HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 03LakevrJle
Memorandum
To: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
From: Brett Altergott, Parks & Recreation DirectofS4
Date: February 21, 2013
Subject: Commercial/industrial Park Dedication—
Review of Recommendations by Committees
City of Lakeville
Parks & Recreation
In January the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Committee, Planning Commission and
Economic Development Commission reviewed the Commercial /Industrial Park Dedication
Fee report developed by The Planning Company (TPC). (EXHIBIT A) At each of these meetings,
Dan Licht of TPC presented the findings and answered any questions raised by committee
members.
According to the report, the City of Lakeville could increase its Commercial /Industrial Park
Dedication fees based upon the findings of the TPC report. However, it is the
recommendation of all three committees to keep the Commercial /Industrial Park Dedication
fees the same for 2013 and review the fees annually as part of the budget process. Attached
for your review are the minutes from the each of those meetings. (EXHIBITS B, C & D)
EXHIBIT A
TPC 3601 Thurston Avenue N, Suite 100
Anoka, MN 66303
Phone: 763.231.6640
Facsimile: 763.427.0620
TPC@PlanningCo.com
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Steven Mielke, City Administrator
FROM:
D. Daniel Licht, AICP
DATE:
9 January 2013
RE:
Lakeville — Commercial /Industrial Park Dedication
TPC FILE:
135.01 - 11.03
BACKGROUND
The City of Lakeville initiated a review of park dedication requirements applicable to
new subdivisions as provided for in Section 10 -4-8 of the Subdivision Ordinance to
ensure consistency with requirements established in State Statute. The City Council, at
their meeting on 4 June 2012, approved an ordinance amending the Subdivision
Ordinance to establish park land dedication requirements for all uses and cash fees in
lieu of land dedication for residential uses. The City Council also directed that a review
of park dedication fees in lieu of land for commercial and industrial uses be undertaken.
While the statutory methodology for determining park dedication fees is the same for
residential, commercial and office uses, the initial park dedication study indicated that
the same approach could not be used to establish the average land values for the
separate land uses. Whereas residential land demonstrated consistent pattern of
adjustments to land market values by the County Assessor's Office over time, the
County Assessor's adjustments to values for commercial and industrial land have not
followed the same consistent pattern for undeveloped commercial and industrial
properties. For this reason, the City Council engaged the consultation services of an
appraiser to establish an average fair market value for undeveloped commercial
properties and a separate average fair market value for industrial properties.
Exhibits:
A. Patchin Messner Dodd & Brumm Memorandum
ANALYSIS
State Statute. Minnesota Statutes 462.358, Subd. 2b enables the City to require
dedication of a portion of a subdivision to the public for parks, recreational facilities,
playgrounds, trails, wetlands or open space. Minnesota Statutes 462.358,Subd 2c.
further requires that there be an essential nexus between the dedication of land or
payment of fees based upon the City's purpose for the dedication and that the
dedication or fee must be roughly proportional to the need created by the development
and, where fees are to be dedicated in lieu of land, that the fee be based on the
average fair market value of unplatted land. A map illustrating the properties within the
MUSA and MUSA Expansion Area A meeting these criteria guided for commercial,
office and industrial land use by the 2008 Comprehensive Plan is attached hereto for
reference.
Projected Growth. The table below outlines the projected population, household and
employment growth for Lakeville through 2030 adopted as part of the 2008
Comprehensive Plan. The cumulative population and employment numbers indicated
a percentage divide of 81 percent population to 19 percent employment. By 2030, the
percentage of employment will increase to approximately 24 percent of the total of
population and households. In discussing the initial demographic planning for the 2040
Metropolitan Area plan, the Metropolitan Council indicates that the development
downturn in the latter portion of the previous decade will setback growth projections by
as many as ten years. However, as noted during the discussion of the residential park
dedication requirements, the implementation of the 2006 Parks, Trails and Open Space
Plan and 2008 Comprehensive Land Use Plan are not dependent on a specific
timeframe and that both the development and population /employment will occur.
Parks, Trails and Open Space Plan. The City's Parks, Trails and Open Space Plan,
updated in 2006, establishes the planned development and continued buildout of the
parks and trails system taking into consideration projected population, household and
employment growth, national standards for park system facilities and community
priorities. The development of system improvements set forth by the Parks, Trails and
Open Space Plan is dependent upon dedication of land or payment of cash fees in lieu
of land dedication at the time of final plat approval for new subdivisions.
2
City of Lakeville
Population, Household and Employment
1990— 2030
Actual
Estimates/Pro ections
1990
2000
2010
2005
2010
1 2020
1 2030
Households
7,851
13,609
18,683
16,905
20,200
28,400
33,500
Population
24,854
43
55,954
52,466
59,500
78,400
88, 800
1
- Employment
6,563
9,885
13,862
13,219
18,503
22,945
27,387
Source: 2030 Lakeville Comprehensive
2010 Census Metropolitan Council
Land Use Plan, 2006 Parks, Trails and Opens Space Plan,
Parks, Trails and Open Space Plan. The City's Parks, Trails and Open Space Plan,
updated in 2006, establishes the planned development and continued buildout of the
parks and trails system taking into consideration projected population, household and
employment growth, national standards for park system facilities and community
priorities. The development of system improvements set forth by the Parks, Trails and
Open Space Plan is dependent upon dedication of land or payment of cash fees in lieu
of land dedication at the time of final plat approval for new subdivisions.
