Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/19/2005 Council Packet• • • WORK SESSION AGENDA CITY OF LINO LAKES Wednesday October 19, 2005 CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION Community Room (not televised) 5:30 P.M. 1. Hardwood Creek Development 2. VLAWMO 3. VFW Construction Project 4. Council salaries Regular Agenda Items Adjourn PAGE 1 • • WS -1 WORK SESSION MEMORANDUM To: City Council From: Michael Grochala Date: October 19, 2005 Re: Work Session Item 1 Hardwood Creek Comprehensive Plan Amendment BACKGROUND During the last two years the City Council, staff and the Hardwood Creek development team have been discussing the opportunity for a master planned development encompassing approximately 360 acres in the NW Quadrant of the I- 35E/Main Street Interchange. In October of 2004 the City initiated the 135E Corridor AUAR, recognizing the need to evaluate not only the impacts of the Hardwood Creek development but the cumulative effects of development throughout the corridor. The Hardwood Creek developer participated in the AUAR process as part of the advisory committee as well as financially. The development team has also hosted three neighborhood /public open house meetings. At this time the developer has submitted an application to amend the Comprehensive Plan for the purpose of moving forward with development planning. The Planning and Zoning Board held a public hearing on the amendment at their September 14 regular meeting and the September 27, 2005 special meeting. The Planning & Zoning Board has recommended approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The proposed comprehensive plan amendment is currently scheduled for council consideration at the October 24, 2005 regular City Council meeting. REVIEW The council discussed the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment and the development Concept Plan at it's October 5, 2005 City Council Work Session. Several issues of concern were expressed by council members including, but not limited to, the following: Page 4 1. Housing density and number of townhome units. 2. Infrastructure costs and potential impact to taxpayers The purpose of this memo is to provide additional information to address these concerns. Housing density and number of townhome units. The proposed Hardwood Creek development plan includes approximately 400 -420 single family homes and 800 to 830 multifamily homes (townhomes) on approximately 270 acres of the development site (including permanent open space). The proposed housing mix would allow for a residential development density of approximately 4.5 units per acre. Approximately 45 acres of the site is currently guided for medium density residential (3 to 6 units per acre) and 25 acres are guided as high density residential (6 to 12 units per acre). This would allow for up to 570 multi - family /townhome units on 70 acres (8.1 units /acre). While the proposed Hardwood Creek Development increases the number of residential units on the site, from a land planning standpoint, the proposed project allows for a better distribution of the intensity of development than what is currently provided for within the Comprehensive Plan. Secondly, from a policy standpoint, the 4.5 unit per acre density over the site should assist the city in satisfying Metropolitan Council Development Framework guidelines for an average city wide residential development density of 3.0 units per acre. This was a point of contention during the adoption of the 2002 Comprehensive Plan and required some modification, on the City's part, of the land use plan. This should provide us with additional flexibility as we begin to prepare for the 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update. Finally, while staff cannot comment directly on the economics of the development, the proposed density and unit type is linked to the site amenities that we will expect in any development approvals from the site. The number of units provides for greater economies of scale that make a highly landscaped, architecturally controlled development feasible. These same economies also provide for the off -site infrastructure improvements necessary to service the development and surrounding area. Additionally, the unit type itself greatly influences the amount of open space preserved and /or created by the development. Attached units (townhomes) by their very nature allow for more clustered development which in turn provides for more open space on the site. Generally, staff is supportive of the proposed housing density and product mix for the above reasons. However, the development proposal does include a significant number of housing units. To insure that the development creates the desired gateway into the community the location, mix, look and orientation of housing product on the site is extremely important. The developer is aware of and committed to addressing these challenges. It is apparent from both staff and council comments that the housing products themselves will need to improve significantly during the PUD process to gain approval. Page 4 • • • Infrastructure costs and potential impact to taxpayers Water and Sanitary Sewer The proposed development will require the extension of the City's trunk water and sanitary sewer lines from Main Street to the project site. The existing trunk facilities, installed in 1998, were designed to accommodate the potential demand from the development site. The developer will be responsible for 100% of the sewer and water costs associated with the extension of the utilities except for pipe over sizing and over depth required to serve property outside of the project limits. Additionally, the developer will be responsible for trunk utility area and unit charges. These charges were established to equitably distribute the costs of trunk utility infrastructure, i.e., wells, water towers, lift stations, oversized pipe etc. When over sizing or deeper pipes are required to be installed to service areas outside of the development a credit will be provided. Area and Unit charges are reviewed and updated annually based on the ENR Construction Cost Index. The charges for 2005, based are as follows: Sanitary Sewer Area Charge Sanitary Sewer Unit Charge Watermain Area Charge Watermain Unit Charge $2,520.00 acre $1,095.00 per unit $2,690 00 per acre $1,765.00 per unit In general the 363 acre site will generate approximately $1,891,230 in area charges based on the 2005 fee schedule (the actual amount will be dependent on upland area and the development year). Unit charges vary depending on use. A single family home represents 1 unit. Based on 2005 rates and the proposed unit total (1,250) the residential portion of the development would generate $3,575,000 in trunk utility unit fees. Unit fees on commercial development would be in addition to this amount. The estimated trunk utility charges should cover any city credit for over sizing or over depth as well as contribute to debt retirement of infrastructure costs previously incurred. There is no impact on taxpayers for sanitary sewer and water infrastructure. Surface Water Management The proposed development will require the installation of storm sewer and water quality ponding. The