HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-14-99 ITEM 2
• CITY OF LAKEVILLE
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
December 14, 1999
Members Present: Brantly, Detjen, Emond, Erickson, Matasosky, Miller, Pogatchnik,
Tushie, Schubert, Vogel, and ex-officio Erickson.
Staff Present: Michael Sobota, Community and Economic Development Director;
Rita Erpelding, Economic Development Coordinator; and Penny
Brevig, Recording Secretary.
1. Call to Order. Chair Vogel called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. in the
Administration Conference Room at Lakeville City Hall.
2. Approval of the October 26, 1999 Meeting Minutes.
99.15 MOTION: Comms. Detjen/Pogatchnik moved to approve the October
• 26, 1999, meeting minutes. Motion carried unanimously.
3. Strategic Plan Update Process.
a. Review and Approve
Mr. Sobota stated that the memorandum included in the packet provides an
overview to the process that will be utilized to review the strategic plan and begin
the prioritization process for the 2000 work plan. Ultimately, the EDC will be
requested to make a recommendation to the City Council to adopt the 2000
Strategic Plan and the 2000 Work Plan. To begin the review and approval
process, Mr. Sobota suggested that the EDC begin with sections I through IV.
Mr. Sobota stated that sections I thought IV were the summary of the
assessment of the current environment for economic development. The
information was gathered from City staff, as well as from the discussion at the
Strategic Planning Session itself. Mr. Sobota stated that the critical issues
identified in Section V were developed at the Strategic Planning Session in
September. In order to facilitate the discussion on the critical issues, each critical
issue was discussed individually to determine whether it indeed is a critical issue
and whether the descriptive statements accurately reflect the sentiments of the
EDC.
•
Lakeville Economic Development Commission December 14, 1999
Meeting Minutes Page 2
• Critical Issue 1: Attraction of New Business to Serve the Resident
Population
Comm. Emond stated the development will occur when the timing is right, rather
than through active recruitment. Therefore, it is important to be ready for
development through quality planning and customer service. Based on Comm.
Emond's comments, it was recommended that the title be changed from
"attraction of" to "encourage" to more accurately reflect the role that the City is
likely to play in this type of development. Mr. Erickson also recommended that
the word "dental" 6e stricken from the third paragraph because the primary
concern regarding availability of health services related to medical clinics.
Critical Issue 2: Providing the Workforce for Existing Businesses
Comm. Detjen recommended that the title include "future" as well as existing. Mr.
Erickson requested that the first sentence of the second paragraph be reworded
for clarity. Through discussion, the EDC concluded that the sentence should be
"Highlighted by the labor shortage, there is an increasing skills mismatch
between the skills of potential employees and the skills needed for the job."
Critical Issue 3: Providing Housing for New Workers
Chair Vogel asked whether the word "providing" accurately reflected the City's
role in housing. Comm. Tushie expressed approval of the current language
because through the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, the City is
participating in providing housing. In addition, it is unlikely that affordable housing
• would be developed without the City's support.
Critical Issue 4: Building on the Assets of Lakeville to Attract High Skill
Jobs
The EDC requested clarification between this critical issue and the first critical
issue. Mr. Sobota stated that the first critical issue related to providing services
that are needed for the resident population. The services most requested include
retail and medical services. In contrast, this critical issue relates to encouraging
companies with higher skill jobs to move to Lakeville. Comm. Matasosky
expressed concern regarding whether these companies would compete with
existing companies. Mr. Sobota stated that it was unlikely because of the large
number of Lakeville residents that currently leave the community for employment
opportunities. Chair Vogel added that additional residents both living and working
in Lakeville will help support retail development.
Critical Issue 5: Maintaining the Long-Term Vitality of the Historic
Downtown
The EDC agreed that this was a critical issue and that the description was
accurate.
Lakeville Economic Development Commission December 14, 1999
Meeting Minutes Page 3
• Critical Issue 6: Timing/Stage of Development
Ms. Erpelding expressed concern regarding whether the development of
commercial and industrial standards was critical or desired by the EDC. Ms.
Erpelding recommended that this critical issue incorporate the development of
policies to manage growth, the importance of communication, and quality
customer service. The EDC recommended that the title of the critical issue be
changed to "Develop and Maintain Policies and Programs to Facilitate Long-term
Growth".
Mr. Sobota stated that the EDC must also review and approve the mission
statement. The EDC had no comments or questions. The Mission Statement was
approved as written.
Chair Vogel turned the discussion to the goals identified in section VIII. Chair
Vogel stated that it is important that the goals both incorporate the critical issues
and meet the intention of the mission statement. Chair Vogel stated that
affordable housing is identified as a critical issue, however it is not incorporated
in any of the goals as written. After a discussion, the EDC concluded that
affordable housing should be listed in goal 1 as one of the needs of employers.
