HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-27-12 WSMinutes
Lakeville City Council Work Session
February 27, 2012
In attendance: Council Member Laurie Rieb
Council Member Kerrin Swecker
Council Member Matt Little
Council Member Colleen LaBeau
Absent: Mayor Mark Bellows
Staff. Dennis Feller, Finance Director
Chris Petree, Public Works Director
Steve Michaud, Parks and Recreation Director
John Hennen, Parks Superintendent
Zach Johnson, Interim City Engineer
Mac Cafferty, Environmental Resources Manager
Judi Hawkins, Deputy City Clerk
The meeting was called to order at 6:05 p.m. by Acting Mayor Rieb.
There were no Citizen Comments.
ITEM # 1 — Park Dedication Fee.
Parks and Recreation Director Steve Michaud stated that staff has been working with Dan
Licht of The Planning Company on an update of the Park Dedication ordinance. Recently a
developer filed a protest, stating that the fees are too high. Statutes allow for the protest.
Michaud indicated that the protest appears to be based on the downturn in the economy
and declining land values.
Due to this request, Mr. Licht was asked to look at the park dedication fees as part of the 5-
year system plan update. Mr. Michaud referenced a survey of other communities and
stated that historically Lakeville has been in the mid range of park dedication fees
compared to cities of a similar size. Michaud stated that Lakeville never increased fees to
match the higher land prices of the past however now that land prices have dropped, the
City is being asked to reduce the park dedication fee.
Michaud indicated that cities use different methods of determining fees. He stated that the
formula needs to reflect the needs of the community. He stated that the Staff has reviewed
the Plymouth formula for comparison. And the Staff has reviewed the County Assessor's
values for comparison and found wide variations in values.
The Staff report includes a formula which ties acreage to people needs approach which
the City Attorney has reviewed and agreed to. Staff is asking Council to review and react to
the formula proposed in the report. The dedication policy allows for land dedication or a
City Council Work Session Minutes
February 27, 2012 Page -2-
fee in lieu of land. The question is in finding the appropriate land value. He stated that the
staff has not yet come to terms with how the land value is established.
Michaud indicated that Staff is looking for feedback on the methodology. Michaud stated
that the next step is to take the issue to the Park and Rec Committee.
To establish value, Michaud stated that some communities do an appraisal of the parcel.
Others establish a value based upon the type of development across the whole
community. He said some have increased fees, others have not. But the staff is not aware
of any cities that have lowered fees. There is legislation being considered by the Legislature
to change the park dedication laws.
Michaud reviewed the background and history of the Park Development Plan indicating
that the plan is intended to be a vision for the system and that the plan will require
modifications and revenues beyond park dedication in order to be realized. Future
referendums will need to be approved by voters in order to achieve the plan.
Michaud stated That needs have grown in the system since the schools have eliminated
some of the youth sports programs, such as football. Current low prices might offer an
opportunity to purchase land for future park development or athletic complexes.
Dan Licht added that State statutes enable cities to require dedication of land, or a cash
equivalent in lieu of land, to be used for acquisition and /or development of public parks,
recreation, trails, wetlands, or open space. Licht stated that the current park dedication
formula needs to be revised to meet the criteria of new state statutes. The Parks, Trails, and
Open Space Update that was completed in 2006 established planned development and
complete build -out of the system based on projected population and national standards
for park systems. The 2006 update analyzed how much additional land would be required
for active and passive recreation purposes to complete the system. The 2007 Parks CIP
includes acquisition and development of facilities; however, challenges exist for
implementation. Establishing land and property tax values for the purpose of calculating
cash fees is difficult, since sales transactions do not necessarily represent market values. A
park dedication formula should both welcome growth and ensure that new users pay for
the additional needs they create.
Michaud asked Council for comments or questions on the proposed framework for park
dedication requirements, and whether they believe the correct course of action is being
followed in determining funding for the 2007 Park CIP.
