HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC June 28, 2005
:j
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W, . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755-5100
FAX (763) 755-8923 . WWW.CI.ANDOVER,MN.US
City Council Workshop
Tuesday, June 28, 2005
Conference Rooms A & B
1. Call to Order - Following EDA Meeting scheduled at 6:30 p,m.
2. Award BidJ05-18/Wintergreen Street NW & CSAH 20 Improvements - Engineering
~ ) 3. Review Public Works Site Expansion Phase II RFP/o4-55 - Engineering/Public Works
4. Discussion on Land Use Designation (Transitional Commercial/Industrial)
5. Park Study Update
6. Community Center Update - Administration
7. Other Business
8. Adjournment
\
'-)
@
':~) CITY o F
NDOVE
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W, . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304. (763) 755-5100
FAX (763) 755-8923 . WWW,CI.ANDOVER.MN.US
TO: Mayor and Council Members
CC: Jim Dickinoon, City Admini,tmto,~ \)
FROM:
David D. Berkowitz, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Award Bid/05-18/Wintergreen Street NW & CSAH 20 Improvements-
Engineering
DATE: June 28, 2005
INTRODUCTION
/' '\ The 'City Council is requested to receive bids and award the contract for Project 05-18,
'J Wintergreen Street NW & CSAH 20 Improvements.
DISCUSSION
The project consists of construction of Wintergreen Street NW from County Road 20 to the north
end of the Country Oaks West plat and turn lanelby-pass lane improvements on County Road 20
to access Country Oaks West and Birch Point Estates. This section of Wintergreen Street NW is
identified as a State Aid route in the City's Transportation Plan.
The bids received are as follows:
Contractor Bid Amount
C.W. Houle Inc. $422,107.35
Bauerly Companies $428,201.42
Universal Enterprises ofMid-MN Inc. $439,594.57
Park Canst. Co. $451,964.78
Hardrives Inc, $479,761.65
Forest Lake Contracting Inc. $505,316.85
Engineer's Estimate $527,445.78
BUDGET IMP ACT
The project would be funded by assessments and Municipal State Aid Funds. City and developer
,/ '\ costs were identified in the feasibility report that was approved at the May 3, 2005 City Council
\.J meeting.
:J Mayor and Council Members
June 28. 2005
Page 2 of2
ACTION REOUIRED
The City Council is requested to approve the resolution accepting bids and awarding the contract
to C.W. Houle Inc. in the amount of $422,107.35 for Project 05-18, Wintergreen Street NW &
CSAH 20 Improvements.
Respectfully submitted,
Q~0.
David D. Berkowitz
, \ Attachments: Resolution./'
\J
cc: Scott Wold, Pentagon Holdings, LLC, 9457 State Hwy. 10, Ramsey, MN 55303
Larry Emmerich, 1341 - 161st Ave, NW, Andover
\
0
CITY OF ANDOVER
/ '\ COUNTY OF ANOKA
,,) STATE OF MINNESOTA
RES. NO.
MOTION by Council member to adopt the following:
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR THE
IMPROVEMENT OF STREETS & STORM SEWER FOR WINTERGREEN STREET NW
(NORTH OF 161sT AVENUE NWJ THROUGH COUNTRY OAKS WEST AND TURN
LANE IMPROVEMENTS TO 161 I AVENUE NW ,PROJECT NO. 05-18.
WHEREAS, pursuant to advertisement for bids as set out in Council Resolution No.
090-05 ,dated May 17, 2005, bids were received, opened and tabulated
according to law with results as follows:
C.W. Houle Inc. $422,107.35
Bauerly Companies $428,201.42
Universal Enterprises of Mid-MN Inc. $439,594.57
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Andover
to hereby accept the bids as shown to indicate C.W. Houle Inc. as being the
apparent low bidder.
'\
" ) BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED TO HEREBY direct the Mayor and City Clerk to enter
into a contract with C.W, Houle Inc. in the amount of $422,107.35 for construction
of the improvements; and direct the City Clerk to return to all bidders the deposits made
with their bids, except that the deposit of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder
shall be retained until the contract has been executed and bond requirements met.
MOTION seconded by Council member and adopted by the
City Council at a special meeting this 28th day of June , 2005 , with
Council members voting in favor
of the resolution, and Council members voting
against, whereupon said resolution was declared passed.
CITY OF ANDOVER
ATTEST:
Michael R. Gamache - Mayor
~ Victoria Volk - City Clerk
(J)
, ~NDbVE~
' )
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755-5100
FAX (763) 755-8923 . WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US
TO: Mayor and Council Members ~
CC: Inn Dickinwn, City Admini'tmto~
Frank Stone, Public Works Supt.
FROM: David D. Berkowitz, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Review Public Works Site Expansion Phase II RFP/04-55 - Engineering/Public
Works
DATE: June 28, 2005
INTRODUCTION
'. The City Council is requested to review the attached Request for Proposal (RFP) for Public Works
'J Site Expansion Phase II, Project 04-55.
DISCUSSION
At the April 26, 2005 City Council Workshop the Council directed staff to prepare a RFP for Public
Works Site Expansion. Attached is a draft RFP for your review.
ACTION REQUIRED
The City Council is requested to review the draft RFP and give staff direction on how to proceed.
Respectfully submitted,
il
(Jcv-~~ CO .~J2-M.
David D. Berkowitz ..
)
,~ Attaclunents: Draft Request for Proposal
, :DRi~~u
" )
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
PUBLIC WORKS SITE EXPANSION PHASE II
(City Project No, 04-55)
1. BACKGROUND AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The City of Andover will engage professional services to evaluate the City's Public
Works facility site expansion and future needs to continue to provide high quality
service.
Attached is a layout of the City Campus. Parcel C and two residential properties
have been purchased by the City. Parcel A and Parcel B are proposed to be
acquired in the future.
The following items are to be addressed:
i) What are the current and future site needs in terms of facilities such as:
. Salt Storage
,_/ . Material Storage for All Public Works Departments
. Dump Station
. Relocating the Recycling Center
. Water Tower
. Equipment Storage
. Fueling Station
. Vehicle Storage Building (100'X250')
. Washing Station
. Access Road to Nightingale Street NW
. Future Community Center Parking
. Etc,
ii) How can the existing site be utilized more efficiency?
iii) What space needs are likely in the future, based on the City's
Comprehensive Plan, through 2020?
iv) How can improvements be phased in utilizing the property that has been
acquired and the timeframe for the future property acquisitions?
v) Evaluate what expansion opportunities are available if the City acquires
, \ the adjacent 20,34 acres.