Chair Vogel also stated that communication, quality growth, and customer
service are not listed in any of the goals. The EDC agreed that those three
components should be incorporated into goal 2, manage growth and city
processes to enhance quality of life and sense of community.
• Comm. Brantly recommended that additional investments besides roads are
going to be needed in order to provide for longer term economic expansion. It
was recommended that infrastructure be added to the end of the second
sentence of the first paragraph in goal 3, position Lakeville for longer term
economic expansion.
Mr. Erickson recommended that the first two sentences of goal 3 be modified in
order to incorporate the MUSA staging areas and the Comprehensive Plan.
Based on Mr. Erickson's recommendation the EDC concluded that the first
paragraph should read "In addition to managing current growth, the EDC has
placed a high priority on positioning the City for future growth consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan. Lakeville's current growth rate is likely to increase utilizing
the staged MUSA expansion areas and planned investments in additional road
systems and infrastructure."
Mr. Erickson commented that quality planning in itself is not enough to support
continued development. The City has begun to see resistance to commercial
development from neighborhoods. The neighborhood development process is
becoming more difficult, and may be a detriment to future growth. In order to
assist residents with understanding the Comprehensive Plan and the process,
the City Council has directed City staff to mail out to all residents the
•
Lakeville Economic Development Commission December 14, 1999
Meeting Minutes Page 4
• Comprehensive Plan and the final Zoning Map. Mr. Sobota added that additional
information will be available on the City's website.
With the approval of the EDC, Chair Vogel began the review of section IX,
Lakeville's Criteria for Prioritizing Action Items. Chair Vogel stated that agreeing
to the criteria for prioritization will assist with preventing members from being too
subjective, as well as increase the efficiency in prioritizing. Chair Vogel asked
EDC members whether they agreed that all strategies should be held to the
standard of "all actions must meet the test of public sector responsibility."
Comm. Matasosky expressed concern that the public sector test limits the
innovation of the EDC. Comm. Matasosky stated that his understanding of the
role of the EDC is to make recommendations to the City Council. Thus, it is the
City Council's responsibility to ensure that the recommendations meet the public
sector standard. Comm. Tushie agreed stating that it would limit the
entrepreneurial spirit of the commission.
Mr. Erickson stated that this discussion mirrored the Planning Commission's
discussion regarding the conflict of interest clause. After a lengthy discussion, the
Planning Commission decided that only the City Council and Planning
Commission are vested with the responsibility of ensuring public sector
accountability. The advisory commissions, such as the EDC, should be able to
be innovative without the fear of conflict of interest and determination of public
• sector responsibility. Based on this discussion, the EDC unanimously decided to
remove the criteria "All actions must meet the test of public sector responsibility."
Chair Vogel then asked whether the remaining four criteria were appropriate.
It was decided that the first criteria, fit with community values, is accurate.
Comm. Tushie recommended, and the EDC agreed, that another component of
the second criteria, urgency, would be "immediate necessity to achieve long-
range plans." The third criteria was agreed to as written. The EDC agreed that
the fourth criteria is important, but that it was the City Council's responsibility to
ensure that an action is fiscally responsible, rather than the EDC.
Comm. Tushie asked whether all of the criteria carried the same weight. The
EDC agreed that although the criteria do not necessarily carry the same weight
for all of the strategies, it would be too difficult to prioritize if weights were added
as well.
Based on the discussion, the criteria were revised to the following:
1. Fit with Community Values
-Implements long-term community vision
2. Urgency
a. Immediate action to correct problem
• b. Take advantage of opportunity
Lakeville Economic Development Commission December 14, 1999
Meeting Minutes Page 5
• c. Immediate necessity to achieve long range plans
3. Impact
- Potential to make a real "big" difference
4. Fiscally Responsible
Before utilizing the criteria to prioritize, Chair Vogel asked whether any of the
strategies need to be modified. Mr. Erickson recommended that the strategy
Ensure an adequate supply and diversity in housing opportunities be clarified. It
was recommended and agreed that the third sentence would be, "through the
Comprehensive Land Use Plan, businesses express concern for and residents
expressed support for increasing the diversity of housing opportunities." With that
modification, the EDC agreed that the strategies were reflective of the critical
issues, goals, and mission statement.
Chair Vogel stated that the easiest method of prioritization would be to read each
strategy and for the EDC to identify which criteria the strategy meets. The
following table summarizes the discussion. The total identified in the last column
reflects how many criteria a strategy meets. Meeting any component of criteria 2
(meaning a, b, or c) was only counted once in calculating a total.