Council Member Swecker believes it is challenging for developers to find affordable land
and develop it. She agrees with the importance of having amenities available for the
residents while not over - taxing businesses or developers. She asked if developers are
allowed to donate land that they might be buying at a lower cost. Michaud stated that the
land dedication requirements need to be within desired park areas and provided examples
of parks where combinations of cash and land dedication were used.
City Council Work Session Minutes
February 27, 2012 Page -3-
Council Member Little believes a change in the formula could be requested again in a few
years when the economy improves and land values increase. Developers need a
predictable, consistent policy, and land value disagreements will impact the projected
formula. In response to the suggested community -wide average property appraisal he
believes that would be unfair to any properties that are below the average value. He is
concerned about using the Metropolitan Council employee averages as they may be
disputed. He is concerned that the formula may be unnecessarily complex. Little wants to
ensure that park land will be available to complete the system as planned.
Council Member LaBeau stated that being in the industry gives her a unique perspective
and she called the report "bogus." She has a hard time with the averaging of values.
Values are "messed up" right now because of short -sales and foreclosures, making
appraisals difficult. At the developers forum it was requested that one way to get Lakeville
moving ahead with the amount of available land and infrastructure would be to look at
park dedication fees. She believes it would be more appropriate to compare Lakeville to
adjoining cities such as Farmington, Eagan, Apple Valley Rosemount and Burnsville rather
than other large cities such as Eden Prairie and Maple Grove which are in different
markets. She believes cities and governments have not adjusted to the downturn in the
economy. She indicated that in the end it is the end taxpayer that pays the costs, not the
developer. She believes the developer's forum and EDC have been asking Lakeville to think
outside the box, get aggressive and get above other cities.
LaBeau commented that people don't need tot lots anymore because people don't let
their kids go to the park by themselves and many have installed their own playground sets
in their backyards. She uses the trails and notices that the neighborhood parks are seldom
used. She stated that the City needs to create a vision, find out what the community really
wants what the community is willing to pay and then be creative. The request to review
the fees comes from asking how to get businesses to come to Lakeville rather than going
somewhere else. She stated that the school district is funded with bodies moving into the
community and the end taxpayers look at one thing, the tax bill as a whole. She stated that
there has been a great amount of shifting in the industry and she was excited to see how
Lakeville could stand apart from other cities. She believes that the community as a whole
do not care about 50% of the park plan any more because times and technology have
changed. She does believe the big parks are very important. She stated that when she
brings potential homebuyers through the city they ask about the big parks, what the
school districts are like and about the road systems. She stated that while trails and parks
are very important, people don't want to pay for upkeep on something that is not used
greatly. She is very disappointed with the information in the report and believes is it
inaccurate for what is trying to be achieved by those at the developer forum and EDC.
Council Member Swecker addressed Council Member LaBeau and stated that she had
received several phone calls and emails from residents and a developer who is concerned
about LaBeau making any comments on the park dedication fee revisions since her father
is the developer. And while LaBeau has spoken with the City Attorney and he has
indicated that there is not a direct conflict because LaBeau does not do direct business
with him but there is a perception of a conflict because he would benefit from a reduction
in the fee. His current plat has 37 lots in the development process and more coming
City Council Work Session Minutes
February 27, 2012 Page -4-
through. Lowering the park dedication rate by even 5% would be a financial benefit for
his company. La Beau stated that she wishes it wasn't her father because this issue started
long before he came.
Michaud acknowledged that park dedication fees are a big part of the overall costs
incurred by developers. There have been past instances when the City has frozen park
dedication fees for future phases of a development, however, the fees have never been
lowered. It is important to maintain a balance of what amenities people come to the
community for — schools, parks, police, etc. He stated that Council Member LaBeau is
correct that park dedication fees are among the concerns from developers and people in
the industry.
