Laserfiche WebLink
created by his subdivision in order to avoid imposing the bur- <br /> den of paying for additional services on all citizens via tax- <br /> . <br /> ation. To tolerate this situation would be to allow an other- <br /> wise acceptable exercise of police power to become grand theft. <br /> But the enabling statute here prevents this from ocouring by <br /> authorizing dedication of only a 'reasonable portion' of land. <br /> for the purposes stated. We therefore uphold. the statute as <br /> constitutional. "" <br /> It is evident that the court has upheld cities right to require a <br /> reasonable portion for park dedication. <br /> But what is a "reasonable portion"? The court states a defin- <br /> ition in Collis v.rCity of Bloomington: <br /> "A 'reasonable portion' is construed to mean that portion <br /> of land which the evidence reasonably establishes the munici- <br /> pality will need. to acquire for the purposes stated as a re- <br /> sult of approval of the subdivision. This is, of necessity, <br /> a facts-and.-circumstances test , but it is the only kind of <br /> test that will consider the myriad of factors which may bear <br /> on a municipality' s needs for certain kinds of facilities and. <br /> the relationship of a particular subdivision to those needs. <br /> "In articulating this test, we decline to follow the ex- <br /> treme approaches of the Illinois aid Montana cases discussed <br /> herein. We choose instead to follow the lead. of Wisconsin, <br /> California, and New York, and. those cases which hold. that a <br /> reasonable relationship between the approval of the subdivision <br /> and the municipality' s need for land. is required.. "*« <br /> In a law review article by Cutler we find. <br /> "In theory, the most scientific way to relate the quantity <br /> of land to be dedicated to the need. for the use of such land <br />