2
Lakeville had 1,551 acres of park land in 2005. The 2006 Parks, Trails and Open
Space Plan recommends acquisition of up to 481 acres of additional active park land for
a total system of 2,032 acres, which would not include additional greenways or
conservancy areas. Based on the recommendations of the 2006 Parks, Trails and
Open Space Plan, it is possible to allocate specific demand for additional park areas
proportionally to future development based on adopted population, household and
employment projections. An analysis completed by the City of Bloomington indicated
that 90 percent of the demand for park land is generated by residential uses and 10
percent is attributed to commercial or industrial uses.
City of Lakeville
2012
Parks, Trails and Opens Space System
$7 /net acre
Acrea a Per Ca Ita/Employment
$4,558 /net acre
2030
2030 Population/
Acres/
Proportional
Employment
Capita or
Acres
Employment
Residential
1829ac.
88,800
0.021
Commercial /Industrial
203ac.
27,387
0.007
Source: 2006 Lakeville Parks, Trails and Open Space Plan, 2030 Comprehensive Land Use
Plan Metropolitan Council TPC
The 2030 Land Use Plan projects development of 3,094 acres of such uses by 2030.
The estimated density of employees in 2030 is therefore 8.85 employees per acre
(27,387 employees /3,094 acres). Multiplying the estimated density of employees by
the commercial/industrial per capita acreage demand of 0.007 equals a park dedication
share of 0.06 per acre of development (8.85 employees per acre x 0.007 acre of park
land per employee).
Current Dedication Requirement. The City Council approved an ordinance on 4
June 2012 establishing that for commercial or industrial subdivisions where a land
dedication is required, six percent of the buildable land being subdivided is to be
dedicated. The dedication of land is based on the acreage of land guided for
commercial and industrial land uses by the 2030 Land Use Plan, projections of
existing /future employment populations within the City to 2030 and the amount of park
land guided by the Parks and Trails System plan attributable to commercial and
industrial users. Note the 2006 Parks, Trails and Open Space plan does not designate
acquisition of future park land within areas guided for commercial, office or industrial
land uses. The current cash fees in lieu of land dedication for commercial and industrial
uses established in Section 10 -4 -8.J of the Subdivision Ordinance are shown below.
These fees were established based on a detailed study of planned park capital
improvements and land acquisition undertaken by the Parks, Recreation and Natural
Resources Committee and Economic Development Commission and approved by the
City Council. The current fee schedule has not been adjusted since 2007.
Land Use ^ I
2012
Commercial
$7 /net acre
Industrial
$4,558 /net acre
Cash Fee In Lieu of Land Dedication. The City may elect to receive payment of a
cash fee in lieu of land for all or a portion of a specific development's park dedication
requirement. City staff interprets the Statute provisions outlined above literally that the
cash fee in lieu of land must be calculated specific to the amount of land to be dedicated
and the value of the land required to be dedicated outlined in the following formula
applicable to all land use types:
Acres Required to Dedicate x Land Value = Cash Fee In Lieu of Land
The ordinance amendment approved by the City Council on 4 June 2012 established a
methodology to determine park land dedication factor by land use, including commercial
and industrial uses, to be used in the formula above. The consultation obtained from
the appraiser contracted by the City provides guidance on the average fair market value
of undeveloped land guided for commercial, office and industrial land uses. For the
purposes of this study, parcels guided for office land uses by the 2008 Comprehensive
Plan are grouped with industrial land uses in terms of establishing an estimate of
average fair market value based on similar land use characteristics. The findings of the
appraiser's analysis yield the following mean and median land values:
City staff is recommending that the City utilize the median values determined by the
appraiser as the basis of establishing park dedication fees as this number will ensure
that the results aren't influenced one way or another by the specific values and number
of parcels in the survey sample.
Commercial
I Office /Industrial
Mean
$234 907 /ac. $5.39 /s.f.
$121 694 /ac. $2.79/s.f.
Median
$199,414/ac. $4.58/s.f.
$102,807/ac. $2.36/s.f.
Source: Patchin Messner Dodd 8 Brumm
City staff is recommending that the City utilize the median values determined by the
appraiser as the basis of establishing park dedication fees as this number will ensure
that the results aren't influenced one way or another by the specific values and number
of parcels in the survey sample.
Community Survey. Communities within Lakeville's region of the Twin Cities
Metropolitan Area were surveyed for park dedication fees, with this information shown
below. This information is not to be used in establishing dedication requirements in
Lakeville. However, the information is useful for comparison purposes to ensure that
the City's dedication fee does not put it at a competitive disadvantage with comparable
communities in the region relative to economic development objectives.
0
Commercial
Officeli ndustrial
Median Value
$199,414/ac.
$102,807/ac.
6% Dedication
$11,965/ac.
$6,1681ac.
Current fee
$7,693/ac.
$4,558 /ac.
Change
+$4,272/ac.
+1,610/ac.
Source: Patchin Messner Dodd 8 Brumm
Community Survey. Communities within Lakeville's region of the Twin Cities
Metropolitan Area were surveyed for park dedication fees, with this information shown
below. This information is not to be used in establishing dedication requirements in
Lakeville. However, the information is useful for comparison purposes to ensure that
the City's dedication fee does not put it at a competitive disadvantage with comparable
communities in the region relative to economic development objectives.
