HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/19/2005 Council Minutes.4
•
•
•
COUNCIL WORK SESSION OCTOBER 19, 2005
APPROVED
1
2 CITY OF LINO LAKES
3 MINUTES
4
5
6 DATE : October 19, 2005
7 TIME STARTED : 5:35 p.m.
8 TIME ENDED : 9:55 p.m.
9 MEMBERS PRESENT : Councilmember Carlson, Reinert,
10 Stoltz, and Mayor Bergeson
11 MEMBERS ABSENT : Dahl
12
13
14 Staff members present: City Administrator, Gordon Heitke; Director of Administration,
15 Dan Tesch (part); Community Development Director, Mike Grochala (part); City Planner,
16 Jeff Smyser; Economic Development Assistant, Mary Alice Divine (part); Finance
17 Director, Al Rolek (part); City Engineer, Jim Studenski (part); Environmental Specialist,
18 Marty Asleson (part); and Chief of Police, Dave Pecchia
19
20 HARDWOOD CREEK DEVELOPMENT
21
22 Community Development Director Grochala advised during the last two years the City
23 Council, staff and the Hardwood Creek development team have been discussing the
24 opportunity for a master planned development encompassing approximately 360 acres in
25 the NW Quadrant of the I-35E/Main Street Interchange. In October of 2004 the City
26 initiated the I35E Corridor AUAR, recognizing the need to evaluate not only the impacts
27 of the Hardwood Creek development, but also the cumulative effects of development
28 throughout the corridor. The Hardwood Creek developer participated in the AUAR
29 process as part of the advisory committee as well as financially. The development team
30 has also hosted three neighborhood/public open house meetings.
31
32 Community Development Director Grochala stated at this time the developer has
33 submitted an application to amend the Comprehensive Plan for the purpose of moving
34 forward with development planning. The Planning and Zoning Board held a public
35 hearing on the amendment at their September 14 regular meeting and the September 27,
36 2005 special meeting. The Planning & Zoning Board has recommended approval of the
37 Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The proposed comprehensive plan amendment is
38 currently scheduled for council consideration at the October 24, 2005 regular City
39 Council meeting.
40
41 Community Development Director Grochala stated the Council discussed the proposed
42 Comprehensive Plan Amendment and the development Concept Plan at it's October 5,
43 2005 City Council Work Session. Several issues of concern were expressed by Council
44 members including, but not limited to, the following:
45
COUNCIL WORK SESSION OCTOBER 19, 2005
• APPROVED
1 1. Housing density and number of townhome units.
2 2. Infrastructure costs and potential impact to taxpayers
3
4 Community Development Director Grochala advised the proposed Hardwood Creek
5 development plan includes approximately 400-420 single family homes and 800 to 830
6 multifamily homes (townhomes) on approximately 270 acres of the development site
7 (including permanent open space). The proposed housing mix would allow for a
8 residential development density of approximately 4.5 units per acre. Approximately 45
9 acres of the site is currently guided for medium density residential (3 to 6 units per acre)
10 and 25 acres are guided as high density residential (6 to 12 units per acre). This would
11 allow for up to 570 multi-family/townhome units on 70 acres (8.1 units/acre).
12
13 While the proposed Hardwood Creek Development increases the number of residential
14 units on the site, from a land planning standpoint, the proposed project allows for a better
15 distribution of the intensity of development than what is currently provided for within the
16 Comprehensive Plan.
17
18 Secondly, from a policy standpoint, the 4.5 unit per acre density over the site should assist
19 the city in satisfying Metropolitan Council Development Framework guidelines for an
20 average city wide residential development density of 3.0 units per acre. This was a point
21 of contention during the adoption of the 2002 Comprehensive Plan and required some
• 22
23 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.
24
25 Finally, while staff cannot comment directly on the economics of the development, the
26 proposed density and unit type is linked to the site amenities that we will expect in any
27 development approvals from the site. The number of units provides for greater
28 economies of scale that make a highly landscaped, architecturally controlled development
29 feasible. These same economies also provide for the off-site infrastructure improvements
30 necessary to service the development and surrounding area. Additionally, the unit type
31 itself greatly influences the amount of open space preserved and/or created by the
32 development. Attached units (townhomes) by their very nature allow for more clustered
33 development which in turn provides for more open space on the site.
34
35 Generally, staff is supportive of the proposed housing density and product mix for the
36 above reasons. However, the development proposal does include a significant number of
37 housing units. To insure that the development creates the desired gateway into the
38 community the location, mix, look and orientation of housing product on the site is
39 extremely important. The developer is aware of and committed to addressing these
40 challenges. It is apparent from both staff and council comments that the housing products
41 themselves will need to improve significantly during the PUD process to gain approval.
