Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br />1 <br />1 <br />Design Review Board <br />December 12, 1990 <br />In their negotiations with the developers, the members have noted <br />that most of them were more interested in paying the $400 than in <br />giving a land dedication. Obviously the cash was a better deal for <br />the developers when actually there should be little financial <br />difference between the two options of land or cash. <br />In any attempt, to rectify this situation the board and the city <br />staff assigned to them have proposed the following: <br />A. Each lot in a minor subdivision would have the fee <br />increased from $400 to $500. <br />B. For other subdivisions this formula would apply: <br />(Land cost) (.10) (Total Acreage) = Dollars /lot <br />Number of Lots <br />The land cost is defined as a minimum of $10,000 an acre. <br />Professional Opinion: So what does the formula produce in way of <br />park fees? Let's look at some examples: Applied to D. Erickson's <br />Willow Ponds this is the result: <br />(10,000) (.10) (13) = $481. <br />27 <br />Well that shows a modest increase. Let's look at Sunrise Meadows. <br />Even though its already developed it should be a good test for the <br />formula. <br />(10,000) (.10) (42) = $407. <br />103 <br />Hmmm. Some improvement over the current $400. but not too much. <br />Let's try Woodridge Estates. <br />(10,000) (.10) (38) = $542. <br />70 <br />OK. Now the pattern emerges. Development with lower densities pay <br />higher rates with the formula. Here all the R -1X developments will <br />pay more if the park board asks for cash. Subdivisions in R -1 <br />areas will pay lesser amounts. <br />Now there are two ways of looking at this. First it can be argued <br />that the bigger lots are more valuable and a higher dedication is <br />fair. And it can also be argued that large lots cover a greater <br />land area so they should pay more; you know, closer to the ten per <br />cent rule. <br />8 <br />