developer is responsible for 100% of the cost of such improvements. The City has established a Surface Water Management Charge that covers administration, Surface Water Management Planning, Subwatershed Hydrologic Planning, Subwatershed trunk lines, ponding and water quality projects. The charges for 2005 are based on upland area and are as follows: Single Family Residential $0.1 per square foot Multiple Family Residential $0.137 per sq. ft. Commercial /Industrial $0.151 per sq. ft. Page 4 • • For example the 363 acre site, based solely on multiple family residential would generate approximately $2,166,282 in charges (the actual number will change based on upland area and commercial area). A credit for on -site surface water management improvements is also provided based on the final design. Transportation Improvements The proposed development will require the installation of streets to service the development as well as improvement to the surrounding county road system. The developer will be responsible for 100% of the cost of all internal street improvements, 100% of the costs of required upgrades to CSAH 21 (20th Avenue) and CSAH 14 (Main St.) that are outside the scope of the Anoka County CSAH 14 project. Additionally, the developer is aware of and proposing to contribute to the necessary upgrades to the CSAH 14/I -35E Interchange. The amount of funding for the interchange from the Hardwood Creek will be dependent on the scope of improvements and an equitable cost distribution formula that will need to be prepared by the City. It should be noted that the improvement of the CSAH 14/I -35E interchange is currently needed to address existing traffic volumes. Regardless of the outcome of the Hardwood Creek development the City will have a share in the cost of the interchange improvements. Possible city funding sources for these improvements include, but are not limited to, Municipal State Aid Funds, Special Assessments, and /or property tax levies. The proposed Hardwood Creek development provides an opportunity to bring in private sector dollars to assist with the funding of the interchange improvements and minimizes the need to impact property taxes. I hope this provides some clarity to the complex issues being discussed regarding the proposed development. Staff has also enclosed for your review a copy of the Market Study prepared by Maxfield Research Inc., and a copy of the application narrative supplied by the Developer. ATTACHMENTS 1. Project Narrative, dated September 7, 2005 2. Market Study, dated August 10, 2005 • • • WlTage of Mardwood Creek Lino Lakes, Minnesota APPLICATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND PUD GENERAL CONCEPT PLAN September 7, 2005 Prepared By: ittgL IA LANDFORM MINNEAPOLIS-PHOENIX • Village of Hardwood Creek ott LANDFORM MI lEAPous•P HOLE PX September 7, 2005 INTRODUCTION Village at Hardwood Creek is a master - planned, mixed -use development offering an approach to life- cycle housing and destination retail that is unique in this community. The project is planned as a conservation development to preserve the existing resources of the site. The property is located east of County Road 21 (20th Avenue), north of County Road 14 and west of I -35E. Our proposal would allow development of a unique community on 362 -acres that will allow convenient pedestrian access from the new homes to the retail center, which is planned to include several restaurants and other service retail. The retail element of the plan would provide destination retail that is still convenient and walkable for neighborhood residents. The mixed -use development would include residential near the commercial so that residents could easily walk to pick up the paper and a morning cup of coffee or enjoy a leisurely stroll to dinner at one of the many restaurants. The City is currently completing the Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) for approximately 4,500 acres in the northeast portion of the City of Lino Lakes. The project site is included in the AUAR area. We have reviewed the AUAR and believe the proposed project is well within the limits of the AUAR scope. The City is expected to approve the AUAR later this month. PUD GENERAL DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT The City Planned Unit Development (PUD) ordinances require that mixed -use developments such as this be rezoned to PUD. Therefore, we plan to request approval of a rezoning to PUD, PUD Development Plan and Preliminary Plan following approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and review of the PUD Concept Plan. The PUD would allow a mix of retail and residential uses. The Zoning Ordinance states that the purpose of the PUD is to provide "for development as an integrated, coordinated unit as opposed to traditional ... piecemeal ... development ". The development team has held open houses and neighborhood meetings to engage the residents in the planning process. We have gotten good feedback that we intend to integrate into the plan, such as: a desire to reflect the community's agricultural heritage through the landscape and architectural design of the project; a desire to provide pedestrian connections with trails and sidewalks; a desire to preserve natural areas within the site; etc. As we continue to refine the site plan, we intend to incorporate these elements to create a unique development. Page 1 Village of Hardwood Creek LANDFORM MINNEAIOLIE•INOENIX September 7, 2005 Mix of Uses Our concept plan includes 55 -70 acres of commercial development, which will result in approximately 500,000- 600,000 square feet of retail space. We anticipate a variety of users with a mix similar to The Village of Blaine development, however, that development is smaller than our proposed development with approximately 495,000 square feet of retail. City residents have indicated a desire to have retail shopping choices on the site. Currently, residents are required to travel a significant distance for shopping needs. Residents have also commented that with the growth in surrounding communities, the area demands additional retail stores and they prefer to capture the tax benefits from retail development within the City rather than seeing it go to the neighboring communities. Our plan also includes a mix of residential homes that provide lifecycle housing opportunities for the community. The plan includes approximately 400 -420 single family homes and 800 -830 multifamily homes on approximately 150 -170 acres (270 acres including open space). This mix of housing would allow development at approximately 4.5 units per acre, which would be less than the density currently anticipated in areas of the site that are currently guided medium and high density residential and would be less than the densities anticipated in the City's AUAR. As we move forward through the development process, we will work with the City to finalize the design and bring forward a unique development that provides needed retail and housing options in the City. Parks, Trails and Open Space The concept plan also shows 80 -95 acres permanent open space. This land is in addition to the landscaped areas within the public street right -of -way and will include a mix of