)
'_/ vi) What range of cost would be expected for the site expansion and new
facilities? I
H:IEngineeringlCity ProjectslOpen City Projectsl04-55 Public Works Expansion Phase 21Word DocumentslRFPlletter &
rfp,doc
vii) Submit a comprehensive site report and schematic layout (laB) formatF
that shall include current and future needs. RAT
/' ( ". 7 ',.
, ) viii) Evaluate other City facilities that could utilize the additional sp~c~ th'at ,is "
'- ,
not needed for Public Works expansion, such as ball fields,
soccer/football fields, skate park or other governmental related facilities.
The study may suggest other issues that need to be evaluated and it is expected
that those issues will be addressed as part of this study. Information can be
provided to the applicants to review including copies of the City's Codes,
Comprehensive Plan, etc.
A minimum of 4 meetings will be required
. Kick off meeting with staff
. Public Works Committee meeting
. Final meeting with staff
. City Council Workshop
A minimum of twelve bound copies and one unbound copy of the proposal are
required.
2. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
Please provide the following information as part of your submission:
, ,
, A narrative relating to your general approach to this project.
" ) .
. An anticipated timeframe for the project.
. Company history.
. Examples of work in the past five years in government office space
planning or analysis.
. Examples of work in the past five years in site development and/or site
expansion.
. Resumes, including responsibilities, background and relevant experience
of key personnel that will be working directly on this project.
. The names of three to five individuals that can be contacted as references
concerning the professional capabilities and resources of your firm.
. Any additional information or materials that you believe communicate the
capabilities of your firm to perform on this project
3, FEES
Please submit the fee for your service on this project. The fee shall be submitted
on a hourly basis with a not to exceed amount for the service provided.
, '\
'-- j
H:IEngineeringlCity ProjectslOpen City Projectsl04-55 Public Works Expansion Phase 21Word DocumentslRFPlletler &
rfp,doc
4, SUBMISSION TIMEFRAME AND PROCESS DRAfT
r
l A, Submission Deadline and Requirements
Please send twelve bound copies and one unbound copy of the response to
this Request for Proposal. They are to be received at the offices of the City of
Andover no later than 4:30 p.m.,
Proposals should be directed and delivered to:
David D. Berkowitz, P.E.
City Engineer
City of Andover
1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW
Andover. MN 55304
B. Selection Process
Following review of the Request for Proposal by City staff, firms will be
contacted for additional information or to participate in an interview process.
We anticipate that interviews will be conducted during the week of
, and that consideration of engaging professional services will be
placed on the or
_' meeting agenda for the City Council. This timeframe is a guideline and
, may be subject to change.
,/ Any questions regarding this Request for Proposal should be directed to the City at
(763)767-5133.
\.
, I
H:IEngineeringlCity ProjectslOpen City Projectsl04-55 Public Works Expansion Phase 21Word DocumentslRFP~elter &
rfp,doc
2 ~
- - I
(11.1. 'ON avOlr )U.NJ]O:J) L~'- ..- ....._....'. _.:_";",-..a _.~~~","~""'"'-~~t....-9j";"~;;:-:,,::;;.,~--...,,.,~~
mll"AS"7'J]OEC NOSNYH
-
=, ~
<ll I
I
i'
,
,I
'~
lID 0 ~ 5
fill 0 ~
II
'~ ~
:~
!.. 8
,
,.
i~
I~ :
;11; .
!~ ~
'e 0
I~ (/)
I W
i~ : z
:z:
;:,:
I . I
10 .
I III
!~
i~
~ ,~ C<1
! C. I
D < i
I
r
I
I < a::
D ~
Cl
~
~ r
HH~<U~HU<<i ,I
. . . . . . . . . . " .......... ...............
. . . . . . . . .. ............................
: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ i ~ i ~ i ~: ~ i ~ i ~ i: i: ~ ~ i ~ i i: ~: i i ~ i ~ i ~ i ~: :~~~~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~: ~: ~: ~ i i: ~ i i: ~ ~ ~: i i i I
I
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~s:
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
~ : : ~ : : ~ : ~ ~ ~ ~ : : : : : ~ ~ ~ ~ : : : : ~ ~ : : : : ~ : ~ ~ ~ : ~ ~ ~ ~ : : ~ : ~ ~ ~ ~ : : : : : : : : : : ~ : ~ : ~ : ~ ~ : ~ ~ : : : : : : :: ~ i : i i ~ ) ~ ~ : ~ ~L ~ ~ ~ i ! ~ : : ~ :
~o
~ : : : : : : : : : : : : : :?,}: : : : : : : : : : E-~
. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . ~z
w ., . . . . . . . . . . . . .
m g ,l!i...~!i~$j!:!!l:!:!: l
m .. o N
1->-
" o m
-' b
w ca wo
U ., (/)w
'" " 0'" , . . . . . . . . . . .
-<: ' ~ 5 . . . . . . . . . . . .
a. ., , . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
'" 0 ' . . . . . . . . . . , .
. . , . . . . . . . . .
a.~ . . . . , . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .
, . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . , . .
, . . . . . . . . . . . ,
. . . . . . . . . . . ,
. '-'-' - -
. . , . . . . . . . , . ,
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
:::::::::::~~::::::::::::
w '" ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ \
m C;
o N ' . . . . . . . . . . . .
. .. . . . . . . . . . . .
-<: .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I- >- . . , . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
-' ~ om . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . , . . . . . . . . . .
wo . . . . . . . . . . . . .
w ca . . . . . . . . . . . , .
(/)w . . . . . . . . . . . , .
U ., . . . . . . . . . . . . .
0'" . . . . . , . , . . . . .
'" ., . . . . . . . . . . . . .
~ 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . .
-<: M . . . . . . . . . . . . .
GJ . . . . . . . . . . . . .
a. ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . t;
'" 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
a. ~ . . . . . . . . . . . , .