STRATEGIES 1 2a 2b 2c 3 Total
Identify Resources to Meet Employers' X X 2
• Recruitment and Retention Needs
Develop Strategies to Attract and Retain 2
Employers That Will Utilize the Skills of X X
Residents
Develop and Monitor Policies That Promote X 1
Quali Growth
Enhance and Maintain Communication Efforts X 1
With Stakeholders
Implement Strategies to Maintain Quality X 1
Customer Service
Ensure an Adequate Supply and Diversity in X X X X X 3
Housin O ortunities
Implement Strategies to Ensure Lakeville's 2
Infrastructure is Adequate to Meet Current and X X X
Future Business Needs
Maintain Long-Term Vitality of the Historic X X X X X 3
Downtown
Develop and Maintain Policies and Programs 0
that Improve Lakeville's Capacity for Economic
Develo ment
Encourage Additional Office Park/Business 2
Campus and Home-Based Business Sector X X
Develo ment
Develop and Implement a Vision for Lakeville's X X X 3
• Retail and Service Sectors
Lakeville Economic Development Commission December 14, 1999
Meeting Minutes Page 6
• Based on the number of criteria each strategy met, the EDC categorized the
priorities into high, medium, and low. A high priority was one in which the
strategy met all three criteria. A medium priority met two criteria and a low
strategy met one or no criteria. The following is a summary of the priorities:
High Priority Strategies:
• Ensure an Adequate Supply and Diversity in Housing Opportunities.
• Maintain Long-Term Vitality of the Historic Downtown.
• Develop and Implement a Vision for Lakeville's Retail and Service Sectors.
Medium Priority Strategies:
• Identify Resources to Meet Employers' Recruitment and Retention Needs.
• Develop Strategies to Attract and Retain Employers that will Utilize the Skills
of Residents.
Implement Strategies to Ensure Lakeville's Infrastructure is Adequate to Meet
Current and Future Business Needs.
• Encourage Additional Office Park/Business Campus and Home-Based
Business Sector Development.
Low Priority Strategies:
Develop and Monitor Policies that Promote Quality Growth.
• Enhance and Maintain Communication Efforts with Stakeholders.
• Implement Strategies to Maintain Quality Customer Service.
• Develop and Maintain Policies and Programs that Improve Lakeville's
Capacity for Economic Development.
Mr. Sobota stated that the EDC could make a recommendation to the City
Council to approve the 2000 Strategic Plan with the changes suggested. Mr.
Sobota asked whether the EDC would like to see the 2000 Work Plan before it is
presented to the City Council for approval. The EDC concluded that a review of
the Work Plan would be good because there may be low priority actions that will
be done sooner because they are easy to complete. The revised 2000 Work Plan
will be brought to the EDC in January for their review and approval.
99.16 Motion: Comms. Matasosky/Tushie recommended that the City
Council approve the 2000 Strategic Plan as amended.
Motion carried unanimously.
4. Consider Recommendation for 2000 Allocation for Community
Development Block Grant Funding
Mr. Erickson stated that approximately $100,000 in Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funding will available for Lakeville in
the year 2000. The City of Lakeville is required to submit an application to
the Dakota County HRA, the CDBG funding administrator, regarding the
• anticipated use of the funding. Mr. Erickson stated that the EDC is being
Lakeville Economic Development Commission December 14, 1999
Meeting Minutes Page 7
• requested to make a recommendation to the City Council regarding how
the funding should be utilized for 2000. Last year, CDBG funds were
utilized to prepare the new senior housing site, including acquisition,
relocation, and demolition.
Mr. Erickson stated that staff is suggesting that the funding could be utilized for
affordable housing initiatives, such as is identified in the letter from Mr. Lee Smith
of the Dakota County HRA. Another possible use would be for storefront
improvements in downtown. Mr. Erickson suggested that the funding could be
utilized for pilot projects that would restore buildings to historic standards. One
example might be the restoration of the bank building back to its former
appearance. Staff is still in the process of verifying with the Dakota County HRA
regarding the eligibility of storefront improvements for funding. It may be that the
buildings need to be on the historic register in order for projects to be eligible.
Comm. Tushie expressed support for funding being utilized for both affordable
housing and storefront improvement. However, Comm. Tushie expressed
concern that the improvements should be to restore or rehabilitate a building to
its historical appearance, rather than to fix problems that should have been
completed by the owner. Comm. Brantly agreed stating that the EDC may want
to clarify in its recommendation that the funding must be utilized for rehabilitation,
restoration, or enhancements consistent with the findings of the design
guidelines study.