natural habitat corridors, neighborhood recreation and trail corridors consistent with the City's Conservation Subdivision Design. We will: • Preserve natural habitat areas unique to Lino Lakes • Create open spaces for passive and active recreation uses • Create well- designed neighborhoods that feature common open space and • Establish a unified landscape amenity for the enjoyment of residents We are proposing dedication of approximately 5 -6 acres of public park in the west central portion of the site for use as an active City park with play equipment and picnic areas. Additionally, we are proposing numerous private open space /recreational spaces in the neighborhoods. The private recreational space may include small neighborhood parks, tot -lots, passive open space and trail corridors. Sidewalks on the main streets allow convenient connections to the trails within the project neighborhoods and, ultimately, to the regional trail system. Page 2 • • • ottL LANDFORM Village of Hardwood Creek ""' " "' "' ° " „' " °` "'x September 7, 2005 Landscaping The project team is working to create an integrated landscape theme throughout the project, including plantings, lighting, streetscape and open space design. The main entrances to the site are planned as boulevard streets with landscaped medians. The entrances to the development will have significant landscaping and a development identification sign to create a unique entry feature. Our landscape concept will emphasize streetscaping to create a welcoming entrance into the main development and individual neighborhoods within Village of Hardwood Creek. The landscape concept emphasizes significant water features, natural plantings in the open spaces and more formal plantings within the development. The plan emphasizes street plantings, but will also provide extensive landscaping throughout the development. The plan will incorporate native plant material wherever possible. Streets/Access The neighborhood has been planned with a street connection to the north to allow for future access to that property via a new north -south collector road. The will have two accesses from County Road 21, but the main access is planned via the new north - south collector road with an intersection at County Road 14. Successful commercial development projects require direct access via a frontage road close to high traffic roadways. The site has excellent visibility from I -35E, which is the highest traffic road nearest the property, and direct access to the frontage road closest to I -35E will be important. While the subject property does not extend south to County Road 14, we have a general access easement from the adjacent properties and we are working with the landowners to the south to try to establish the street connection. Final site plan design cannot be completed until the access location to the south is finalized. Covenants /Association Documents Except for the public park proposed in the west - central portion of the site, all open space will be owned and maintained by an association. Village of Hardwood Creek will have a master association that will maintain the shared common areas. Within the master association there will be a number of sub - associations: the commercial association will maintain the common areas within the commercial portion of the site and homeowners associations will be created for individual neighborhoods to maintain the common space with their neighborhoods. Page 3 • • • LANDFORM Village of Hardwood Creek "' " "` "' ° " "' " °` "" September 7, 2005 The developer is preparing covenants and homeowners association documents that will be provided to the city for their review prior to final plat. These documents will address building materials, fences, retaining walls, pond maintenance, landscaping maintenance and other association issues. We have provided a draft of the master association document to give some idea of the intent of the document. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS We are requesting approval of three comprehensive plan amendments to allow development of the site as proposed. In order to allow this unique development, the city must approve amendments to the land use guide plan, growth area 1 MUSA allocation and growth management plan. The requested amendments are discussed below. Land Use Guide Plan Amendment We are requesting approval of a reguiding from Industrial, Medium Density Residential and High Density Residential to Mixed Use to allow development of this 362 -acre site as an integrated, master - planned community. We anticipate approximately 55 -70 acres of commercial in the southeast portion of the site and a mix of single family and multifamily within the remaining portion of the site. We expect to incorporate 80 -95 acres of open space within the site as well. The comprehensive plan designates the majority of this site as industrial with medium and high density residential adjacent to County Road 21. The requested reguiding to mixed use would allow use to develop the property as a Planned Unit Development with integrated commercial and residential land uses. Discussions and feedback from residents at open houses and neighborhood meetings support this change to allow this master planned community. Furthermore, Maxfield Research completed a market study that analyzed growth trends and market potential. This study also supports the concept of a commercial and residential mix on this site. We believe that a mix of retail commercial and residential is a better land use for this site because it responds to market demand and provides a better transition from this site to the existing residential neighborhoods. We respectfully request approval of the reguiding, based on the finding that reguiding: • Would comply with the spirit and intent of the City's Comprehensive Plan, • Would comply with the mitigation provisions of the City's AUAR, • Would allow development of this vacant site, • Would provide increased taxes for the City • Would provide life -cycle housing opportunities for Lino Lakes residents, Page 4 • • • ittgL LANDFORM Village of Hardwood Creek September 7, 2005 • Would provide destination retail to serve the neighborhood and the greater Lino Lakes community and • Would allow development of the master - planned, mixed -use Village of Hardwood Creek as proposed. Growth Area 1 MUSA Allocation The property is currently located outside of the MUSA (Metropolitan Urban Service Area), but is located in Growth Area 1, which is planned to be added to the MUSA between 1998 -2010. The Comprehensive Plan anticipates development will occur in Growth Area 1, prior to 2010. However, the Growth Area I includes more land than has MUSA acres allocated to the area, therefore, we are requesting an allocation of MUSA reserve acreage to allow development of a mixed use, master planned community on this 362 -acre site. Municipal utilities are available and do have adequate capacity to serve this site. Furthermore, bringing this site into the MUSA to allow for this master - planned development will also provide opportunities to improve the streets in this area by creating a local street system in this development with a north -south collector that could provide