Swecker believes that residential fees could be lowered; however, they should reserve the
right to increase fees in the future as the economy picks up. She believes the commercial
and industrial formula is fine. LaBeau reiterated that the comparisons don't make sense to
her since those cities are not Lakeville's competition for homebuyers. Swecker agreed that
the south metro area makes sense for comparison. Swecker still wants to see the
comparisons for Woodbury and Maple Grove, growth communities. Michaud agreed that
he could provide south metro comparisons. LaBeau stated that she does not believe Eden
Prairie and Plymouth are good comparisons.
LaBeau stated that she will defend her passion for Lakeville and wanting to make it right.
She stated that she wants people to be engaged in what it takes to make a good park and
trail system. She believes that Lakeville's most important assets are the location between
two main roadways (35W and Cedars and the school system.
Council Member Rieb asked LaBeau for clarification on what she meant by not wanting
parks and trails. LaBeau said maybe the City does need the amount as are projected to be
needed and the focus should be on a few bigger parks. Rieb stated that it still takes money
to build the athletic complexes. Michaud stated that many years ago a decision was made
to build larger parks that served several neighborhoods. Unfortunately, some
neighborhoods without a park were not satisfied and wanted their own. The lack of
neighborhood parks generated complaints in the past.
The parks system plan includes an athletic field in each neighborhood park to help meet
the needs of the youth sports programs. Dan Licht stated that as part of the 2012 update
of the system plan Council will discuss policy issues and anticipated costs. Efforts continue
to implement projects in the 2005 system plan; however some of the 2005 policies will be
revised in the 2012 update. Due to changing demographics, the 2005 document has
evolved by increasing park spacing guidelines to a one -mile radius and placing more
emphasis on community facilities. The park survey can determine what the residents want
and set community priorities. The City can accept parkland or cash for funding
development of parks.
LaBeau asked if most developers would want to make a land dedication rather than cash.
Licht stated that they are more inclined to donate cash since there is a greater opportunity
to profit from building a home. LaBeau asked if it was possible for developers to get land
City Council Work Session Minutes
February 27, 2012 Page -S-
credits for parks like wetlands. Michaud stated that the developer would need to buy
something that doesn't currently exist. Credits have been provided to developers that will
have multiple phases by providing more dedication up front.
Council Member Little would like to see the formula kept simple and easy for everyone to
understand. Licht and Michaud agreed that developers should be able to easily calculate
their fees, while being in compliance with the new statute. Council Member Swecker felt
there is some room to move in the amounts on the residential but the
commercial /industrial fees should stay as they are. Swecker stated that the $4,747 is still
at the high end compared to these cities in the south metro cities.
Changes will be made as proposed and brought back to the Council for direction.
ITEM #2 — Trails Improvement CIP
Park Maintenance and Operations Manager John Hennen stated that over 100 miles of
paved trails have been constructed in the City of Lakeville in the past 25 years. Almost 25%
of those trails are over 20 years of age and another 44% are 10 to 20 years of age. It is
important to preserve and maintain this amenity since the trail system is a great asset to the
City and much used by residents. The City contracted with WSB to inspect, analyze and
review the trail system and determine the overall condition index (OCI) of trails and
sidewalks and make recommendations for improvements. WSB also analyzed funding
options for long -term maintenance in order to maximize the life of the trails. Park Director
Steve Michaud added that WSB's trail and sidewalk assessment was modeled after the
City's street pavement assessment, which WSB also completed.
Michael Reif, Construction Services Manager for WSB & Associates, stated that he has been
working with the Minnesota Dept. of Natural Resources on a similar program. The analysis
focused on: what is important in the system; how are the trails being used; who are the
users; what issues are being experienced. A crack or heave in a roadway system is
insignificant for a car but can be potentially hazardous for a pedestrian. Expansion and
contraction of the pavement and the weight of snow removal equipment can cause
distress to the pavement resulting in cracks and breaking up of the asphalt. These issues,
or "events," were identified in the analysis.