~ ''to. e,)
~~ ~.
t~l ' r:'l e" ' >-
e, ,q
IT! ~
o~ ,
-' ,r-- .. '0",
w ca- ~e,
U"
"'~ i
-<: .
a.~
---=;1 --
=----~-
- ~
I (60 ~ 'ON O'IfOH A.LNnO:)) 'M'N .L33H1S 3Tv'E>NI.LHE>IN
I
~ hill
...
z .
I :..
, , ,
) I C) (]
@
,.. "-
V
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N,W, . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304. (763) 755-5100
FAX (763) 755-8923 . WWW,CI.ANDOVER,MN.US
TO: Mayo, ",d Couo,,! Mombm ~
CC: Jim Dickinson, City Administrator
FROM: Will Neumeister, Community Development DirectorM-
SUBJECT: Discussion on Land Use Designation (Transitional CommerciallIndustrial)
DATE: June 28, 2005
INTRODUCTION
At a recent Council meeting the staff presented information related to how the Transitional
Commercial Industrial land use designation was put on the City's Comprehensive Land Use
0 Plan. Attached are the minutes of a Council meeting from February 16, 1999 that indicated
there were four Council members that were interested in giving one particular site that
designation. There are four locations in Andover that have that designation on the land use
map (attached is a map showing the locations). An excerpt from the current comprehensive
plan defines what is meant by the term "Transitional Land Uses"; as well as "Transitional
CommerciallLight Industrial":
City of Andover Comprehensive Plan - Chapter Four
4. Transitional Land Uses
Transitional land uses encompass areas where future land use may differ
from that of the designated Zoning District. Transitional districts recognize
the possibility for land use change in the future, but do not exempt
development under current Zoning Guidelines,
a. Transitional Commercial\Light Industrial (TC) Areas designated as
TC, Transitional Commercial\Light Industrial are currently designated as
residential in the Zoning Ordinance, but may potentially become
commercial because of their proximity to existing commercial development
or location along a major thoroughfare. Property designated as TC may
develop as either residential or commercial under the rules of the Zoning
Ordinance and Land Use Guide Plan.
0
DISCUSSION
"
" ) In discussions with the City Attorney, he has advised that properly following Zoning Case
,
law, a designation of this type on the Comprehensive Plan means that Council is willing to
rezone the site to either commercial or light industrial. If the sites in Andover that have this
designation are improperly designated, then the Council should discuss whether the plan is
consistent with the intentions of the Council. If the plan is, not, then the staff should be
directed to prepare a minor plan amendment to review them and process a land use change to
a new designation that the Council would recommend.
ACTION REQUESTED
The Council is requested to discuss the issue of whether the four locations that have
'Transitional Commercial! Light Industrial" are in need of change on the Comprehensive
Land Use Map. If Council is not comfortable with the current designation, then the process of
making the needed changes should begin.
Respectfully Submitted,
W:fv..-
Will Neumeister
Attachment:
/ " Minutes of Feb. 16, 1999 Council Meeting
'......) Land Use Map (11" x 17")
'1
'-.J
( "
,
Regular Andover City Council Meeting
Minutes - February 16, 1999
Page 12
er Feasibility/Approve Feasibility/1P98-19/14223 Quay Street, Continued)
Councilmember I noted this expedites the project, especially when the report is done in house.
The approvals are to me e legal requirements so the project can be assessed. He didn't have a
problem with this procedure on minor projects. Mr. Erickson stated normally such reports are
ordered at one meeting and approved at xt. This was a simple project. The house on this lot
is for sale, and the desire is to have the assessm the lot before it is sold so those fees are on
record.
Motion by Orttel, Seconded by Johnson, to approve Items 26 and 27. (Res . n R049-99 ordering
the feasibility report and R050-99 approving the feasibility report and ordering lie hearing
forIP98-19/14223 Quay Street NW) Motion carried on a 4- Yes, I-No (Jacobson) vote.
MAYOR/COUNCIL INPUT
Potential commercial designation/Bunker Lake Boulevard and Crooked Lake Boulevard - Mr.
; Carlberg stated three landowners between Crooked Lake Boulevard and Gladiola along Bunker Lake (
,
'. , Boulevard has requested a change in the land use from urban residential, R-4, to TCI - Transitional
Commercial/Industrial. This would allow the lots to be developed as commercial in the future.
With the reconstruction of Bunker Lake Boulevard, the decision would be whether to stub the
properties for residential or potentially commercial development. He did contact five of the
Comprehensive Plan Task Force members regarding the request. Two did not approve; three didn't
have a problem with it. One property owner will proceed to have a single family home constructed
if this request is not considered by the Council.
The Council discussed the benefits of commercial development along that portion of Bunker Lake
Boulevard, noting there are few other single family residences along that road, the desire to have a
service road between Crooked Lake Boulevard and Heather, the negative impact the reconstruction
of Bunker Lake Boulevard will have on the front yard of the lots, not wanting to see the single family
homes converted into businesses as is often done in similar situations and raising the concern of
another single family house in that area. A concern was with the "industrial" designation, though
the hope was that this would develop as small offices and lighter uses, not high use commercial,
especially because of the right-in, right-out situation that will exist at the Crooked Lake Boulevard
intersection.
Charlie Vieman explained that his intent was to sell his house and be able to get a nice little place
for his wife that is all on one level. What he discovered was that his property is not worth what he
thought; when the road is widened, his property will be worth $10,000 to $20,000 less. Now at 7
o'clock in the morning, the sound of the traffic disturbs his wife. The only alternative is to zone the
, property as commercial to be able to recoup his investment. Dale Scott has been in a wheel chair
,
'-. " ; for a number of years, and he too would like to move to a place with one floor. The widening of the
road will impact that property significantly.
, '. . .'
~~
Regular Andover City Council Meeting
Minutes - February 16,1999
Page 13
(Mayor/Council Input, Continued)
Four of the five Councilmembers were interested in giving serious consideration to the request. <
Council member Jacobson was generally opposed because of the amount of commercial along
Bunker Lake Boulevard already.
School speed zones - Mr. Erickson stated they have met with the county and the school. At the next
meeting, the Council will be asked to support the reduction in the speed limit in front of the schools,
which will then be passed on to the county.