42
•
•
•
•
COUNCIL WORK SESSION OCTOBER 19, 2005
APPROVED
1 Community Development Director Grochala continued stating the proposed development
2 will require the extension of the City's trunk water and sanitary sewer lines from Main
3 Street to the project site. The existing trunk facilities, installed in 1998, were designed to
4 accommodate the potential demand from the development site. The developer will be
5 responsible for 100% of the sewer and water costs associated with the extension of the
6 utilities except for pipe over sizing and over depth required to serve property outside of
7 the project limits.
8
9 Additionally, the developer will be responsible for trunk utility area and unit charges.
10 These charges were established to equitably distribute the costs of trunk utility
11 infrastructure, i.e., wells, water towers, lift stations, oversized pipe etc. When over sizing
12 or deeper pipes are required to be installed to service areas outside of the development a
13 credit will be provided. Area and Unit charges are reviewed and updated annually based
14 on the ENR Construction Cost Index. The charges for 2005, based are as follows:
15
16 Sanitary Sewer Area Charge $2,520.00 acre
17 Sanitary Sewer Unit Charge $1,095.00 per unit
18 Watermain Area Charge $2,690 00 per acre
19 Watermain Unit Charge $1,765.00 per unit
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31 Community Development Director Grochala advised the proposed development would
32 require the installation of storm sewer and water quality ponding. The developer is
33 responsible for 100% of the cost of such improvements. The City has established a
34 Surface Water Management Charge that covers administration, Surface Water
35 Management Planning, Subwatershed Hydrologic Planning, Subwatershed trunk lines,
36 ponding and water quality projects. The charges for 2005 are based on upland area and
37 are as follows:
38
39 Single Family Residential $0.1 per square foot
40 Multiple Family Residential $0.137 per sq. ft.
41 Commercial/Industrial $0.151 per sq. ft.
42
43 For example the 363 acre site, based solely on multiple family residential would generate
44 approximately $2,166,282 in charges (the actual number will change based on upland
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.
3
•
•
•
COUNCIL WORK SESSION OCTOBER 19, 2005
APPROVED
1 area and commercial area). A credit for on-site surface water management improvements
2 is also provided based on the final design.
3
4 Community Development Director Grochala stated the proposed development will
5 require the installation of streets to service the development as well as improvement to
6 the surrounding county road system. The developer will be responsible for 100% of the
7 cost of all internal street improvements, 100% of the costs of required upgrades to CSAH
8 21 (20th Avenue) and CSAH 14 (Main St.) that are outside the scope of the Anoka County
9 CSAH 14 project. Additionally, the developer is aware of and proposing to contribute to
10 the necessary upgrades to the CSAH 14/I -35E Interchange. The amount of funding for
11 the interchange from the Hardwood Creek will be dependent on the scope of
12 improvements and an equitable cost distribution formula that will need to be prepared by
13 the City.
14
15 It should be noted that the improvement of the CSAH 14/I -35E interchange is currently
16 needed to address existing traffic volumes. Regardless of the outcome of the Hardwood
17 Creek development the City will have a share in the cost of the interchange
18 improvements. Possible city funding sources for these improvements include, but are not
19 limited to, Municipal State Aid Funds, Special Assessments, and/or property tax levies.
20 The proposed Hardwood Creek development provides an opportunity to bring in private
21 sector dollars to assist with the funding of the interchange improvements and minimizes
22 the need to impact property taxes.
23
24 Ms. Kendra Lindahl, Project Manager, came forward and stated she would like to respond
25 to issues that were raised at the last meeting. She reviewed the project history noting it
26 has been a very exciting project to work on. She referred to a chart outlining the existing
27 Comprehensive Plan and the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment. She advised
28 there has been a lot of positive public input on the project. That input indicated there is
29 support for a mixed use project on that site. She stated the development team has worked
30 within the AUAR process and the project does follow the approved AUAR.
31
32 Ms. Lindahl stated all City advisory boards have been supportive of the plan and have
33 recommended approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment request. She noted the
34 three aspects of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment request indicating the development
35 team is asking for Council support for a mixed use project.
36
37 Ms. Lindahl distributed and reviewed a new them book that incorporates concerns that
38 were raised at the last meeting. She reviewed the next steps in the process that must
39 occur to move forward with the project.
40
41 Ms. Lindahl advised the development team is not asking for any City assistance to help in
42 the funding of the project. She noted a PUD gives the City more control in the finished
43 product. The development team is committed to participating in the funding of the
44 necessary road improvements to accommodate the project.