0
COMMERCIAL
city
Park Fee In Lieu of Land
Rosemount
$4,500 /ac.
Shakopee
$6 390 /ac.
Lakeville (existing)
$7,693 /ac.
Savage
$8,397/ac.
Lakeville maximum
$11 C.
Burnsville
$16 000 /ac.
Apple Valley
Formula based on land value of $260,000 /ac.
Eagan
$869 /sf. of building area
Farmin ton
Appraised value of specific arcel
INDUSTRIAL
city
Park Fee In Lieu of Land
Rosemount
$2,500 1ac.
Lakeville (existing)
$4 558 /ac.
Lakeville maximum
$6,168 /ac.
Shakopee
$6,390 /ac.
Savage
$8,397/ac.
Burnsville
$11 000 /ac.
Apple Valley
Formula based on land value of $100,000 /ac.
Eagan
$236/sf. of building area
Farmington
Appraised value of specific parcel
Options, Based on the preceding analysis City staff is seeking recommendation from
the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Committee, Economic Development
Commission (EDC) and Planning Commission as to the establishment of park
dedication fees for commercial and office /industrial land uses. City staff has outlined
the following options for discussion and consideration:
The technical analysis of the Statutory method for determining park dedication
requirements supports the City increasing its park dedication fees for commercial
and office/industrial land uses to $11,9651ac. and $6,168/ac. respectively. This
would result in an increase of $4,272/ac. (55 %) for commercial properties and
$1,610/ac. (35 %) for industrial properties.
2. The technical analysis of the land and cash -in -lieu of land dedication provides a
ceiling, or maximum, for what the City may require of commercial, office or
industrial developers. The City Council, with recommendations from the Park,
Recreation and Natural Resources Committee and EDC may establish lesser
dedication requirements for land, cash or both. This is especially true for
commercial and industrial development given the competitive nature of economic
development. The City has had a practice of collecting lower park dedication
fees for commercial and industrial development as incentive to encourage such
development in Lakeville (as is the case with the current fees established in
2007).
6
3. An increase in park dedication fees for commercial and office/industrial uses may
be phased in over several years stepping up from the current fees to that which
the technical analysis indicate is justified based on current market value
information.
Regardless of the policy decision made in setting the park dedication fees for
commercial and officetindustriai uses, City staff recommends a mechanism be
established for periodic or annual adjustments in the base value in accordance with the
average change in the Dakota County Assessor's estimated market value for the
qualified properties (as was proposed for residential uses). The City could seek
additional consultations from an appraiser when more significant changes in property
values are believed to have occurred.
RECOMMENDATION
Following past practice of collecting lower park dedication fees for commercial and
industrial development as an incentive to encourage such development in Lakeville,
staff recommends that the fees be set below the maximum allowable but not less than
the current fees. Further, the fees should be reviewed on a regular basis.
PROCESS_
The information outlined herein will be presented to Parks, Recreation and Natural
Resources Committee, the Economic Development Commission and Planning
Commission. City staff is requesting a recommendation from each advisory body as to
the approach to be taken in regards to changes to the park dedication fees for
commercial and office/industrial land uses. These recommendations will be forwarded
to the City Council at a work session before initiating the process to formally amend the
park dedication requirements as may be directed.
C. Roger Knutson, City Attorney
Dennis Feller, Finance Director
Daryl Morey, Planning Director
David Olson, Community and Economic Development Director
BrettAltergott, Parks and Recreation Director
H
PATCHIN MESSNER DODD & BRUMM
VALUATION COUNSELORS
MEMORANDUM
To: Mr. Dennis Feller, City of Lakeville
From: Jason L., lylessner, MAI, and Randy J. Deones
Date: January 10, 2013
Subject: Average fair market value of un- platted land
At your request, this memorandum is intended to summarize our research and analysis of
commercial and industrial land sales in Dakota County and surrounding areas in order to
arrive at an indication of average market value for un- platted land in the City of Lakeville.
Furthermore, this consultation is not intended to be an appraisal of any particular property
within the City of Lakeville. Rather, the function of this memorandum is to provide
guidance to the City in determining appropriate park dedication fees.
SCOPE OF WORK
The following data and information pertaining to the review of park dedication fees have
been examined.
• Reviewed City of Lakeville zoning information
• Reviewed map of un- platted commercial and industrial land in Lakeville
• Reviewed Minnesota Statute 462.358 Subd. 2b. regarding park dedication fees
• Investigated comparable commercial and industrial land sales
• Complete statistical analysis on observed market values
Sunset Pond Executive Offices • 13967 West Preserve Boulevard • Burnsville, MN 55337
Phone: 195218951205 Fax: (9521895-152 1
City of Lakeville
Land Analysis
January 2, 2013
Page 2
ZONING
The land sales summarized on the following commercial sales grid are assumed to have
zoning and potential uses consistent with these commercial zoning districts.