Length of meetings - Councilmember Jacobson was concerned with the timing of the meetings. The
first item on the agenda this evening was not considered until 8:20. The Council felt that problem
should be alleviated since the EDA will now be held on another night. No changes were made this
evening.
APPROVAL OF CLAIMS
U The Council noted the claim to E & H Earth Movers, $91,899.20, must be removed from the list.
Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Johnson, to move the Claims with the exception as noted. Motion
carried unanimously.
Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Knight, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously.
The meeting adjourned at 11 :23 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
~~UVL
Marcella A. Peach
Recording Secretary
/ "\
0
- -- . . -. ... ...- .. . .._~.. ,...
~
C :>.'~ ~
co ,.... '11iiii ~ ~ >.
:li"".,I"" C :>.'- . ,~ ... V'l
a.. ,..... >. Q) ... .::. E u.... E \0""
co '-' ""O';;;Ul" .!i ::I 0:::: Q)
en C:J.- ro ~ .::::: +oJ w
cE"'~ ~ I C Cll
Q) ~ ~,:!o~ ~ ~ C/l 0 u
-=::.. z ;:"'C.!: <0 (,):::: Q)
> l:'-. 0 ~ :f'~ ~ l;; ,~ 0 ; ('f') 0) Q) c::: ~
._ ...J Q.) 'E E C5 .... ... 0 c: > .-
'<T (/) Q) ~ _~]i]iE~~5'~~ ~, 0 Cll:O::: :J ~
"C UJ ,!!!'Cijic8';;;u(')"'E ~ C\l.cU n:J
~~ Q) en ~ ~~1l~~&~'8~8iii ~ ~ U~ 0 0..
> ~ ~ ~Ul",Ul",-Eoo ,- "'- Q)LU V'l L-
o"O..c.....J l!) 'U5~a::~ c ~ o-EU~~ ~ e (I) CO rJ) ~
.,..... Q) Q) C .QoUo-~:J a.::::J~ ~ =:s '- 0
C...... Q) ....... ~ 0::: ffi m ffi ~ :e 'CoO ~ E"tJ CI) 'S .a / C :) Q) "'0
<( ~ -,-, r... - .g 1O..c -e -e c ~.s -E, ~ ~.E 0 ~.Q CO " .l1 CO"'" 0.. C
O L.. '-J""" UJ - '- '-............ co - "E- ,- '" I ....- ...... .... Q).9 - "'0 '+-<( .-
en :J =.l - - '- ~ Q) .c::o ...... cnLL. oJ C ........
"-0 0.. 0. C aO:: , ' ,I-I-::iZelO.2'"O<t~:> ;;; -:;: ....-
"- 1....J:::iEJ:'l,II:!:...JQ.112:> ~ e ,,"''-........
:>.. 0 E '" 5lo::a::a::a::C3a::(.)(.)(.)u~ ,CI)el~O ~ & ...J :J
~ u ,~ ~ :;)O:::;):;):;)I-I-~Zel~~~O<t:>O:: U ~
@ 8 -l ~ [J[l]!EJDJDIIIIITJ <: <: ~ <5
~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~
"' ~~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~
~[~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~i ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~
H33.W"-LIS...v;n
~il'~ it P" Ih-I -\~ ~ u ~~..... ITIIIII I~ll \
~,""-"' h ~ - R"- I I I r I TT [""; ~%--A..rr::;-
~,,~~- ~ loY' I"" Q ~ f::' 1'-' 'I '/
~il."'~ h ~I I/~ ^ '" 1 7 k" ~ ff!iNI!I.
~"'~~" (f-., (..-')ro. Vv ~ ~ ~~
::'~O:-,'= l rr f( v 1- I ~ ~ m" ""-' """ ~L '"
~""~< 1\ j) ~\- J~~' ""," ,"" ~~
. ~-:~,=: b L- ~ V ~Ir- --rIH ~Wl~ ~~~ ~ 'I-.~f:, I~ J r"7
" ~"~m I ~ ~ 11 El!ill ~t-...'\...'.::,,- ~,V/ ,T:)~I ~~ ~ U
: ~..:::'=.: "::::::==: f-f n j) "'" 10~"~ l..... '\.~~ ~,,\ " '.: .v:. II~ 1
" ~"'"~ ) f- -:;,. r-- ,rA:~.. '<.r'<. 'il",':,..:~" -" '\ , "=31
IM.l$~W4 ~ ,.... I rr r---r X/I1\. f\.. ~ ........ T\ ~ ~~I ~
~,,~'" f-J " I I f--J~ L'" ~ l'-~ ~ "-\ Hrnf- ~ '11ft r-
:~=~ L v L ~ ~ ~~~ H'~~ tt#Jf- ~~~ t v '\
~il~:~~~ --; ~ .~~~~~IIIII~tla
~n"'~' 833 ~ '\~ ==~;;j.X~~8~r\. ~m&fS~ I~~
~,,~~ '1 r \ == ~ ~,~ \I ~)'ifA 'lQ
-:~.: Jl ~' 0-- '" ~ .~ i"iJ;;~ t-lF,
~:~~H \, IT F ~EIH 1cmBl.i~.'/lg~,t u
~ilO.'_~ W I iii:' ~gj~~ fil~Y mmJl"
~m'. II - U I . I~~ / ;
. ..,.:;:, ::::' mm
c ::~':::::; - ~ J=L .. ~, .. :=1
>"~"~,, - "tt -:',' ~~L c (' .,U
c ~::=: I ~ _ B<~F "fl!: 1 ~ ~~ I(lj ,-;:: L!;J ~I\'U 'U~ ~. ~~IJ~ (~m~-
~,,~'" H~ I-~ 1 r:m:5~ ,,\ 6!B f). ~E~ ~!!em~~~ s i'-"" ~
~"~n.., l2 Y lrl-..L- Ll1M!< l\ :mJ ~ ~ s I- I
~"=.~, f- mT '" If!>! f:!i1..~ EEE~ ~ ::E
~:~:: Q3Im3ffiEB I I I III I~~ '- H I ~ ~~~~ ~.~, ~
~""" 1~~~Jnl7u I L f- 6- ~R"i " ~
~"~1" I J).J ");~""'- I- C I r- r- ;::... ~, w.~. 8
~".n ~'- \\-If- " ' ,,,," .