an alternative to County Road 21. We request approval of the MUSA extension based on the findings that: • The change is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, • Development of the site is anticipated by the Comprehensive Plan, • Adequate infrastructure is available to serve the site and • The amendment will allow development of a unique, master - planned community. Growth Management Policy The City's Growth Management Policy generally limits new housing to an average of 147 units per year through 2020 while carrying a 3 -year inventory. The 362 -acre site would include all of the MUSA residential acreage and units planned by the City for development prior to 2010, but the Comprehensive Plan does allow for comprehensive plan amendments for master - planned communities such as this. The proposal would require a comprehensive plan amendment to allow the mixed -use development to exceed the annual residential unit limit, the annual residential acreage limit and the 2010 MUSA acreage limits. In exchange for this flexibility from the growth management limits, the developer is proposing an exceptional project to meet the retail and residential needs of eastern Lino Lakes. The proposed development provides a comprehensive approach to land planning a significant piece of land in the city rather than allowing the piecemeal development that the growth management limits could cause. With a Page 5 • • • ottL LANDFORM Village of Hardwood Creek September 7, 2005 master - planned community like ours, the neighborhoods are integrated and connected, large amounts of open space are preserved, and the scale of the development allows for streetscaping and other amenities that simply would not be possible outside of a master - planned community like Village of Hardwood Creek. The project allows the opportunity for great residential neighborhoods that are connected to a vibrant commercial area with green corridors and pedestrian connections. It is our intention to develop the site as a conservation development with 20 -26 percent permanent open space plus landscaped medians and boulevards on the main streets, but we cannot begin work on the detailed planning prior to approval of the requested comprehensive plan amendments. Therefore, while we believe our conservation development would meet the purpose and intent of the ordinance, we are asking the city to respond to this policy question now to ensure that our development proposal has the City's support before we proceed with the site plan details. Despite the City's Growth Management Policy, the City has continued to be impacted by the growth of the surrounding communities through increased traffic. Our master planned development will provide alternative roadways and relief from the existing thoroughfares. The City always has the discretion to approve housing units and acreage above the annual limit where the development proposal results in significant and discernable public values. The proposed development complies with the growth management criteria. Specifically: • We are proposing to provide a variety of housing types in this mixed -use development, which will help to meet the City's housing goals. Centex Homes will be the primary builder, but a number of custom home Tots will be reserved for local builders. • The project will include transportation improvements that will benefit surrounding residents and which could not otherwise be accomplished through traditional, piecemeal development. • The concept plan shows 20 -26 percent of the development to be preserved as permanent open space, which will help to preserve natural features. • The retail and multi - family portions of the development will provide significant tax base for the City of Lino Lakes. • The public improvements planned with the site will have regional benefits for the community. • The development of this site as an integrated neighborhood with destination retail provides a unique opportunity for the City of Lino Lakes. • Village of Hardwood Creek will have an extensive system of sidewalks and trails that will provide access to and within the development. • Innovative stormwater design will also be used within the development, where feasible. Page 6 • • ittgL LANDFORM Village of Hardwood Creek September 7, 2005 Unfortunately, the exceptional design of this project and a commercial development of this scale cannot happen without the residential portion of the development. If the development is subject to the existing City growth limits, the opportunities presented by this site will be lost. We request approval of an exemption from the City's growth management restrictions to allow development of this mixed -use, master - planned community over a period of approximately 5 years. SCHEDULE Assuming the AUAR is approved by the City Council this month, we request approval of this Comprehensive Plan Amendment and PUD concept plan. Following approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, we would submit application for approval of a rezoning to PUD, PUD development plan and preliminary plat. We would then submit for final plat and final PUD development plan approval in the spring and begin site grading in the spring of 2006. At this time, the developer anticipates 4 phases of Village of Hardwood Creek, but the final phasing plan is dependent on a number of factors including the final site plan and market conditions. The phasing of the project will general move south to north and we anticipate residential build -out over 4 -6 years and commercial build -out within 5 years. SUMMARY We are requesting approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendments and PUD General Concept Plan to allow development of the Village of Hardwood Creek as a mixed -use development providing a variety of residential housing opportunities and retail commercial. Any additional questions in regards to this development can be directed to Kendra Lindahl with Landform at klindahl(a�landformmsp.com or 612.638.0225 or Greg Hayes with Village of Hardwood Creek, LLC at ohayes(ashingobee.com or 763.479.5636. Page 7 • Village of Hardwood Creek LANDFORM M,NNENPYL S,140ENI% September 7, 2005 vilrage of Wardwood Creek DeveCopment Team Master Developer: Village of Hardwood Creek, LLC 669 North Medina Street PO Box 8 Loretto, MN 55357 -0008 Commercial Developer: Greg Hayes Shingobee Builders, Inc. 669 North Medina Street PO Box 8 Loretto, MN 55357 -0008 Residential Developer: Bill Anner Centex Homes 12400 Whitewater Drive, Suite 120 Minnetonka, MN 55343 Project Planner: Kendra Lindahl, AICP Landform 510 First Avenue North, Suite 650 Minneapolis, MN 55403 Landscape Architect: Ben Sporer, RLA Landform 510 First Avenue North, Suite 650 Minneapolis, MN 55403 Project Architect: Jack Amdahl, AIA KKE 300 First Avenue North Minneapolis, MN 55401 Project Engineer and Land Surveyor: William McCully Glenn Rehbein Companies 8651 Naples Street NE Blaine, MN 55449 Project Attorney: Mark Vargo 8651 Naples Street NE Blaine, MN 55449 Project PID# s: 13- 31 -22 -31 -0001, 13- 31 -22 -23 -0002, 13- 31 -22 -23 -0001, 13- 31 -22 -21 -0002, 13- 31 -22 -21 -0001, 13- 31 -22 -31 -0002, 13- 31 -22 -34 -0001, 12- 31 -22 -34 -0002, 12- 31 -22 -33 -0004, 12 -31 -22-43 -0001, 13- 31 -22 -33 -0001, 13- 31 -22 -32 -0001 Page 8 xfield Research. Inc. August 10, 2005 MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Greg Hayes Shingobee Builders FROM: Ms. Mary C. Bujold Maxfield Research Inc. RE: Summary of Growth Trends and Potential Market for Housing and Commercial Uses for Village at Hardwood Creek Maxfield Research Inc. has reviewed projected growth trends and overall market conditions in Lino Lakes and the surrounding communities as they relate to the potential demand for housing and commercial retail uses as proposed for the Village at Hardwood Creek master - planned development. The following paragraphs summarize our findings. Growth Trends Lino Lakes, several of the surrounding communities and Anoka County, in general, have been growing rapidly as the Twin Cities population base continues to spread outward. As shown on the following table, Lino Lakes is projected to add 5,500 people and 2,243 households during the 2000s. According to estimates published by Minnesota Planning, the State demographer, Lino Lakes was estimated to have 18,368 people and 5,433 households as of 2003, well on their way to achieving the 2010 projected growth figures. Employment growth is not projected to be as strong as growth in population and households. Nevertheless, the community is expected to add 506 new jobs by 2010. Most of these jobs are expected to be in service- related industries including education, business and government services, and retail. A concern voiced by residents in the community indicated a need for more jobs locally. 615 Is' Avenue NE #400, Minneapolis, MN 55413 (612) 338 -0012 fax (612) 904 -7979 www.maxfieldresearch.com • • • Mr. Greg Hayes Shingobee Builders August 10, 2005 Page 2 TABLE 1 GROWTH TRENDS LINO LAKES & ANOKA COUNTY Census Estimate Forecast 2000 2003 2010 Change 2000 -2010 No. 1 Pct. LINO LAKES Population 16,971 18,368 22,500 5,529 32.6% Households 4,857 5,433 7,100 2,243 46.2% Employment 2,444 2,597 2,950 506 20.7% ANOKA COUNTY Population 298,084 313,197 357,670 59,586 20.0% Households 106,429 112,627 135,300 28,871 27.1% Employment 106,814 112,328 125,190 18,376 17.2% Sources: Metropolitan Council; Maxfield Research Inc. Compared to Anoka County, Lino Lakes is growing rapidly. Although Anoka County is experiencing strong growth, Lino Lakes proportional growth exceeds that of Anoka County in each category, population, households and employment. Lino Lakes is growing at a rate approximately 40% more than Anoka County for both population and households. Demographic Trends Household Type Table 2 presents household type trends for Lino Lakes in 1990 and 2000. This data shows that all household types increased during the 1990s, a period of strong growth for the community. Proportionately, households living alone increased the most. However, the largest household group remains married couples with children, followed by married couples without children. Married couples without children usually represent those that are younger who have not yet had children and those that are older whose children are grown. Both of these groups without children are candidates for multifamily housing. Although married couples with children typically prefer a single - family home, we are finding that many young couples with only one child will often move first into a townhome before moving up into a single - family home. As the prices of single - family homes continue to rise dramatically, the townhome option has become a more attractive alternative for those first -time homebuyers wanting to own a residence. MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC. e • • Mr. Greg Hayes Shingobee Builders August 10, 2005 Page 3 TABLE 2 HOUSEHOLD TYPE LINO LAKES 1990 and 2000 1 TS'Pe. of Household .. Single - Living Alone Number Percent 1990. 230 2000 488 9.6 10.0 Married Couple Family w /Child Number 1,352 2,455 Percent 56.6 50.5 Married Couple Family w/o Child Number 696 1,313 Percent 29.1 27.0 Other Family Number 213 395 Percent 8.9 8.1 Non - Family (Roommates) Number 112 206 Percent 4.7 4.2 Total Households Number 2,390 4,857 Percent 100.0 100.0 Sources: U. S. Census, 1990 & 2000. There is a growing need for new housing products to provide life -cycle housing opportunities for existing and future residents of Lino Lakes. Age Distribution Table 3 presents estimated and projected age distribution for Lino Lakes. This data shows the large number of children, a figure that is projected to continue to grow during the 2000s. Lino Lakes is a relatively young community. Over time, we expect to see a gradual shifting in average age upward as the baby boom generation moves into its older adulthood and early senior years. MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC. • • • Mr. Greg Hayes Shingobee Builders August 10, 2005 Page 4 Household Incomes Age TABLE 3 AGE DISTRIBUTION LINO LAKES 2000 -2010 ensus Estimate °'. 2000 2005 Forecast 2010 17 and Under 5,651 6,806 7,332 18 -24 1,100 1,703 2,613 25 -34 2,381 1,961 2,330 35 -44 4,303 4,400 3,878 45 -54 2,054 2,567 3,208 55 -64 753 1,250 2,040 65 -74 327 441 741 75+ 222 292 358 Total 16,791 19,420 22,500 Average Age 30.1 31.6 33.1 Sources: Bureau of the Census; Claritas Inc. Table 4 presents household incomes in Lino Lakes as compared to the Twin Cities Metro Area. Household incomes are relatively high in the community. Compared to the Twin Cities Metro Area, Lino Lakes' household incomes are slightly higher than those overall for the Metro Area. Per capita incomes however, are nearly equal or slightly lower. This is likely due to the high proportion of children in the community. Higher incomes will be attractive to retailers wanting to locate in the community. MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC. • • • Mr. Greg Hayes Shingobee Builders August 10, 2005 Page 5 TABLE 4 HOUSEHOLD INCOME LINO LAKES /METRO AREA Census`: Estimate 2000 2005 orecast. 2010 Lino Lakes Avg. HH Inc. $86,117 $102,446 $116,457 Med. HH Inc. $75,899 $87,062 $97,154 Per Capita $25,387 $30,603 $34,542 Metro Area Avg. HH Inc. $68,439 $79,603 $90,676 Med. HH Inc. $55,235 $62,862 $70,462 Per Capita $26,776 $31,185 $35,509 Sources: Claritas, Inc.; Bureau of the Census Residential Construction Trends Table 5 presents information on recent residential construction trends in Lino Lakes and the surrounding communities. The table shows that construction has been strong, more so in the surrounding communities than in Lino Lakes. Multifamily development as a percent of total construction has increased due to rising home prices and households choosing greater levels of convenience. MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC. • • • Mr. Greg Hayes Shingobee Builders August 10, 2005 Page 6 City Lino Lakes Blaine Hugo Forest Lake Total TABLE 5 RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED 2002 through 2004 Single - Family; 200211 2003 2004 wnuomes 20021 20031 2004 202 120 128 16 450 429 520 203 42 44 93 119 139 262 167 178 833 855 908 516 % TH's /Other Multifamily as a % of total: Source: Metropolitan Council Housing Demand 1 284 8 237 530 ith er „1Ylult'lamily 200211 200311 2004 62 0 255 166 103 297 28 0 175 108 87 62 0 10 0 0 432 228 278 415 32.7% 31.9% 