Alternatively, industrial development in the City of Lakeville is driven by three zoning
districts. These industrial districts are as follows:
1 -1, Light Industrial District
1 -2, General Industrial District
I-CBD, Industrial Central Business District
The land sales summarized on the following industrial sales grid are assumed to have zoning
and potential uses consistent with these industrial zoning districts. Lands guided for
commercial industrial and office development in the city of Lakeville are identified on the
City of Lakeville 2012 Parks, Trails & Open Space Plan Map on page 4. Following the map
is a list of parcels potentially affected by a modification to current park dedication fees.
PARK DEDICATION FEES
The City of Lakeville initiated a review of its park dedication fee requirements applicable to
new subdivisions to ensure consistency with the State's statute. This examination was
initiated after the City received feedback from developers that a review of the fees was
needed. After modification of park dedication fee requirements for residential land, the City
continued with a review of fees for commercial and industrial land.
At their meeting on June 4, 2012, the City Council approved an ordinance amending the
Subdivision Ordinance to establish park land dedication requirements for all uses and cash
fees in lieu of land dedication for residential uses. The purpose of this memorandum is to
aid in determining the need for modifications to cash fees in lieu of park land dedication
applicable to commercial and industrial land.
PATCRIN MESSNER DODD & BRumm
Valuation Counselors
City of Lakeville
Land Analysis
January 2, 2013
Page 3
PARK DEDICATION FEES
State Statute
Minnesota Statutes 462.358, Subd. 2b. enables the City to require dedication of a portion of
a subdivision to the public for parks, recreational facilities, playgrounds, trails, wetlands or
open space. Minnesota Statutes 462.358, Subd. 2b. (c). further requires that there be an
essential nexus between the dedication of land or payment of fees based upon the City's
purpose for the dedication and that the dedication or fee must be roughly proportional to the
need created by the development and, where fees are to be dedicated in lieu of land, that
the fee be "based on the average fair market value of the un platted land for which park fees
have not already been paid."
PATCRIN MESSNER DODD & BRUMM
Valuation Counselors
City of Lakeville
Land Analysis
January 2, 2013
Page 4
PITCRIN MERsNER DODD & BRumm
VelU9BOn Cwnsei m
a
w
.
l
Sol
ME
No
1
■
r
`g
u � s `i,� • �
PEI
["
r '• ■ It
.IL
R
1 ■
AA
it
71 T`e '�JM sfuj� � y r
✓'� ����f�'�
r '-
ME I ft
I
=f'k®r
f i /4t - "�
+���
1:\
OAF.
W_
PITCRIN MERsNER DODD & BRumm
VelU9BOn Cwnsei m
City of Lakeville
Land Analysis
January 2, 2013
Page 5
COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL AND OFFICE WITHIN CURRENT MUSH AND MUSA EXPANSION AREA A
CITY OF LAKEVI LE
COMMEROALOULOTS
COMMEROALFARCFL9
INOMMIALOUTIOTS
INDUSTRIMPARCEIS
OFFICE CIMOTS
OFFICE FARQU
037 - 220200055012
037. 220011005012
037- 721037900020
037 - 220410079010
037 - 224790000010
037- 220250054013
037 - 220280052051
037 - 220011005013
037.221175WWID
47.220320D0940
037.214790001034
037. 21031005041
037.220290072013
037 - 220011009030
037.222695WWLI
037 °220320090010
037. 224790100010
037. 230360003011
037 -221 LOSDOO174
037 - 22001100540
47222695000060
037. 220320075012
037. 220360003017
037 - 271685100020
037-220011006011
037- 222695200010
037.2203MM010
037. 220360004010
037 - 221860000080
- 037 - 220011006020
037-220340050011
037320360006017
037 - 122119500060
037- 220011017020
037 - 220340051010
037. 220360007011
037- 222129500070
097- 120OL147020
037220340061010
037. 222122500010
037 - 220011052023
037423202500030
037. 22041054010
a37- 223202600010
037. 22002041030
037- 323102801010
037- 220090079011
037 - 124434000040
037- 220300025024
037- 224434001010
037. 220100091011
D37- 22443404020
037220121027011
037- 224434001031
037- 2242102743
037 - 22443400240
037 - 220121029011
037424434002020
037 - 220121029012
037 - 224434002030
037- 770121030111
037 - 216460000050
037220121053430
037- 217150000060
037- 220250029010
037- 227150MMIO
037- 220250055010
037.227670000120
037 - 22016000440
037- 227670001020
037 - 220290035010
037- 22767024030
03722033MO29
037 - 2276744040
037 - 220320025021
037427670300010
097 - 220340025022
037- 127670300020
037. 720340025030
037- 22034MDIG
037- 22034002646
037 - 220350001012
037 - 22035004614
037 - 72035000101$
037 - 220350002011
037 - 2203500441
037- 22D35004011
037-210$004012
037.220350005013
037420360005014
C37- 220 000640
037 - 220002541
037 - 770360020070
037320360027020
037 - 220360027030
037 - 221165000172
037 - 221185000180
037. 221185000184
47.221185000285
47.2211BSOOM6
47- 221705200030
037 - 721890000011
037221660000022
47.224434900020
037 - 224880000
037.226750702010
037- 127330000103
PATCHIN MESSNER DODD & BRUMM
City of Lakeville
Land Analysis
January 2, 2013
Page 6
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL LAND SALES
The purpose of this consultation was to investigate land sales in order to develop the
average fair market value of commercial and industrial land in the City of Lakeville. The
average market value is necessary for the City of Lakeville to complete their review of park
dedication fees and determine if modification of the current fee structure is needed. The
sales comparison approach is the preferred, and most common, technique for developing a
market value estimate for land. Typically, the sales comparison approach compares vacant
land sales to a subject property. However, in this case, there is no specific subject property.