The analysis looked at the City's objectives: having a high quality system; extending the life
of the pavement, and getting ultimate value for maintenance dollars. Not all trails were
constructed to the same standards over the years. In 2005 higher standards for asphalt
and base materials were adopted, which increased the life expectance of trails constructed
after that time. Mr. Reif displayed examples of various trails within the system to illustrate
OCI ratings. Trails with an OCI rating of 30 or less are candidates for major rehabilitation
or reconstruction; an OCI between 40 and 60 indicates the need for major preservation
and improvement measures; and preventive maintenance activities should be scheduled
for all trails with an OCI of 70 or higher. In addition, there are 75 miles of sidewalks in the
city, for which the Engineering Dept. is responsible. The $25,000 annual sidewalk
maintenance budget includes funds for minor repair and required ADA updates. Other
major trail maintenance would be done at the same time as street improvements.
City Council Work Session Minutes
February 27, 2012 Page -6-
WSB has developed a Parks CIP, which is based on current life expectancy of trails. Policy
decisions need to be made by Council to establish goals for long -term maintenance of the
system. Routine maintenance is currently inconsistent as a result of unavailable funding.
Deficient trails need to be scheduled for repair or reconstruction as funding becomes
available. Tree roots coming through the asphalt is another continuing issue which needs
to be addressed. WSB is suggesting developing a Trails CIP and budget. Cost sharing
opportunities can be investigated with developers or with other cities through Joint
Powers to obtain the best possible price for trail maintenance services.
Swecker asked whose responsibility it is to maintain the sidewalks and could they ever be
replaced with asphalt. Michaud stated that it is the homeowners' responsibility to maintain
sidewalks. Those replacements would be done along with street reconstruction projects.
Public Works Director Chris Petree stated that replacement costs are now being partly
assessed to adjoining homeowners along with street improvement projects. It was
suggested that the maintenance budget be increased to prevent large one -time future
costs from draining the budget. Budget recommendations from WSB are based on how
many miles are classified in each OCI range, and estimated cost for restoration at each level
of disrepair. The lower the OCI rating, the more costly the repair will become.
LaBeau asked about reclamation and reconstruction of the trails and possible damage by
plowing equipment on the trails. Michaud responded that he has been advised that
damage from plowing equipment is less significant than from heavy equipment in the
summer because the ground is frozen. LaBeau also asked about standards for width of
concrete. Michaud stated that when they are required, 4 -foot sidewalks are built on one
side of the street in residential areas and 8 -foot sidewalks are built in commercial areas.
Staff reviewed the proposed 2012 to 2016 Capital Improvement Plan for trail projects as
prioritized by year. A total fund balance of $1.3M is currently budgeted for the 5 -year plan;
average annual expenditures are proposed to be about $250,000. Finance Director Feller
stated that trail improvement options would be discussed as part of the budget process
later this year. Projects are subject to change depending on weather conditions or
unforeseen situations. The main advantage of the CIP is to eliminate sharp spikes in
expenditures over the years. Chris Petree added that trail and sidewalk projects are being
bid at the same time as miscellaneous street projects in order to achieve the most favorable
prices. There has also been some interest shown in joint powers agreements.
Council directed staff to proceed with implementation of the 2012 -2016 CIP Trail
Improvement Fund as presented.
ITEM #3 — North Creek Hydrological Study
Chris Petree stated that over the last few years there have been several rain events that
caused Cedar Avenue to overtop and resulted in flooding in the Valley Park area and
along the North Creek corridor. One year ago, Lakeville contracted with Barr Engineering
to study the North Creek Subwatershed and the Cedar Avenue area and to identify some
alternatives to mitigate the flooding in those areas.
City Council Work Session Minutes
February 27, 2012 Page -7-
Interim City Engineer Zach Johnson stated that the goal of flood mitigation is to improve
public safety and reduce the risk of property damage. Barr's study concentrated on
analyzing several flood mitigation alternatives in response to flooding at Cedar Avenue
and Highview Avenue in 2010 and 2011 and established flow and volume standards
along North Creek at the city boundary.
