Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council May 28, 2002 <br />Regular Meeting Page 10 <br />Council Member Marty indicated he had not been out to the property and asked what was on the <br />property and whether it would be possible to put a playground on the land. <br />Director Ericson indicated the land was partially treed and said there maybe enough room on the <br />125,000 square foot piece to add a playground. <br />Council Member Stigney noted the Planning Commission had recommended requiring the park <br />dedication fee and asked whether Staff wished Council to take action on the Resolution. <br />Director Ericson indicated the Planning Commission made a recommendation of appraval with <br />stipulations but did not take a position as to whether or not it would be appropriate to waive the <br />park dedication fee because they have no control over that. <br />Council Member Stigney commented that the park dedication fee is in the City's Code and asked <br />why the City would not follow its own Code. <br />City Attorney Riggs indicated it would be the best practice to follow the Code but Council does <br />have the authority to deviate if it desires. <br />David Jahnke of 8428 Eastwood Road asked whether different zoning on the same parcel had <br />• ever been done before. He then asked how anyone would be guaranteed that the property owner <br />would not build on that other lot. <br />Mayor Sonterre indicated the stipulations attached to the approval make it impossible to develop <br />the property. <br />Director Ericson indicated that split zoning has happened in the past and, in this instance, is the <br />best assurance that the property owner would not be allowed to expand the use. <br />Mr. Jahnke asked why the park dedication fee would be waived and whether or not it had ever <br />been waived in the past. <br />Council Member Quick indicated the park dedication fee has been waived and reduced in the <br />past for other applicants. <br />Mayor Sonterre commented that the park dedication fee has been based on the fact that the <br />property has some development potential and a value to the landowner. <br />Director Ericson indicated that development does not trigger the park dedication fees it is the <br />subdivision requirements that trigger the fees. <br />Mayor Sonterre asked if development is an aspect of property that is subject to subdivision and <br />• park dedication fee. <br />