As such, no adjustments are made to the comparable sales.
Rather, as a group, the comparable sales are expected to form a range of unit values
established by informed buyers and sellers in the marketplace. The average market value
can then be utilized as a reasonable estimation of average fair market value for land in
Lakeville, thereby meeting the guidelines of Minnesota statute.
Sales of land in Dakota County and surrounding areas were researched using the Appraisal
Data Network database and the Northstar Multiple Listing Service. Information has been
sought on recent sales of parcels that are similar in terms of potential use as the zoning
categories within the City of Lakeville. Sales of un- platted land and outlots, that closed
between January 2009 and November 2012, have been gathered. These sales are generally
similar to the parcels identified on the City of Lakeville Map, but located in competing
areas.
The unit of comparison used for both the commercial sales and the industrial sales is price
per acre. The sales used in this analysis are presented on location maps, followed by
summary grids, and statistical analysis.
P.ATCHIN MESSNER DODD & BRUMM
City of Lakeville
Land Analysis
January 2, 2013
Page 7
WRO-11 *002
A to
la C F.gncaa�v ...a
V - a c "
kAwwwwml 201 241
i
......"d a iYllM� Laly lalli 1(IV'�:.'N/Al.. °i7aG
:K5 � xa ' " Vitt
z4-- +e ,m
Tarim 8ry. .DaaPIMYin
Bmif�alii
1 mnprer n
swor milid e
ylbllpog� GM p�
16 *in
_"wlosu� �• r
' Olt ;AoI
-
l�il4mr Qer. -' �.
v :rilwr to
I, { m
o+ ,o &
NM 0 ' +
tWu�
,ea ®o
23 �'
sa
�e , `Sir_+trltl Avs ,; F
m v 3e
1
.3s i :_. SDI M
{�. PAS{ Z
ZT
w
5e ---
asz e,
c"Wen kisii 1! — � D A R 0 T A
tt�o
..1'hlrkR I
�[vav�r' - '
6 .. y
27 - +1011111111,
so
.a T M N at 7 , `Hak" Q airYM4 4 p i p �l
�mt�irwi ai>H —
Call, .
4 •
I er ' ek1 1 � [R'wu na ! ClttlY n
L E S sJ. B 'U R
.41 Her" JJCWiff
a �
Mllwaeruv
noMiYq
R C £
Q
a
22 . -..__ 31
Fa^��
a
COMPARABLE COMMERCIAL SALES LOCATION MAP
isi FrMI/�s . �phOnvlRW a I
141
I RbO..,z. BO#i
eS
I may : a . F1a�IR�
52 fl�:afVf , Ea BII ,20
PATCHIN MESSNER DUDD & BRUMM
Valuation Counaelore
l i l t$
� m
"
» » ffi
» »
'» a r » tt » »
a s $ s s a s s
us d •r � �i .� w N d � e d .. � o
y7 gg9t9 Y
3 [3
Zz a a s 9 N
5 S g bb
z
»» I All 1 Nf 1 - It 11 w .ms
City of Lakeville
Land Analysis
January 2, 2013
Page 9
2
r t6
LOfef►1 47
Sp 1t'- 166 F 152
301 34 1 1�lYW 9
take
,saga w 3 '01 7;
47 7
AM ANen Hib c hOrerlmlr c 41�a00tl
M , .p.. es - y
, _
0 aoi vote a � ➢. • Chord[
t
cf„ 1 3a. FP. -49n FN�Ib- 69 ,
3
ilt1@8iPtlttvG 1
i -.
_.�._. Nu111TD 14 ,MWurtanlm Eleaah at W_ ^Louts PaA ... _
I T ed *"Pull . Ht; Rlw 33 38 '
OMAN" anag- p
I�j. A --
a ,t �; ➢i tb ' --p, T"T as
to 1•' DMramhlrM N'�"'L
Idn
1 ..
15
do
40 ealnm t.�
i de
�(fommpvp M L � -�xa I ar .C1sAt
t1 oapratlsq i,C ►E
A
3 _}—
N ie f+ww61r71a �eaa
"Wow 3
`umm RR PAN" pWa6Mr
Yatlr4 ' i 1111111
--- C.
LM is
L E 3 U E U R
r 26
_. —.