Representatives from Barr Engineering stated that possible mitigation alternatives include
constructing additional culvert capacity to carry rainwater below Cedar Avenue, providing
additional floodplain storage along North Creek between Cedar Avenue and Highview
Avenue, and modifying the height of Highview Avenue with various amounts of culvert
reduction. The goal of this mitigation is to store enough water upstream at Highview
Avenue to prevent Cedar Avenue from overtopping without impacting the residents
upstream. In summarizing the results, Barr determined that only one of the scenarios
would meet all of the desired criteria. That alternative would raise Highview Avenue by
approximately seven feet and restrict the existing 5X7 culvert to a 3X3 culvert. This would
prevent Highview and Cedar from overtopping and provide benefits downstream.
LaBeau asked if Dakota County is participating in the project or costs and why nothing was
done about this at the time of the road project. Staff stated that the County has indicated
that they would consider cost sharing. They are aware of the situation due to the
Vermillion River Watershed being a component of the County. There were no
improvements directly related to this as part of the Cedar Avenue study; however, the City
made some storm water system improvements as part of the project. LaBeau asked about
potential flooding on land between 165 and 175 and if there would need to be
corrections in order to make it possible to develop. Petree stated that this land has wetland
issues and would need drainage corrections to allow development in any case. The
landowners are aware of the discussions regarding their property.
If Council chooses to pursue mitigation alternatives staff will obtain additional information
such as surveys in order to provide accurate cost estimates. Council asked if there were
any grants available. Mac Cafferty stated that a grant with the Vermillion JPO funded
about half of the North Creek study. The VRWJPO is also considering participation in
funding for the project due to water quality and control benefits. The project will be
presented to the JPO board and the City will pursue cost sharing with Dakota County.
LaBeau asked if any of the existing homes were affected by the new FEMA maps. Johnson
stated that he was not aware of any.
Swecker asked if any communities downstream would benefit from this project. Johnson
stated that no impacts or changes are anticipated in any other communities.
ITEM #4.a. Ipava Avenue Pedestrian Crossing Analysis
Chris Petree stated that the crossing at Ipava Avenue and 185 Street at Century Middle
School was installed in 2011 as part of a federal aid Safe Routes to School project grant.
The current crossing meets the minimum requirements; however, there have been
inquiries from residents and the school district about possible improvements. The stopping
City Council Work Session Minutes
February 27, 2012
Page -8-
sight distance in a 45 -MPH speed zone is required to be a minimum of 360 feet; the current
distance is 375 feet, which barely meets the minimum. Additional high visibility signage
has been discussed. Other issues are trees in the median and on the east side of the
roadway causing sight obstructions; excessive speed for a school zone; and inadequate
nighttime lighting in the crosswalk.
Council asked about possible pedestrian push- button crossing signs. Petree stated that a
total of five electronic signs would be needed for vehicles approaching the intersection
from each direction, and that could be cost prohibitive.
Council directed staff to bring this item back to a future work session with proposed
improvements and estimated costs.
Council member Little asked about the status of Driver Feedback signs on Flagstaff
Avenue. Petree stated that that project should be going out for bids soon for scheduled
sign installation this summer. Funding for the project was previously approved through
the pavement management fund.
ITEM #4.b. Heritage Center Volunteer Demolition
Steve Michaud updated the Council on the progress at the Heritage Center. There is a
savings opportunity by using a group of volunteers for some interior demolition. The work
needs to be completed before the renovation contracts are awarded. Council directed
staff to proceed with using volunteers for the demolition work.
ITEM #4.c. Interagency Committee /Board Reports:
There were no reports.
ITEM #5 — Adjourn
The meeting adjourned at 8:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
J di `Hawkins
D pi'ity Clerk
Laur e Rieb
Acting Mayor