24.6% 14.5% 17.6% 23.6% Village at Hardwood Creek is proposed to have approximately 1,200 housing units, a mix of single- family and multifamily. At this time, the target proportion of multifamily to single - family is expected to be 60 %140 %. This proportion is in keeping with trends that we are seeing in the overall housing marketplace and the development of a broader variety of housing products to meet households' life -cycle needs. At the current development pace, we project that it would require between 3.5 to 5.0 years for full build -out of the housing component provided that interest rates remain at their current lower rates. Retail Market Conditions New neighborhood retail space was recently developed in Lino Lakes with SuperTarget and Kohl's as the anchor tenants. Lino Lakes Town Center has approximately 350,000 square feet along with additional retail pad sites. This center primarily serves the area west of I -35W and further north and south on either side of 35W. Households located on the east side of Lino Lakes are oriented primarily north -south along I- 35E. The closest commercial shopping is located at the intersection of I -35E and Highway 96 with Cub Foods and Walgreens. Vadnais Square with Target and Walmart is located at I -35E and County Road E, about one -half mile south from Highway 96. This area attracts households from Centerville, east side of Lino Lakes, Hugo, White Bear Lake, White Bear Township, Vadnais Heights, Shoreview and White Bear Lake. Commercial uses on the proposed site would draw households from Lino Lake, Hugo, White Bear Township, and as far away as Forest Lake given the level of development that is being contemplated. In addition, providing neighborhood MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC. • • • Mr. Greg Hayes Shingobee Builders August 10, 2005 Page 7 goods and services to households nearby will serve the existing resident base which has indicated they are currently underserved in this area in addition to future households that will reside in the area. Retail Demand Our analysis of consumer expenditures revealed that households in the Lino Lakes Draw Area current spend $832.8 million on retail goods and services, excluding education, health care and shelter - related expenses. Based on total household expenditures and an average per square foot retail sales of $280 for neighborhood goods and services, results in a need for nearly 3.0 million square feet of retail space. Our calculations exclude Blaine from the analysis, although retail space in Blaine currently serves a portion of households in Lino Lakes. Thus, there is currently a high proportion of retail leakage from Lino Lakes. Our estimates reveal that there is current market support for approximately 300,000 square feet of retail at this time that will double over the next five years. Households in Lino Lakes are currently spending their retail dollars both inside of and outside of Lino Lakes, more outside of the community as there is a lack of retail outlets to support all of the demand. During both formal and informal surveys, households have indicated a desire for additional sit - down restaurants and other types of neighborhood retail goods to increase the variety of choices nearby. The proposed commercial space for the Village of Hardwood Creek development, 600,000 square feet will be supported over time as the population grows and as retail outlets are established and customers gradually shift their buying patterns to outlets closer to home. The strong projected household growth for Lino Lakes and the immediate surrounding communities will attract new retailers to the area who see an opportunity to satisfy the growing demand for goods and services in the community. MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC. • WS - 2 WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT Work Session Item No. 2 Date: Council Work Session October 19, 2005 To: City Council From: Gordon Heitke Re: VLAWMO Joint Powers Agreement Background The existing joint powers agreement with the member units which comprise the Vadnais Lake Area Water Management Organization (VLAWMO) expires at the end of the year. Throughout the past year, the City of Lino Lakes has maintained a position that it favored merging into a watershed district in order to have a structure which would have the resources to more effectively manage water issues. While some other members have also expressed concern about VLAWMO's effectiveness and the need to make changes to the structure of governance, all other members have indicated that they will extend the current JPA for another year. The withdrawal of the City of Lino Lakes has the impact of reducing the effectiveness of VLAWMO's ability to manage the watershed unit as a portion of it would be outside of their area of jurisdiction and the City would have to find another means of administering wetland regulations. Throughout our discussion of the VLAWMO JPA, concerns have been discussed related to lack of a water management plan, providing for a means of adequately funding the organization in order to implement an appropriate work plan, and having an effective structure of governance committed to managing the water resources. Since the VLAWMO Board initially approved a budget which would provide for significantly more resources to accomplish more activities, member communities have reduced the amount, but adequate funding for the completion of a water plan has been maintained. 1 • • • Attached is a copy of correspondence received by VLAWMO from the Board on Water and Soil Resources (BWSR), the state agency which has oversight of water management and water management entities. The position of Lino Lakes up to this time has prompted some needed clarification from BWSR on how the WMO is to operate and provided BWSR with a forum to express some of its concerns to VLAWMO. Mr. Jeff McDowell, Acting Chairman of the VLAWMO Board and Lino Lakes representative, and I have discussed this situation. The position of Lino Lakes and other member units and BWSR have prompted some action and placed some expectations on the part of VLAWMO. At this time it appears that the best course of action would be to agree to an additional one -year extension of the JPA in the amount $5,411, making it known that the City intends to monitor progress this year on the completion of the water plan, plans for obtaining adequate funding for the future, and resolving issues of governance related to member unit representation, eligible representatives, and voting. Requested Council Direction The VLAWMO Board needs to know the intention of the City of Lino Lakes in regard to being a member of the VLAWMO JPA and providing its proportional share of the budget in order for the necessary documents to be drawn and distributed to member units for action in November and December. Staff is seeking direction from the Council on its intent to continue participating in the JPA during 2006 and provide $5,411 as its share of the budget. The Council may choose to include comments related to monitoring progress made during 2006 related to the water plan, future funding and governance issues. Attachments 1. VLAWMO letter, budget attachment, Sept. 8, 