^,"L$avlH<Y:lUV ~r==r=r= l.b:1- M
IM.uLW,,,WllJi ~~ it-- H lr- r-.. t.... ....... . . 8
~"'"~, CIIJ~\\= 1r 111-- Mf '- 1 r Etm~~ [ '::J [, '-"- '" """ I~~ ffi, ;;:
~,,~~ CI.lJ 11 ~ l) T [ II, lp "''<.r~I''''',,,'- ~ 1ilil6l<<~ ~::::
~""'~- p:;:::;I:::1 r, :I I N
~,,_ bJJ...W~h1b 1 V' 1 IlElJ 0
':,';:.:: em EEE l 9P m kl-- \:~ IH~ fl]\\d R~ i ~
~ "-,, '- r=r= tjj B R"TIT'7~ ~ '""'lJ>' ~
. ~,,~- f- f- ~I' W ~' IL t; In- [ffiffi Y 1IT:l..M: . AI L 'W/>.~~ ' ~
IlINlSAnU _ I /.:;1 .., /J(5 10
: ~il:'::':: r,- I 1- ~~ jt "Yi ~" ~ 'Y II ~ tHllHIl I ~
~ ~~~,o ~ ~~ ~1:I~rnrnffi;~~f ~1]~W~ff ~~~~ ~i~m!!lEIi'~1 ~
"~"M' I I m~ 1 UJ1J ~ It- ,~ ~m-::I tI~~ OEs::I9"l 111111 '"
~;:;';~ ITTTJT] h=1 \'<. CII.Q\ lK'A~.<<7 !fill Imi'ttI tlltllEl::1:n ~
~,,=m~. n ITIIIIlJ B:i1 P 1?lii e 11!l'j~ u
Vl
::,:'::; ~ ~~ )( ~mJ - R~ I.4J.,.--., . 'I f-~~jl ~
.m<< I J- ~):%; ~ A\?rm~ ~ i~ ~
~il ,=' fllil ffiE~~" ~~ II' I1L"'" I h ~ [ 'If m%----l \1 ~"r- _~ ""'-~EHlHJ ~
~"=-,,~: /" 1W'C ffiR1lh ,i- t1l [ 1 '''IWWl =I ~ ~ T - ~ ~
~,"mno ", /)\11 'T- f-' \~ ,~ !J. ~" "iI ffi c;r (/ Vi
~"W'~' vI ( ffiB~f-- :qJD tJ
: ~:,~.::: ","~1~ F=..J ~~~s:Bm~m1tt;:i [i;; .... .. !
~,,~ I: (,~ ~ II~f tU ~RB'63lfi -:. -:' z
: ::~:::.:. ~ ~ ~ I ~ II r lu:JJLtjtj I r1 ~ ~ ~
: ~~,:'''.. ~ ~~I I ~W~ ~ Bill ~
z :::::;: =-~ 1--'-]11 ~~ms )-/7 ~\s7J: ~m [SJS 8" ~
<~,,~...~'~ m~ VI'; "-;,.. 0 z
- ."..m'" 0 EIHE jf./// ~ l~;.? .... Ln Z
" ~,",~~. r=-l~ // '= \\~k" F- 8 ": ~
~"",," f-- =-.J N ? N' 0 <(
: ~:::: II wr ~I' u L 1 1 1 1 -;- .L ! 0 ~
""'l$nlN."-' "\ r 8 d ~
~"w.. 1 ;=' N"
:,:::: '& -)) fJ I g)} Ln ~
""'L$IN;-;7 ';::==, J::::.ltf .. C"! 5
IM.l$NOOlCV u.. a :p
~'''~. I II-...-f f:1[llJE ~ '" 0 ~
~ ~"'_ \ ~\I ++ EHHJ~ ...
~."':;~,:::: ~ ~ f'=;!< ~ n~ ..111 10. + 0 i
~ ..,mn~ ~Kr~ ~ z ....0 Ul c..
"\ \\1. ~ QJCl ~~ r-..
(1)0 '-. ....
~ LLN ::E:a ~
c..
<(
::E
UJ
Vl
::J
Cl
z
:5
"
-i
'.J ' ) / -'\ ~
, , .
, \, 'J :::
=>
"
@
~J
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N,W, . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304. (763) 755-5100
FAX (763) 755-8923 . WWW,CI.ANDOVER,MN,US
TO: Mayo, and Coone;! Membcrs ~
CC: Jim Dickinson, City Administrator ' .
FROM: Will Newneister, Director of Community Development tAIL.
Todd Haas, Assistant City Engineer
Lee Brezinka, Assistant City Finance Director $
SUBJECT: Park Dedication Study Update
DATE: June 28, 2005
INTRODUCTION
The Council had asked for staff to review the rate for park dedication and compliance with the
previous study. Attached is an update to the study that was conducted in November, 2002.
The nwnbers that have been used in the study reflect the end of year nwnbers from 2004.
~J DISCUSSION
This update reflects the current status of improvements that have been made to the park
system since 2002 and also accounts for increases in land and/or lot values. The study was
also adjusted to include the proper wording related to the adopted "Rural Reserve Area". The
original report had included figures related to the options that were being considered (i.e. two
rural reserve areas). As a result of the updated information in this study, you will see that the
park dedication fee is projected to increase to cover the anticipated improvements. If the rate
does not change the only other option to consider is to change the anticipated improvements
that will be completed or rely on tax levy.
ACTION REOUESTED
Staff will briefly present the updated study and ask for Council direction on whether to begin
the process of implementing rate changes an updated study will reflect. The docwnent is a
work in process and if Council would like to continue the discussion to another workshop
before making a decision that is understandable. Rate changes of this type are usually done at
the first of the year when other fees change, a review/update of the Park Study would need to
be completed this fall to be reflected in the 2006 Fee Ordinance.