-
a
as ,e
r - - 7n
s K
u- 45 -
amviu.o;ail °`
2a _
`dAr111l� � -
�..� ��evUMs' • Ems.. ;e3- .
tl O A% O T A
7a
# 50
-I * 1lilwa CaWs Rmk
a F u1 p"n
,� SCwaarl, Mar Tyr
R
ab -`
' �YYsOS1fMd
59 -
soonHUt
ea
w iOtttatMM gem
COMPARABLE IN DUSTRIAL SALES LOCATION MAP
PATCHIN MESSNER DODD & BRUMM
ValuaOOn Cauncel6n3
3
C�a10n�
1
-
aafl
59 -
soonHUt
ea
w iOtttatMM gem
COMPARABLE IN DUSTRIAL SALES LOCATION MAP
PATCHIN MESSNER DODD & BRUMM
ValuaOOn Cauncel6n3
a n �.8 p me c 19� L $ m S�
9 Ma
p 8
al _ 1 FE g g � I
e m
15 oil 4 2
YI ` N p y O pN a! 0 1nWp fV P 6
g $ 6 m g SS 2 m 25 S p g o S 8
io
p p p o
W y N O W W N q g M » N H $ H
R pp p p S 8 Hm p p » p
A K W
z
E5 i `? O� U
O
r N C O C W
r
p N
N N R R N tV N N N lV N N p N r
all
gm
so
m
z
0 o o f $y ; 'g � �� o m� S 2 . m Q S
cz
City of Lakeville
Land Analysis
January 2, 2013
Page 11
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
It is important to note that the comparables have not been adjusted to a specific subject
property and not all of the comparables presented herein have been verified.
Based on our investigation, unit sale prices for commercial and industrial land proximate to
Lakeville are summarized as follows:
Commercial Land
Range
Mean
Median
$38,320 to $652,519 per Acre
$234,907 per Acre
$199,414 per Acre
Industrial Land
Range
Mean
Median
$16,441 to $320,000 per Acre
$121,694 per Acre
$102,807 per Acre
PATCHIN MESSNER DODD & BRUMM
EXHIBIT B
CITY OF LAKEVILLE
PARKS, RECREATION & NATURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE
MEETING MINUTES
January 16, 2013
Chair Kelly called the meeting to order at 6 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall.
Members Present: Tom Goodwin, Judy Hayes, Scott Kelly, Howard Lovelace,
Jeanne Peterson, Bob Swan, Jerry Zell
Members Absent: Matt Dinslage
Staff Present: Parks & Recreation Director Brett Altergott, Recording Secretary
Patty Ruedy
2. Approval of January 2, 2013 minutes
Minutes were approved as presented.
3. Citizen comments
There were no citizen comments.
4. Staff report
13 Annual Ice Fishing Contest Feb. 2 at Valley Lake; please contact Recreation
Dept. if you'd like to volunteer at the event. Cherryview rink is open again this year
and being utilized. Neighbors are happy with the site; staff received a compliment
from a neighbor praising the maintenance of the site. MN Hockey event at McGuire
this weekend. Maintenance staff is rebuilding the ice after warm weather last week.
New tables and chairs have been delivered to the Heritage Center. Tickets are still
available for the Johnny Cash Tribute Concert on Feb. 2.
5. CommerciallIndustrial park dedication
Dan Licht from The Planning Company reviewed the reports distributed to
committee members. There are three options included as noted in the report. City
staff is recommending that the current park dedication fees for commercial and
office/industrial uses not be changed for 2013 and that future changes would be
reviewed as part of the annual budget process.
Hayes inquired as to 'When park dedication fees would be reviewed going forward.
Review of the fees is proposed to be reviewed annually during budget time
beginning in April: Licht said that any change to the fees requires a public hearing
to be held by the Planning Commission and action by the City Council.
Goodwin inquired as to whether the same methodology was used as the residential
park dedication fees and if keeping the fees the same now moves the fees away
from the formula and short-funds the park dedication fee collected by the City. Licht
replied that the park dedication fee is only one source of funds to develop the parks
and trails system; bonding or taxes can (and will need to be) be utilized together
with changes to planned park improvements as development of the system
continues. He also stated that the analysis showed that Lakeville could justify an
increase based on land values but that fees must be balanced with economic
Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Committee Meeting Minutes, January 16, 2012 Page 2
development goals. Licht explained how this has been the City's past practice of
establishing park dedication fees for commercial and industrial uses at less than the
maximum that would be allowed by statute.
Swan stated that if the fee were raised to the maximum allowed (by statute)
Lakeville would still be in the lower 50% of fees. Licht agreed that the statute says
the City can increase the park dedication fees but that the City must also consider
economic development goals. Licht explained that undeveloped commercial, office
and industrial properties in Lakeville are highly desirable due to a number of factors
but that the City is in a competitive situation.
Zell said that there is an easier correlation to be made between park dedication
fees and park usage for residential uses than com'merciaVindustrial development.
By increasing park dedication fees for this group, the City would possibly curtail the
gains that come with increased fees. Goodwin inquired as to what udieria we would
use for next year. Licht replied that the methodology used to determine the
proposed fee would be the same as is being presented now but that the
establishment of specific fees especially for commercial, office and industrial uses
also involves a degree of policy making.
Swan stated he is uncomfortable with standardizing the process for determining
park dedication fees. Licht replied that park dedication is a means for the
implementation of the Parks, Trails and Open Space Plan. Therefore, setting the
fees should be a standardized process based on the statutory allowances, Parks,
Trails and Open Space Plan and average fair market property values. If there are
questions as to the extent and type of improvements that are to be developed as
part of the system, those issues need to be addressed in developing updates to the
system plan.and are in fact to be considered as part of the upcoming community
visioning process. Currently the City must utilize the 2006 Parks, Trails and Open
Space Plan that was approved by City Council. The draft 2013 Parks, Trails and
Open Space Plan may be adjusted based on the results of the visioning process.
