900 $ 2,900 <br /> In Scenario 1, commercial and residential pay a park development fee but there is no land <br /> dedication fee. To reach the total needed for improvement and financing costs of$8.2 million, the <br /> residential park development fee would have to be approximately $4,300 per unit. This scenario <br /> does not work well as this formula nets 32 dedicated acres while the City has planned for 24 <br /> dedicated acres. In addition, it puts the burden on residential units to pay significantly more. <br /> Because the ordinance gives the City discretion on whether to accept cash or land, the City is able <br /> to avoid Scenario 1. <br /> In Scenario 2, the County or developer dedicates residential land and commercial pays a total land <br /> dedication fee of 10% of the land value. In this example, the residential park development fee is <br /> reduced to $2,900. She said this figure is common in the metro area and meets the City's goals. <br /> In Scenario 3, the City receives no dedicated land from the County or developer and so the City <br /> must purchase the land. The City would charge a land dedication fee for both residential and <br /> commercial and there also would be a park improvement fee. <br /> Mayor Grant asked what figures were used. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.