2005 2. Steve Woods, BWSR, correspondence to VLAWMO, Sept. 12, 2005 2 Memo Vadnais Lake Area Water Management Organization 4701 Highway 61, White Bear Lake MN 55110 Tel. 651 -429 -8522; Fax 651 -429 -8579 Website: www.vlawmo.org; email: office @vlawmo.org Date: September 8, 2005 To: Members of the VLAWMO Joint Powers Agreement Cc: VLAWMO Board From: Jeff McDowell, Acting Chair, VLAWMO RE AWMO 2006 Budget, as amended As red $34 me F" J our PA and State Statute the VLAWMO Board approved a 2006 Budget of ts June meeting. That budget, with the member assessments was submitted to the before the end of June, 2005. The WMO Board appreciates the time and energy you, as member communities, have put into' consideration of the 2006 Budget. At an August 31st Membership Budget Committee meeting a revised 2006 budget of $141,400 was recommended to VLAWMO. The VLAWMO Board considered the revised budget at its September meeting, and is proposing increasing the budget to $186,400 in order to adequately fund the Water Plan update. The newly proposed budget and member assessment is attached. The $186,400 budget was unanimously approved by the VLAWMO Board at the September meeting. The VLAWMO Board feels the proposed $45,000 increase is necessary to update theWater Plan as outlined in Minnesota Rule, Chapter 8410. The VLAWMO Board is asking each member community to formally address the proposed budget prior to our October 13th Board meeting. At this meeting we hope to have the financial support necessary to continue making progress on a conforming Water Plan. Thank you for your support and patience on this matter. Any questions can be directed to Stephanie McNamara (651 -429 -8522) or myself (651) 604 -4798. VLAW, 4Q Amended budget 2006 -Board approved 905 September 1, 2005 ® EXPENSES 1 Monitoring and Assessment 1.a 1.b 1.c 7 #60.433vd-getffor 20QW) J* ;t�, O M Citizen's Lake Monitoring ($1500) footnotes 1 2.a 2.c 2.d 2 Ramsey Co lab work & bio assessment ($8500) Lambert Cr. Data collection Outside professional consultants 2 Engineering ITechnical(4 hr /mo @ $125= $6000) 2.e Public Education ($1000) Legal ($1500) 1 %.,t rqi AS. 3.a 3.b Information systems Finance (audit - $3500, bookkeeping help $500) Website maintenance r Computer upgrades 4 Office rent, copies, post, tel 6.a 5 Insurance Maintenance Liability, errors & ommissions, bond 7.a Lambert Lake Grass & Rice Lks Whitaker weir & pond IVIDA AZNict SI R 3 4 5 6 Administration 7.b Administrator (+ FICA & PERA, no health) 7.c summer intern ($7000) Water resources tech ?aQ ;riia5 7 8 Training (staff /Board) 9 Misc. & Cont. Projects 10 Water Plan project grant funded in 2006 gam 11.a Source Water prote Wellhead protection assistance 11.b Well sealin WISL 10, j *, 12 Fees for review service 13 Interest 14 15 16 • 11 Miscellanous WCA sub grant & other Assessments Assessments _ Gem Lake 2.85 . $ . Lino Lakes 3.05` North Oaks 29.32 '51; SPRWS • 3.4 : Vadnais Heights 27.42 `4X04.0-4$:' White Bear Lake 22.53 V9:. White Bear Town 11.43 it { „' .;$a)3.127g, Total assessments $177,400 09/01/2005 • • • 2 Memo Footnote discussion of amended 2006 Budget: 1. Monitoring and Assessment. The previously approved amounts for the volunteer lake monitoring program and the Ramsey County lab work were continued. Lambert Creek monitoring data collection was deferred pending the Water Plan and further discussion with the St. Paul Regional Water Service (SPRWS). 2. Outside professional consultants. As larger capital improvement projects and education pilot projects would be defined in the Water Plan this area was trimmed back to level that would allow for development plan reviews by an engineering consultant and some additional education (double 2005) monies. It was strongly suggested that the application fee structure be reviewed and updated (see income item) with costs such as engineering reviews of applications be considered a `pass - through' cost borne by the applicant. Legal and financial consulting budgets were maintained as approved. 3. Information Systems. A website upgrade, including links to all of the member sites was considered essential and need not be deferred to 2007. The website upgrade was increased from $1500 to $2000. This upgrade will stop short of making our database available on -line. Updating our database first will most likely be an Implementation item in the Water Plan. Computer systems budget was decreased from $4400 to $3500. This however, could still allow for the purchase of a new computer for an intern to use this year and potentially a full -time staff person to use in the future. This item should include set -up and networking assistance. 4. Office. This was increased over the current level of $3300 to $4000. But it did not assume moving to a market rate office space at the $15,000. Nor does it fund most potential office upgrades (desks & file system) that have been identified if VLAWMO adds a staff person. 5. Insurance. This is increased slightly over 2005 ($2600 to $2700), but somewhat lower than approved 2006 of $3200. Workers compensation will not be needed for the second person. 6. Maintenance. This item was considered essential, but costs were not broken out by project area. The amount was increased from $7500 to $10,000. 7. Administration. The amount for the administrator was left as budgeted. The intern funding was cut to $7000 based on the experience committee members. The committee recommends deferring the additional staff person until the Water Plan Implementation program is available. At that time VLAWMO may have a clearer vision of the needs to met by staff person. One member suggested VLAWMO may want to reduce or eliminate the engineering consultant budget item and might be better served by hiring a staff engineer. 8. Training. With 1.5 staff rather than 2.5 staff persons, training was left at its current level ($700) rather than the approved $1400. 9. Misc. and Contingency. This amount was reduced to the current level of $1000 rather than the approved $11,800 that anticipated moving, resetting up the office and hiring another full time staff person. 10. Water Plan. Similar Water Plans in the metro area have been costing at least $100,000. Particular attention will be paid to Goals & Policies and Implementation Program, providing a level of detail now required by State Rules. The Water Plan must be expedited and may cost more as a result. The recommended 2006 budget ($75,000) would bring the total available for the Water Plan update to $1 10,000. 