Goodwin recommended the City adopt the present rate for 2013 and raise the rate
in subsequent years. The committee had a discussion on how it is their role to
advocate for parks and recreation.
Kelly responded that based on the information that they were given, there was no
reason to believe that we need to increase fees. He added that Lakeville wants to
encourage business and that we need to be careful on fees charged to develop the
property and for our City to spur economic development. Less development
equates to less park dedication fees.
Goodwin believes that the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Committee's
function is to advocate for the portion of the City that includes parks, trails and
natural resources and that the fee should encourage development in order to
adequately fund our parks in the future. Kelly added that the committee is working
to advise the City Council on matters related to parks and trails for the citizens of
Lakeville. Lovelace said that the City's advisory committees may have differing
opinions, but there should be common ground. Zell added that although we don't
Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources Committee Meeting Minutes, January 16, 2012 Page 3
want the highest fee, the City should maximize the revenue source while not
discouraging development. Licht gave an example of how sometimes market
factors influence the outcomes of City policies.
Motion made by Zell, seconded by Peterson to recommend supporting option
two as presented and recommended by staff.
Ayes -3 Nays -4
Motion Failed
Nays: Goodwin, Hayes, Lovelace and Swan because specific fee increases should
be included in the recommendation, as presented by City staff in option three.
Motion made by Hayes, seconded by Lovelace to recommend that the park
dedication fee for commercial, office or industrial uses not be changed for 2013 with
an increase in park dedication fees for these uses.to be phased in over subsequent
years stepping up from the current fees with an initial five (5) percent increase for
2014 if justified based on the current market value information and the
recommended methodology for determining park dedication fees.
Ayes -4 Nays -3
Motion Passed
Nays: Kelly, Peterson and Zell because of their support of the previous motion to
adopt the recommendation of City staff.
6. Otherbusiness
The Lakeville Rotary has declined funding for the canoe /kayak rack. Staff will
continue to discuss this issue and let the committee know.
The City visioning process is moving forward. Council members are working on
forming a task force. A community survey will be sent to all members of City
committees in the near future. There will also be opportunities for public input as
well as participation in focus groups.
Hayes would like an update on the tree sale. Staff will let committee members know
the details as they become available.
7. Announcements
The next Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources meeting is scheduled for Feb.6.
8. Adjourn
Meeting adjourned at 7:18 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Patty Ruedy, Recording Secretary
EXHIBIT C
PknNng CommLoWw Won* Session Mhu[es - January 17 2013 Page 2
The Planning Commission agreed that car dealers are a unique commercial use that
have changed over time in terms of franchising/branding and should have specific sign
standards, especially in the case of multiple brand (or franchise) dealerships. The
Planning Commission selected amending the Zoning Ordinance specific to auto
dealerships as the preferred option of those listed in the January 11, 2013 planning
report. The suggested the Zoning Ordinance amendment include a maximum number
of wall signs as well as both individual wall sign size maximums and a cumulative wall
sign maximum.
CommarciaUlndua Park Dedication
Mr. Licht presented the findings of the appraiser hired by the City to determine the
average fair market value of undeveloped commercial, industrial and office land
Included in the January 10, 2013 report from Jason Messner of Patchin Messner Dodd
& Brumm. While the appraiser's findings support an increase in the park dedication fee
for commercial and Industrial subdivisions, City staff recommends continuation of the
past practice of requiring lower park dedication fees for commercial and industrial
subdivisions as an incentive to encourage such developments. Further, City staff
recommends an annual review of the commercial and industrial park dedication fees by
the City Council as part of the budget process.
Mr. Licht reminded the Planning Commission of the residential park dedication study
and subsequent Subdivision Ordinance amendment concerning residential park
dedication requirements that was completed in 2012. He also reminded the Planning
Commission that the methodology used for determining commercial, industrial and
residential park dedication must be consistent with State Statute.
Mr. Licht noted that on a 4 -3 vote at their January 16, 2013 meeting, the Parks,
Recreation and Natural Resources Committee recommended that the commercial and
industrial park dedication fees not be changed in 2013 and an increase in the
commercial and industrial park dedication fees be phased in over subsequent years
with an initial 5% increase in 2014 if justified based on the current market value
information and the recommended methodology for determining park dedication fees.
The Economic Development Commission will review the commercial and industrial park
dedication at their January 22, 2013 meeting. The City Council will consider all of the
advisory board recommendations concerning commercial and industrial park dedication
at their February 25, 2013 work session.
The Planning Commission concurred with stairs recommendation. They agreed that
decisions regarding funding for the development of the park and trail system should be
made by the City Council based upon annual budget considerations and should not be
an automatic annual increase.
EXHIBIT D
CITY OF LAKEVILLE
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
January 22, 2013
Acting Chair Starfield called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m. in the Marion Conference
Room at City Hall.
Members Present: Comms. Longie, Brantly, Emond, Starfield, Tushie, Schubert, Ex-
officio member Chamber of Commerce Executive Director Todd Bomhauser, Ex- officio
member Mayor Matt Little, Ex- officio member City Administrator Steve Mielke.
A
Members Absent: Comm. Vlasak, Smith, Matasosky {via conference call).
Others Present: David Olson, Community & Economic Development Director, Adam
Kienberger, Economic Development Specialist; Brett Altergott, Parks &Recreation
Director, Dan Licht, TPC Planning Consultant.