. ') Attachment
\.~I Updated Park Dedication Study
:,j "DRAFT"
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
CC: Jim Dickinson, City Administrator
FROM: Will Neumeister, Community Development Director tUi--
Todd Haas, Assistant City Engineer
Lee Brezinka, Assistant Finance Director L~
DATE: June 28, 2005
RE: Update to the Andover Park Dedication Study
(NAC Performed in November, 2002)
INTRODUCTION
The, purpose of this memorandum IS to provide updated numbers and
recommendations to the Council concerning park dedication standards and the
ordinance amendments suggested to implement the Park Plan Chapter of the
Comprehensive Plan. A large amount of the original report remains unchanged from
--' " the original study done in 2003,
,--.J
The City's existing park system has been developed based upon the current
Comprehensive Plan (which describes land use, transportation, parks and community
goals and objectives as well as demographic projections to the year 2020). Including
the Rural Reserve Area which adds additional land to the City's urban service area,
This update to the park dedication study addresses future park needs and dedication
standards for the Rural Reserve Area.
ISSUES I ANALYSIS
Andover has been successful in acquiring land during the subdivision process to
provide neighborhood and mini parks throughout the community. Athletic fields and
other recreation improvements have been provided based upon a combination of City,
School District and regional park facilities. The City is in a good position with respect to
its park and recreation system in that the variety, location, number and facilities
provided by the system exceed national guidelines, The existing Parks and Open Space
Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan utilized both Metropolitan Council and National
Recreation and Parks Association 1 Guidelines to develop the park system standards
1 National Recreation and Parks Association (NRPA) guidelines were utilized to analyze the park system
by park type and the number of acres of parkland per 1,000 population because these guidelines were
0 utilized in the Park Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. The NRPA is a professional association that
provides accreditation programs for universities and advises national lawmakers on policy matters,
programs and legislation related to public parks and recreation.
"DRAFT" - June 28, 2005
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
1 of 21
\ identified in the Comprehensive Plan. The current City park system exceeds the
\"j national standards (based upon the number of acres of park land provided per 1 ,000
population), identified by the existing Comprehensive Plan, The City has provided parks
throughout the community which allow residents good access to the system and there
are a variety of recreational facilities to choose from including natural areas, linear
parks, playgrounds and athletic facilities. Andover has also done an excellent job of
mapping and maintaining an inventory of its park facilities and providing clear guidance
through the Capital Improvement Project (CIP) process for implementation of future
facilities,
The purpose of this update to the park dedication study is to identify the cost or value of
the Andover ultimate park system and distribute the costs of developing this system
equitably to the existing and future households and land uses that benefit from the
City's park system. The following points summarize the key issues that will affect the
City's park system:
1. Andover is considering three future growth options, The 2020 MUSA will have a
build out population of 39,000 people and 14,516 households. The City Council
adopted a Rural Reserve Area, which is 1,020 acres in gross land area,
However the net buildable area is estimated at 759 acres. This is as a
result of all the low lyinQ area and the larQe amount of land area that will be
needed for soils correctionllakeslstorm ponds. that is located between
/ \ Round Lake Boulevard. This yields results in a forecasted build out
"J population that may reach 45.148 people and 16,793 households.
2. The community has done a good job of acquiring land for park and recreation
purposes and providing equipmenUfacilities to serve the recreation needs of the
City. The location and type of parks within the existing system exceed national
standards (suggested by the National Recreation and Park Association), based
upon the current population of 26,588 residents (2000 U,S, Census),
3, Based upon a staff review of the existing land areas which have been acquired or
dedicated to the City over time, staff believes that about 65 acres of the 526
acres or about 12% of the total parkland will never be developed due to
topography constraints such as steep slopes, wetlands and lakes.
4. The existing park system is predominantly comprised of smaller Mini and
Neighborhood Parks which are located throughout the community, City staff
have indicated that the number and proximity of smaller parks are expensive to
maintain and as such, the City may choose to limit further acquisition of small
park sites within the community in favor of larger Neighborhood Parks,
5. The 2000 U.S. Census data indicated that over 67% of the City's population is
comprised of young residents between the ages of 5 to 44 years of age. Almost
~J 20% of the population is comprised of children under 10 years old, The Census
figures indicate that the community has a large population of young active
"DRAFT" - June 28, 2005
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
2 of 21
, residents who typically generate park and recreation demands on the community.
, )
~- Considering the large number of children, teens and young adults, it is
anticipated that park and recreation use will be strong for the foreseeable future.
6. As the community develops and lands within the Metropolitan Urban Service
Area (MUSA) decline, future growth will occur in the rural service area and the
density of development will ultimately decline. While the need for parks will
continue to be strong, the financial resources that will be dedicated to the park
system are expected to decline. The anticipated decreased density of
development in the rural areas will result in a decline in the amount of park
dedication fees that will be collected over the long-term. The land supply within
the MUSA is limited and the cost of land for park acquisition is high.
7. The current City park system contains about 526 acres of parkland, which is
divided into 62 separate park facilities, (including the 15 acre site located south of
WDE Landfill). The total value of the park system based upon full build out
(including existing and future planned facilities, land costs and ' 30%
design/administration costs) approximates $35,890,796 dollars. The existing
park system is valued at $25,320,735 dollars with approximately $10,570,061
dollars of future improvements to be constructed to complete the 2020
Comprehensive Plan park system. This does not include the rural reserve
area.
,
" ) 8, The planned park system (based upon the 2020 Comprehensive Plan), is about
70.5% developed at this time and has been paid for by existing development
(through taxes, Community Development Block Grants, other grants and park
dedication fees, donations etc) , As the City is currently about 66% developed,
(9,592 households based upon the June 1, 2005 estimate, out of the potential
14,516 projected 2020 build out households), existing development has already
paid for over 70.5% of the total planned system, Future development should be
responsible to pay for the remaining 29,5% ($10,570,000 dollars) plus a
percentage of the existing system (including some facility upgrades and
replacement), in order to provide for their proportionate share of the total system
costs, This does not include the rural reserve area.
STATUTE I CASE LAW
The City authorized a park dedication study to be conducted by NAC in 2002 to review
city regulations and dedication requirements to determine if current practices are
adequately providing for existing and future anticipated park demands, This update to
the original report will summarize the objectives of the current Park Plan chapter of the
Comprehensive Plan and provide updated inventory information to establish a base line
for future dedication needs, Factors including property valuation, service area needs,
facility cost analysis, future development and implementation strategies will be
reviewed, Recommendations will be set forth establishing mechanisms for the City to
\ provide park facilities in a manner that meets Comprehensive Plan goals, establishes a
'--) relationship between park need and development impact and that will build out the
"DRAFT" - June 28, 2005
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
3 of 21
" j system in an equitable manner, consistent with Minnesota Statutes and recent case
law, It should be noted that this study excludes analysis of the community trail system.
