CC_Minutes_2011_1010 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, October 10,2011 Page 13 ket for four (4) years without urchase he u p e q estioned the definition and intent of "fair market value"in State Statute. Mr. Saunders advised that City Planner Thomas Paschke had been provided with a copy of the Purchase Agreements for the property, showing the actual sales price; and asked that the City Council consider that purchase price as considered by the American Institute of Real Estate appraisers, who focused on the market, buyer/seller, and addressing distressed sale situations, which this was. Mr. Saunders noted that this Purchase Agreement dated back to 2010, and now the buyers were moving forward toward close; however, this was one issue that came up when finalizing the PIC Amendment. Mr. Saunders advised that his request was that the PIC Amendment language be changed for the park dedication fees to be based on 5% of the purchase price. Discussion among Councilmembers and City Attorney Gaughan related to past practice, while not specifically stipulated in City ordinance, in timing application of the park dedication fee to when the parcel is actually subdivided; and the fair market value determination by the Ramsey County Assessor at that time based on 5% of that value; and the context of the legal term of fair market value in this case and as identified throughout these and other negotiations. Councilmember Pust opined that legal terms could have many meanings; howev- er, in this context it was always known as fair market value at the time the subdi- vision was created; and further opined that if the City was to make an exception in this one case because the developer wanted to pay less, it would set a precedent. Councilmember Pust opined that this left two (2) options: tabling the request if Councilmembers felt they needed additional information, or act on the RCA as presented. Pust moved, McGehee seconded, approval of an Amendment (Attachment A) to the Public Improvement Contract for HIGHCREST PARK ADDITION as pre- sented and deny applicant's request for reduction in or a different calculation me- thodology to determine the park dedication fee. After further discussion, Mr. Saunders asked that the City Council not table this action, but to proceed to avoid further delay in the property's closing. Mayor Roe opined that it was clear that the City's practice had been consistent, and that due to that past practice, other properties may have benefited, and in the end it balanced out. Mayor Roe spoke in support of continuing current policy. Councilmember Pust opined that this was the only practice that made sense, espe- cially when a buyer/seller may not be immediately available for a subdivision, . and delaying calculation of the fee wouldn't make sense.