2. Approval of November 27, 2012 meeting minutes
Motion Comms. Emond /Schubert moved to approve the minutes of the
November 27, 2012 meeting as presented. Motion carried
unanimously.
3. Review of Commercial /Industrial Park Dedication Analysis
Mr. Licht presented the memo outlining the results of a study conducted by
appraisal consultant Patchin Messner bodd & Brumm. The City Council engaged
the consultation services of an appraise�ir.to establish an average fair market value
for undeveloped commercial properties and a separate average fair market value
for industrial properties.
Mr. Licht concluded by stating that the City currently charges much less than what it
is allowed to under current State Statute. He also noted that the Parks, Recreation,
and Natural Resources Committee recommended keeping the park dedication fees
at their current levels for commercial and industrial development and increasing it
by 5% in 2014. The Planning Commission recommended the fee remain
unchanged and is reevaluated next year. Mr. Licht added that to balance economic
development goals and parks goals he is recommending the current park
dedication fee stay at its current level and be reviewed next year.
Comm. Tushie asked how the full park system will be built out if the current park
dedication fee is less than what is needed to fund the current planned build out.
Mr. Licht responded that it would be funded with a combination of park dedication
fees, general fund property taxes, and possible bond funds from any future
referendums approved by the voters.
Economic Development Commission Meeting Minutes, January 22, 2013 Page 2
Comm. Starfield noted that it's important to balance the park system versus
competitiveness. How does Lakeville compare to other ex -urbs such as Lonsdale?
He noted that Farmington currently conducts an appraisal by parcel to determine
park dedication fees.
Comm. Tushie responded that the average appraisal method is a good method and
allows the City to establish a maximum fee amount that can be leveraged via the
statute.
Chair Matasosky (via conference call) stated that the market should come into play
to establish the fee floor. The cap is established by the average appraisal method
under statute. All development fees should be studied as it relates to the cost of
doing business in Lakeville to ensure a competitive development environment.
Comm. Tushie responded that with a substantial amount of parks still to be
developed, there needs to be a secure funding source to pay for ft. We can look at
other development fees, but need to acknowledge that the parks still need to be
built out and that comes at a cost. One of the longstanding advantages Lakeville
has always had was its parks and the quality of it schools. This strategic advantage
has been noted by the EDC and the City shouldn't lose focus on this while striving
to become more competitive on fees.
Comm. Emond recommended that the park dedication fees remain at their current
levels and be reevaluated next year.
Comm. Tushie noted that "hidden" fees often are road improvements needed for
development projects,
Chair Matasosky added that these impacts are often from the County and that
Lakeville should continue to advocate for change in County road policies.
Motion Comma. Tushie / Emond moved to recommend that the park
dedication fee for commercial /industrial development remain the
same, and ,a global view of all development costs in Lakeville in
comparison �o other cities in the region be prepared for the next
budget analysis. Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Little added that it could be debated who Lakeville competes with depending
on the development project.
Comm. Tushie noted that it can be tough to identify, but in general Lakeville
competes with cities such as Burnsville for commercial projects, and cities such as
Farmington or even Wisconsin for industrial projects. Comparisons will vary based
on the type of development.
Mr. Mielke added that the City can utilize fee reductions and incentives based on
the competition for each individual project.
Economic Development Commission Meeting Minutes, January 22, 2013 Page 3
Mr. Bornhauser noted that the Comprehensive Parks Plan should be reviewed and
reevaluated if we can't truly "afford" it.
Mr. Mielke responded that there is a revised draft 2012 Plan but the Council wants
that review to come after the Visioning Plan currently underway.
4. Review of Proposed Tax Abatement Policy
Mr. Olson reviewed the EDC memo outlining the proposed tax abatement policy.
He provided an overview of the recommended objectives and policies for the use of
tax abatement and noted its similarities to the recommended TIF policy.
Comm. Emond inquired if there have been projects that have recently requested
assistance.
Mr. Olson responded that there have been several recent requests for assistance.
The EDC discussed the differences between tax abatement and TIF and how there
needs to be a public benefit demonstrated prior to granting a tax abatement. They
also went on to clarify how this will be used as ap Incentive or assistance versus
calling it a subsidy.
Mr. Olson noted that it is prudent to conduct due diligence of each individual
application for assistance but this is a tool that can be used as an incentive to
attract business growth.
Mr. Mielke added that the "but -for' test for public assistance will be a City Council
decision based on the individual project s merit.
Comm. Tushre concluded that the more tools the City has in its toolbox for
businesses, the better position we are in.
Motion Comms. Tushie /Brantly moved to recommend the draft Tax
Abatement policy be forwarded to the City Council for approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
5. Discussion of Recent City Council Actions
Comm. Longie requested clarification on how the EDC motions are forwarded on to
the City Council.
Mr. Mielke responded that the Council receives copies of all minutes from boards
and commissions on a regular basis, as well as discusses recommendations at
work sessions.
Comm. Longie inquired about a recent approval of CDBG fund allocation by the
City Council and why it was not brought to the EDC prior to approval.
Mr. Mielke responded that not all CDBG activities are within the purview of the EDC
and that the Council decision was on appropriating funds for public improvements
and housing initiatives.