Minnesota Statutes - Park Dedication
Minnesota Statutes 462.358 Subd. 2b, provides the enabling legislation that allows
municipalities to extract parkland or cash dedications for park acquisition and
development. The statute specifically provides: "that a reasonable portion of any
proposed subdivision be dedicated to the public or preserved for conservation purposes
or for public use as parks. recreational facilities. plaVQrounds. trails. wetlands. or open
space," The statute further provides that the municipality may:
a. choose to accept an equivalent amount in cash from the applicant for part or all
of the portion required to be dedicated to such public uses or purposes based on
the fair market value of the land no later than at the time of final approval,
b, any cash pavments received shall be placed in a special fund by the municipality
used onlv for the purposes for which the money was obtained,
c. in establishing the reasonable portion to be dedicated, the regulations may
consider the open space, park, recreational, or common areas and facilities
which the applicant proposes to reserve for the subdivision, and
, '. d. the municipality reasonably determines that it will need to acquire that portion of
) land for the purposes stated in Subd. 2b. as a result of approval of the
subdivision,
Collis v, Citv of BloominQton (1976)
The statute described above was further interpreted by the case of Collis vs, City of
Bloomington, In this case, the Minnesota Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of
Bloomington's Ordinance, which set forth a ten (10) percent park dedication
requirement "as a general rule." The Court found for this particular case and
developerlproject, that "as a general rule, it was reasonable for the City to require
dedication of ten percent of land or payment of ten percent of the value of undeveloped
land for park dedication." The Court noted that the ten percent requirement miQht be
arbitrary as a matter of law because it does not consider the relationship between the
particular subdivision and recreational need in the community. The Court was not,
however, prepared to say that the ten percent requirement was unreasonable or
arbitrary, (Letter from William G, Hawkins and Associates to Mr, Todd Haas, dated
March 3, 1999).
Dolan vs, TiQard (1994)
The enabling legislation of Minnesota Statutes 462,358 Subd. 2b cited earlier in this
report has been further influenced by case law. The U,S. Supreme Count (Dolan vs,
Tigard) found that land use extractions must be reflective of a development impact on
\ the infrastructure svstem, In this respect, park dedication extracted from a land use
'--) must reflect the demand they generate for park and recreational facilities. This case
"DRAFT" - June 28, 2005
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
4 of 21
established that a rational nexus or relationship must exist between the fees charQed for
. . parks and the related impacts that are qenerated bv the use.
Kottschade vs, City of Rochester (1995)
In this case, the Minnesota Court of Appeals noted that in the case of a dedication, the
City is requiring a property owner to give up a constitutional right - the right to receive
just compensation when private property is taken for a public purpose. In order to
uphold a dedication requirement the City has the burden of provinQ the required
relationship between the property development and the City's need for land dedication,
To meet that burden. the City must prove that an "essential nexus" exists between the
need for the land and the dedication requirement. If the nexus can be demonstrated.
the City must also demonstrate a "rouqh proportionality" between the development and
the City's dedication requirement. (Letter from William G, Hawkins and Associates to
Mr. Todd Haas, dated March 3, 1999).
In other words, the City must be able to prove that the proposed project will create a
need for additional park facilities and that the amount of dedication required is roughly
proportionate to the need that will be generated from the development. A precise
mathematical calculation is not required, however, the City must demonstrate that an
individualized determination has been made to support the land/cash dedication
requirement.
, City Attornev Comments - (Exhibit E, Letter from William G, Hawkins and Associates to
, ~ . Mr. Todd Haas, dated March 3, 1999). "In a park dedication situation, the City must be
able to prove two things, First, that the proposed development will create a need for
additional park facilities, Second, the City must be able to prove that the amount of the
dedication is roughly proportionate to the impact from the development. A precise
mathematical calculation is not required; what is required is some sort of individualized
determination, It should not be difficult for the City to meet the first or nexus part of the
standard, Le., that the proposed subdivision will create the need for additional park
facilities. However, it is my opinion that a unit charge for park dedication fees does not
pass the second part of the test. A flat fee charge that is not based upon a community
park plan and facilities analysis, does not provide an individualized determination that
the amount of the charge is roughly proportionate to the need created by the
development. The statute makes clear that a dedication must be reasonable and must
be based on the fair market value of the land,"
PARK COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The City of Andover Comprehensive Plan including the Parks and Open Space
Chapter, sets forth goals and objectives for the park system. The objectives of the plan
are to:
1. Provide areas that meet present park needs and plan for future needs of the
City.
,
, , . .
"DRAFT" - June 28, 2005
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
5 of 21
'~J 2, Maintain, upgrade and expand community recreational facilities and trail
systems to serve all residents of the City.
3, Promote, protect, preserve and enhance the City's rural and open space and
amenities,
The City of Andover contains 62 parks (including the 15 acre site located south of the
WDE Landfill), ranging in size from under 1 acre to over 130 acres. Anoka County
operates two Regional Parks, Bunker Hills Regional Park and Rum River Central
Regional Park that abut the City. Exhibit A, Park Service Area Map indicates the
location of all of the existing parks and developable planned future parks within the City,
The park system contains land areas that are designed to meet varying recreational
needs of residents, The parks are classified according to factors including size, use,
service area, location and site improvements, The Comprehensive Plan identifies the
following parkland classifications:
Mini Park, This type of park is intended to provide specialized facilities that serve a
concentrated or limited population or specific group such as tots or senior citizens. Mini
parks are typically located within neighborhoods and serve people living within less than
X mile of the Mini Park and have an area of 2 acres or less, The Comprehensive Plan
contemplates development of 20 Mini Parks (30 acres) throughout the City.
