HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976 07-28 Park charge hiked THE REVIEW THE REVIEW Wed.,July 28,1976
Park charge hiked
by Kamy fde has a park charge for development of
commercial and industrial land.
A proposed charge on commercial and "Nobody's running away from Apple
industrial development,designed to help Valley,"he said.
pay for parks in Maplewood, was in-
The city Parks and Recreation Com-
creased by that city's council at its mission favored the ordinance for three
Thursday,July 22 meeting. reasons: the need for park land and
The council narrowly passed the development of that land in the city,the
change,which will see a three and one-
"dramatic"decreases in use of federal
revenue sharing funds for parks as these
half percent charge on the fair market
value of the property to be developed.The monies have been channeled into other
council had formerly approved first programs and the savings in cost if park
reading,or the first half of the ordinance development is done now.
approval process,of an ordinance which The motion to increase the ordinance
would have seen a two and one-half came from Anderson and was seconded
percent charge on the tax statement by Bruton.
value of the land. The council gave approval to second
The vote to change the formerly- reading of the changed ordinance,which
proposed ordinance was 3-2,with Mayor means the plan is now city law.
Robert Bruton and councilmen Norm
Councilmen favoring the new plan
Anderson and Donald Wiegert in favor indicated they felt it would be more
and councilman Burton Murdock and equitable for all developers that their
John Greavu in opposition. charge be based on the actual fair market
The council began discussion of value or selling price of the land,
Under the ordinance,if the council and
changing the first-planned park charge
following a memo received from Michael the land owner do not agree on the fair
Miller,city manager, market value,a public appraiser will be
Miller, who read the memo at the called in to determine fair market value
meeting,pointed out inequities in that- of the property.
system."Two properties side by side may
have two entirely different values,"
Miller said. He noted that figures
prepared by city staff showed that land on
the north side of Beam Avenue would be
charged$120 per acre and land on the
south side would be charged$182 per acre
under the first system.
The charge is to be made against only
land which is going to be developed and
would be charged at the time of
development. Already-existing
developments would incur no charge.
Miller's report indicated that,under the
first plan adopted by the council, land
where Maplewood Mall now sits was
valued at $717 per acre prior to
development.Had the park charge been
in effect at that time,a total park charge
of$1,828 or$17.92 per acre would have
been made.
In citing other developed or developable
land in the city, Miller noted that the
per acre park charge varied greatly:
$27.96 per acre at Maplewood Plaza,$53
per acre for land west of White Bear
Avenue and south of Radatz Avenue,$120
or$132 per acre for land on the north side
of Beam and$182 for land on the south
side of Beam.
Miller and several members of the
council noted that the value of land listed
on tax assessment rolls may not be a true
reflection of the value of the land.John
Greavu said, "In other words, you're
telling me the county assessor doesn't
know what the hell he's doing."
Miller replied, "The tax assessment
system is often very slow." Councilman
Murdock,who opposed the increase,said
"I'm for a park charge,but don't you
ever damn forget it's the businessmen in
this community who provide jobs."
Norm Anderson said he had recently
toured parks in Apple Valley,which also