Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOctober 11, 1995 o o o CITY of ANDOVER PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION - OCTOBER 11, 1995 MINUTES A Special Meeting of the Andover Park and Recreation Commission was called to order by Chairperson Tom Anderson on October 11, 1995, 6:07 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Commissioners present: Dave Erickson, Al Grabowski, Jim Lindahl, Roger Paulson Jeff Kieffer, Dave O'Toole Park Coordinator, Todd Haas Others Commissioners absent: Also present: RECEIVE FENCING BIDS/IP93-7/CITY HALL PARK COMPLEX #2 Mr. Haas reviewed the fencing bids received for the Field ot Dreams Project IP93-7. The low bidder is Town & Country with a base bid of $26,591.62 and an alternate bid for the small ball fields of $9,850.32. The firm is ready to begin work as soon as the Council approves the bid. All bidders used the same specifications. Staff may look at eliminating the concrete maintenance strip where the ag lime ends, which will reduce the cost somewhat. Staff is recommending approval of the low bid. o MOTION by Lindahl, Seconded by Erickson, that we accept these bids and forward them to the Council for acceptance of the base bid and alternate from the low bidder, with TIF funds if they can be used that way. Motion carried on a 5-Yes, 2-Absent (Kieffer, O'Toole) vote. ELDORADO ESTATES APPRAISAL DISCUSSION Mr. Haas explained the Larsons had their own appraisal done for their Eldorado Estates plat, which estimated the market value at $64,500. The City's appraiser valued it at $100,000 and also responded to the results of the appraisal done for the Larsons. The City's appraiser, Janet Staeheli, stood by her appraisal because it used the same methodology done for all other appraisals she has done in the City. The appraisal done by the Larsons used a different method, which she considered inappropriate. The Larson's are asking the Commission to make a decision on the market value of their plat. o Jed Larson - did not think an appraiser would admit an error or change an appraisal. He felt the basic difference between the appraisals is because his took into consideration the fact that he did not have legal access to his property prior to platting. Someone is not going to buy the landlocked property at the value quoted by Ms. Staeheli and then have the expense of providing legal access to it. No one is going to pay as much for the back lot because it has no legal access. He couldn't get a lot split to split the property. \ V , '\ I '-..' Special Andover Park and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes - October 11, 1995 Page 2 'I I / (Eldorado Estates Appraisal Discussion, Continued) In discussing the issue, the Commission did not feel it would be appropriate to change the method used to determine market values for park dedication purposes. It is important to be consistent when arriving at those values. If they did accept this low appraisal, they would be liable to look at the many other appraisals already done for the plats around the City. They also pointed out that it is common practice to purchase property and build roads to the back of the property for development. Once that is done, the land value increases considerably. Mr. Larson again noted the first appraiser didn't take into consideration that the back end was landlocked; the second one did. He asked if the Commission would be willing to split the difference between the two appraised values. Mrs. Larson stated they only have four lots, which is not a lot to absorb the costs. When they purchased the property ten years ago, they were told they could get a lot split. Then the rules changed. All they originally wanted to do was split the lot and build a house for themselves in the back. 1 ./ The Commission stated unfortunately any compromise would also open the door for another developer to do the same thing. It is the raw market value as the land sits before development that is being appraised. The current appraiser has been used in the City for about three years. The Commission clarified their recommendation to accept the first appraisal because it is comparable to others in the City; however, they suggested the Larsons take their appeal to the City Council if they wish to pursue this further. Mr. Haas stated this will be placed on the November 7, 1995, City Council agenda. MOTION by Erickson, Seconded by Paulson, that we accept the appraisal by the City's appraiser and recommend that the City Council reject the appraisal for Eldorado Estates by Stephen J. Palm. Motion carried on a 5-Yes, 2-Absent (Kieffer, O'Toole) vote. MOTION by Paulson, Seconded by Lindahl, to adjourn. a 5-Yes, 2-Absent (Kieffer, O'Toole) vote. Motion carried on The meeting was adjourned at 6:45 p.m. Respectfully ~bmitted, r '~(\,~~~ Marcella A. Peach Recording Secretary \ , )