45
•
•
•
COUNCIL WORK SESSION OCTOBER 19, 2005
APPROVED
1 Ms. Lindahl asked for the Council support for a land use change to keep the project
2 moving forward.
3
4 After much discussion, the Council requested more information regarding residential
5 options, ratio of housing mix and the impact of housing in terms of the freeway.
6
7 Councilmember Carlson noted one main concern for her is changing the Comprehensive
8 Plan. No further information from the development team is necessary regarding that
9 concern.
10
11 This item was removed from the regular Council agenda Monday, October 24, 2005, 6:30
12 p.m.
13
14 This item will be placed on the Council work session Wednesday, November 9, 2005,
15 5:30 p.m.
16
17 Mayor Bergeson called for a short recess at 8:52 p.m.
18
19 Mayor Bergeson reconvened the meeting at 9:00 p.m.
20
21 VFW CONSTRUCTION
22
23 Community Development Director Grochala advised this item was placed on the agenda
24 in response to public complaints received by the City Council.
25
26 Community Development Director Grochala stated the bank has foreclosed on the VFW.
27 The City obtained an estimate to finish the uncompleted work on their site. The estimate
28 is much higher than what the City received from the Letter of Credit. If the bank takes
29 over, they will finish the project. Also, the contractor has expressed an interest in buying
30 the property and finishing the project. Staff has spoken to the City Attorney regarding
31 this issue.
32
33 Community Development Director Grochala stated he believes the City will clean up the
34 site with the available dollars and then confer with the City Attorney about possible
35 action.
36
37 VLAWMO
38
39 City Administrator Heitke advised Lino Lakes is the sole holdout in terms of the Joint
40 Powers Agreement (JPA). The VLAWMO Board needs to know the intention of the City
41 in regarding to being a member of the VLAWMO JPA and providing its proportional
42 share of the budget in order for the necessary documents to be drawn and distributed to
43 member units for action in November and December. Staff is seeking direction from the
44 Council on its intent to continue participating in the JPA during 2006 and provides
45 $5,411 as its share of the budget. The Council may choose to include comments related
•
•
•
COUNCIL WORK SESSION OCTOBER 19, 2005
APPROVED
1 to monitoring progress made during the 2006 related to the water plan, future funding and
2 governance issues.
3
4 The Council indicated they intend to support the VLAWMO JPA for one more year but
5 will monitor progress relating to the water plan, future funding and governance issues.
6
7 COUNCIL SALARIES
8
9 Councilmember Stoltz advised he asked that this item be placed on the agenda. At the
10 last Council meeting, their were two no votes for the approval of the Council salaries. He
11 stated there were no objections at the work session when this item was discussed.
12
13 Councilmember Carlson stated she felt concern about the budget cuts that were made for
14 the 2006 budget and was uncomfortable with the Council salary increase. She also stated
15 she saw no reason in the staff report to increase Council salaries by 3%.
16
17 DONATED LEAVE POLICY
18
19 Councilmember Carlson stated she requested this item be placed on the agenda. She
20 stated she believes the City needs a Donated Leave Policy as soon as possible. She asked
21 if the policy could be added to the regular Council meeting for Monday. She noted if that
22 were not possible she would like for the policy to be retroactive when it is approved.
23
24 City Administrator Heitke advised information has been collected from other cities
25 regarding a policy. He stated he also has calls in to the City of Roseville with some
26 questions about their policy. The City's draft policy is almost completed and will be on
27 the next Council work session agenda. The Council will receive the draft policy prior to
28 the Council work session.
29
30 REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
31
32 Item 1C, Consider Resolution 05 — 158, Calling a Public Hearing regarding the Issuance
33 of Revenue Notes for the Benefit of YMCA — this item was moved from the consent
34 agenda to the regular agenda.
35
36 Item 6B, Consideration of Resolution No. 05 — 153, Approving Comprehensive Plan
37 Amendment, Village of Hardwood Creek — this item was removed from the regular
38 Council agenda and will be placed on a future Council agenda.
39
40 There were no other changes to the Council agenda.
41
42 ADJOURN
43
44 The meeting was adjourned at 9:55 p.m.
45
•
•
COUNCIL WORK SESSION
OCTOBER 19, 2005
APPROVED
1 These minutes were considered, corrected and approved at the regular Council meeting held on
2 November 14, 2005.
3
4
6 411111 -)k
7 Acting iblerk Jo Bergen, Mayor
8
9
10
11
12
13
Transcribed by:
Kim Points
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
7