11. Fees for Service. The current pricing structure will be reviewed and updated. e DATE: September 12, 2005 TO: Vadnais Lake Area Watershed Management Organization FROM: Steve Woods, Assistant. Director Jim Haertel, Water Management Specialist SUBJECT: Follow up on questions raised at September 8, 2005 Meeting I provided some verbal feedback on the August 31, 2005 letter from Roger Jenson regarding Joint Power Agreement Issues. You have requested that we document our position in writing and address additional issues that were raised at the meeting. The first three questions mirror those of the August 31 letter and set forth our lack of concurrence with its conclusions. The remaining questions were raised at the meeting. I said that I would include these in our correspondence after conferring with Jim Haertel and our representatives in the Attorney General's Office. • 1. Can the Joint Power Agreement be continued for another year if Lino Lakes or SPRWS (or both) decide not to sign the extension? While we concur with WMO counsel that those members interested in doing so could continue with a JPA, we disagree that the JPA could be extended over cities objecting to being included. The net affect of the position contained in the August 31 letter would be to allow a majority faction of the JPA entity to perpetually bind a minority of communities to the JPA arrangement merely by extending expiration dates (as has been done once already with the concurrence of members). The reference to MS 103B.211 sited in the correspondence refers to decisions of a WMO Board — membership is an issue reserved for the governing bodies of the municipalities to act upon. 2. If the Board continues as a legal entity for an additional year based upon a majority vote, what is the status of the non - signing members? We disagree that a non - signing member is "likely bound by the agreement for 2006" for the reasons noted in item one above. Furthermore, our experience in the courts has shown us first hand that a city must opt out before it opts into another structure. State law says any area not covered by the JPA requires the county to petition for the formation of a watershed district or possibly to do the water planning and implementation themselves. • 3. Consideration of VLAWMO petition on a smaller boundary area (omitting Lino Lakes) and then continuing in it present course. BWSR does not approve changes to WMO boundaries. We are limited to a review and comment role. BWSR does set watershed district boundaries, however. Some of the confusion in this answer may arise from the mistaken assumption that the term "watershed district" includes watershed management organizations. It does not. We describe this scenario as being "possible" on purpose. We believe the term "probable" is overstating the likelihood that our 17- member board would automatically vote to annex the Lino Lakes area into the Rice Creek Watershed District, for example. The Board has historically been cautious about having a political border deviate significantly from the hydrologic border in order to maintain the nexus between the use of ad- valorem financing and water contributions. 4. How could the WMO obtain direct levy authority? It is clear that the legislative intent was for MS 103B WMOs to have direct levy authority. Subsequent decisions to bar use of the authority rest upon the absence of such entities being explicitly listed as a special taxing district in MS 275.066. Several WMOs have had special legislation passed in order to be listed in Chapter 275. 5. Would it be necessary for the JPA to explicitly grant the WMO the power to • utilize direct levy authority? The current JPA for the watershed does not include any clause that would lead us to believe that the WMO Commissioners would have the power to directly levy for administrative purposes without an amendment to the JPA. The current JPA for the VLAWMO does address the power for the WMO to order projects contained in its approved watershed plan and have them paid for either by the members or through the appropriate county. Interpreted narrowly, we would not construe this power to be indicative of the direct levy authority that a WMO board wants for administrative purposes. 6. Are the JPA members required to provide their proportional allocation of the budget that the city or township representatives to the WMO approve? Yes, once the members have had a chance to comment on the proposed budget and a majority of the Commissioners approve a final budget. Section IV, subd. 8 addresses administrative funds. Section 4, subdivisions 4B and 10 address payment for improvement items (i.e. non administrative) initiated pursuant to the approved watershed plan. Another subdivision stipulates that the plan will be complied with by the members unless arbitration is petitioned for. • 7. The City of White Bear Lake still utilizes city staff to represent the city on the WMO Board. BWSR has worked with the City for two years to allow for a smooth transition to a citizen commissioner as required by Minnesota Statue. In part, this was done to avoid losing either the "institutional memory" that the public works director carried or the considerable momentum he brought to the WMO activities. We believe the City has ample time to find a citizen replacement. The continued presence of a city employee voting on matters before the WMO Board will be viewed as an organizational shortcoming in any deliberations BWSR may undertake regarding the VLAWMO's implementation status. 8. The funding mechanisms utilized by Bassett Creek WMO and Hennepin County is a potential funding alternative. At the meeting I outlined direct levy and "indirect" levies obtained through the JPA members. The direct levy issue was address in items 4 and 5 of this memorandum. JPA members could raise their portion of the budget by utilizing their general fund, storm water utility, sub watershed ad- valorem taxation, or, theoretically, direct assessment. In addition to these mechanisms, the WMO can "directly" fund capital improvement projects (contained in their approved plan) by certifying them to the county for payment (MS 103B.251). The WMO may apportion the costs district -wide or by subwatershed units. They may also establish more then one tax district for this purpose. 9. The VLAWMO plan will expire before the new plan is finished. We see no way the VLAWMO can complete even a rough draft of a watershed management plan before the expiration of the current plan. We understand that substantial time was consumed as the organization grappled with the governance issue. For this reason and at this time, BWSR staff does not intend to initiate an investigation of the WMO's inability to implement the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act immediately upon expiration of the old plan. However, our continuing position that the WMO needs to be making progress on the plan remains. The last year has seen the WMO unable to make significant progress in even issuing a request for proposals to hire a consultant to perform the work. We hold serious doubts that the WMO will have any substantial work started on the update of the watershed plan before the old plan expires. We encourage the WMO to act more urgently in getting this progress underway. Failure to move ahead in this critical component of implementing the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act could lead to governance structures that a majority of the communities in the VLAWMO currently do not wish to pursue. We hope our response is clear on these issues and we remain available to discuss the WMO's options for moving forward. • • WS -3 WORK SESSION MEMORANDUM To: City Council From: Michael Grochala Date: October 19, 2005 Re: Work Session Item 3 VFW Construction Project This item has been placed on the agenda in response to public complaints received by council members. Staff will provide a verbal update of the situation at the council work session.