• Mr. Erickson also stated that the City of Lakeville has funding available through
the proceeds currently available from the Department of Trade and Economic
Development (DYED) revolving loan fund created through the New Morning
Windows loan repayments. It was suggested that one option if storefront
improvements are not eligible under CDBG guidelines, would be to utilize the
New Morning Windows loan repayments.
99.17 MOTION Comms. Pogatchnik/Detjen recommended to the City
Council that the available Community Development Block
Grant Funds in the year 2000 be prioritized for affordable
housing and downtown storefront improvements that meet
with approved design guidelines. If one of these projects is
not deemed eligible, funding should then be applied in total
to the remaining priority. Tushie abstained. Motion carried
unanimously.
99.18 MOTION Comms. Detjen/Brantly recommended to the City Council
that if storefront improvements are not eligible for funding
through the Community Development Black Grant Funding
Program, then staff should be directed to investigate the
possible use of the proceeds currently available in the
• Department of Trade and Economic Development (DYED)
Lakeville Economic Development Commission December 14, 1999
Meeting Minutes Page 8
• revolving loan fund created through New Morning Window's
loan repayments. Tushie abstained. Mofion carried
unanimously.
5. Update on Strategic Work Plan Activities.
Minnesota Manufacturers Week
Ms. Erpelding stated that on behalf of the EDC, City staff developed a
promotional piece for the This Week News-Life & Times, as well as hosted a
Minnesota Manufacturers Week neighborhood meeting. The manufacturers'
meeting was held on October 27~' in the Ryt-way Training Room. Over 20
representatives from 16 companies attended the meeting and learned more
about fiber-optics and resources for labor force recruitment and retention.
Ms. Erpelding asked Comms. Matasosky and Schubert for their comments on the
meeting. Comm. Matasosky stated that the feedback that he had received from
Airlake businesses was positive. It appeared that about half of the participants
found the information to be new and beneficial to their company. Comm.
Matasosky added that he believed that the fiber-optics section identified more
questions than it answered. However, as a result of the presentation, a few
companies are pursuing fiber optics. Comm. Schubert agreed stating that she
had also received positive feedback regarding the meeting.
• Ms. Erpelding stated that she had also heard positive feedback from the
presenters, many of whom have had inquiries based on the meeting. Sarah
Cartwright of the Community Action Council Early Childhood Services has
expressed interest in hosting afollow-up meeting to further discuss child care
needs in Airlake. Ms. Erpelding stated that she will be working with Ms.
Cartwright to coordinate a meeting sometime in January.
South Creek Trouf Stream
Ms. Erpelding stated that the subcommittee has met a number of times since the
last EDC meeting. Ms. Erpelding requested that Comms. Pogatchnik and
Matasosky provide an update to the EDC regarding the activities of the Joint
South Creek Subcommittee.
Comm. Pogatchnik stated that there continues to be a lot of information to review
on this issue. The subcommittee is meeting twice monthly to review the
information and involve agency representatives. In order to continue to be
proactive, the subcommittee is involving interested agencies, such as the
Department of Natural Resources.
Comm. Matasosky stated that at the meeting that included agency
representatives, the representatives reviewed the proposed outline for the
management plan and seemed surprised at the credibility and approach. Comm.
• Matasosky expressed frustration at the limited amount of information that is
Lakeville Economic Development Commission December 14, 1999
Meeting Minutes Page 9
available and that the subcommittee must develop its own data resources.
Comm. Matasosky added that the subcommittee has decided to wait with a
public meeting with landowners until the subcommittee is further along in the
development of the management plan. The meeting is anticipated to be in March.
Ms. Erpelding added that the South Creek Trout Stream subcommittee did
recommend to the City Council that Barr Engineering complete a study of South
Creek Trout Stream. Ms. Erpelding stated that the proposed study, which is
explained in the attachments included in the packet, would be considered by the
City Council at the December 20'" meeting. The information from the study would
be utilized to identify and evaluate proposed best management practices, as well
as provide technical justification for their inclusion in the management plan.
Comm. Erickson asked about the location of the trout stream and the watershed.
Ms. Erpelding utilized the map of the South Creek watershed and of the trout
stream designated area to review with the EDC the locations.
Downtown Lakeville Parking Study
Ms. Erpelding stated that Barton-Aschman is in the midst of the Downtown
Lakeville Parking Study. City staff anticipate a preliminary report from Barton-
Aschman in early January and a final report to the City Council in early February.
6. Staff Activities Report
• Ms. Erpelding stated that a summary of staff activities was provided in the
attached memorandum and asked if any EDC members had any questions.
There were no questions.
7. Other Business. No other business was identified.
8. Adjournment. The meeting was adjourned at 8:35 p.m.
R pectively bmitted by: ATTESTED TO:
Penny re g, Recordin ecretary .T. Brantly, Secretary
•