Laserfiche WebLink
C^' <br />' i <br />w <br />BUILDERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA <br />2469 UNIVERSITY AVENUE. ST. PAUL. MN 55114 (612) 646-7959 <br />March 23, 1990 <br />Council Members <br />City of Orono <br />P,0. Box 66 <br />Orono, Mn. 55323 <br />Honorable Council Members; <br />On behalf of the Builders Association of Minnesota I would like to <br />express concerns regarding your proposed park dedication ordinance. <br />There are several areas in this ordinance we feel should be further <br />examined before adoption. We would appreciate an opportunity to meet <br />with City staff and attend the public hearing scheduled for March 26, <br />1990 to contribute our comments and suggestions. <br />There have been some long standing features of park dedication <br />ordinances as accepted by state law in Minnesota. It should be noted <br />that those include a deuication of land in relation to a specific <br />subdivision and is similar to dedication of land for roads and other <br />public purposes. The purpose of collecting monies in lieu of taking <br />land is in order to provide the city the ability to pool it*s money <br />to buy larger park property. The purpose therefore is that instead <br />of dedicated land the city may purchase property with collected fees. <br />The monies collected therefore are not to be used for maintenance and <br />improvements of existing parks. <br />Another key component of park dedication ordinances as outlined by <br />Minnesota Statutes la that the fee is collected at time of <br />subdivision, and the "fair market value" is based on the raw land <br />value, not the finished land value. This proposed ordinance has <br />several deviations from the standard park dedication practice. <br />In Section 2.A. of the proposed ordinance under Lands for Public Use, <br />it should be noted that the city uses an incorrect citation of <br />Minnesota statutes, 1971, Section 462.358, subd. 2. This section was <br />repealed in 1980 and replaced by subd. 2b. Reference made to <br />retiring debt and other purposes has been removed from the statute <br />based on a number of court cases and proceedings. It should be <br />reiterated that the monies collected in lieu of land should be used <br />to purchase only park property.