~J Neiqhborhood Park, This type of facility is intended to provide areas for intense
recreational activities such as field games, courts, apparatus areas, skating, etc, The
majority of the City parks fall into this classification, The service areas range from X to
1h mile and this type of facility is generally intended to serve a population of 4,000 to
5,000 people. Park sizes for existing Neighborhood Parks within the City range from
2.17 acres (Northwoods East Park) to almost 20 acres (Prairie Knoll Park), The
Comprehensive Plan contemplates development of 33 Neighborhood Parks
(approximately 254 acres) throughout the City,
Linear Park. This type of facility is typically developed for one or more varying modes of
recreational travel such as hiking, biking, skiing, canoeing etc, There is currently only
one Linear Park within the City (Coon Creek Park). The park contains bituminous trails
that follow Coon Creek between Hanson Blvd, NW and the Burlington Northern
Railroad, Non-motorized uses including biking, hiking, roller blading and cross-country
skiing are permitted in the park. Coon Creek Park contains 38 acres of land,
Special Use Park. Special Use Parks are generally areas established to provide
specialized or single purpose recreational activities such as golf course, nature center,
marina, zoo, display gardens etc. The Round Lake and Crooked Lake Boat Landings
are designated as Special Use Parks, Crooked Lake has a picnic shelter and play
equipment; Round Lake contains no recreational equipment.
0
"DRAFT" - June 28, 2005
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
6 of 21
~J Undeveloped Parks. The City has a number of Undeveloped Parks where land has
been dedicated or acquired but facilities have not yet been installed, The Undeveloped
Park areas range from less than 1 acre to over 10 acres in size, Many of the areas
contain wetlands and are unsuitable for active plan and/or recreational equipment.
Larger areas may be suitable for future trail development. A total of 112 acres of land
are owned by the City but are currently undeveloped. Of these acres, approximately 65
acres will likely not be developed due to topographic conditions and wetlands which
leave approximately 47 acres of parkland to be developed in the future.
Community Parks, The Comprehensive Plan includes both parks and playfields within
this park classification. Community Parks are generally intended to provide areas of
natural or ornamental quality for outdoor recreation activities including walking,
picnicking, fields and court athletic activities, Three parks are designed for community
use. These parks serve the City as a whole and typically include between 25 to 50
acres of land, Kelsey Round Lake Park and Coon Creek Park are both designated as a
Community Parks. Sunshine and City Hall parks are designated as Community
Playfields, Both are active use parks with recreational facilities designed for league play
in baseball, softball, soccer and tennis. Kelsey Round Lake Park is a passive use park
containing bituminous, gravel and wood chip nature trails, The City has about 218 acres
of land currently developed for Community Park purposes,
Reqional Parks, Two Regional Parks, (Bunker Hills Regional Park and Rum River
, '\ Central Regional Park) are located adjacent to the City, Bunker Hills Regional Park is
'J located in the southwest corner of the City and extends into the adjacent cities of Blaine,
Coon Rapids and Ham Lake, The park includes numerous recreation facilities such as
picnic areas, playgrounds, camping, swimming, bituminous and hiking trails, Rum River
Central Regional Park is located adjacent to the northwest corner of the City on the
west bank of the Rum River in the City of Ramsey, Construction has begun on
developing recreational activities and trails.
Trails, The City is currently in the process of developing a comprehensive trail system
for the community, As this planning is currently underway, the City requested that this
park dedication analysis not include trails as part of the study. The study does however
contain trail access for the individual parks, which is needed to comply with the ADA,
Americans with Disabilities Act requirements.
Open Space. The Comprehensive Plan identifies open space as a part of the overall
park system. Open space is defined as areas set aside for the preservation of natural
open spaces to counteract the effects of urban congestion and monotony, "Man~ new
citizens cite Andover's natural amenities as a reason for moving into the City."2 As
such, an objective of the Comprehensive Plan is to protect, preserve and enhance the
open space character of the City,
"-
I
'J 2 City of Andover Comprehensive Plan - Chapter 8,
"DRAFT" - June 28, 2005
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
7 of 21
\ Unbuildable Parks, Within the existing park system, there are nine parks totaling 65
" / acres, currently shown on Exhibit C, Andover Park Facilities Chart and illustrated on
Exhibit B, Andover Park Map that will not likely be developed due to the fact that the
land dedication consists primarily of wetlands, lakes, or steep slopes and there is
insufficient upland area to develop an active park, This unbuildable park land generally
fills the classification of Mini and Neighborhood Parks. The specific parks and acreage
are identified in Table 1.
TABLE 1
UNBUILDABLE PARKS
PARK NAME PARKS MAP PARK EXISTING
NUMBER (1.0,) CLASSIFICATION ACRES
Mini Parks
Tulip Park 13 UM 1.85
Meadow Wood South 29 UM 0.45
Hartfields 32 UM 1.47
Subtotal Mini Parks Acreaqe 3,77
Neighborhood Parks
Birch Ridqe 1 UN 13,99
Grow Oak View 8 UN 12.77
White Oaks 9 UN 9,30
Valley View 11 UN 8,74
\
,) Redwood Park 45 UN 5,59
Shadowbrook West 47 UN 11,39
Subtotal Neighborhood Park Acreaae 61,23
Total Unbuildable Park Acreage 65.00
In addition to the stated park system objectives, the Comprehensive Plan also provides
recommendations for park system acreage to accommodate community growth through
2020, Table 2 compares the Comprehensive Plan acreage recommended with the
existing park system to illustrate where the City stands in relationship to its build out
park system.
TABLE 2
PARK TYPE COMP PLAN EXISTING PARK EXISTING SURPLUS!
ACREAGE ACREAGE PARK DEFICIT**
RECOMMENDATION GROSS ACRES ACREAGE NET
BUILDABLE*
Mini 30 30 26 - 3,77
Neighborhood 165 254 193 + 27.77
Common Park 358 174 174 - 184,00
Community 124 44 44 - 80,00
Playfields
\ TOTAL 677 502 437 - 175,00
,
'--'
"DRAFT" - June 28, 2005
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
8 of 21
~/ '\ * These figures represent adjusted acres subtracting out unbuildable park acreages from Table 1.
,~) ** Surplus/Deficit represents Comprehensive Plan acreage recommendations minus existing park
acreage net buildable.
City staff indicated that although the existing parkland consists of a multitude of smaller
Mini and Neighborhood Parks, the City may not continue acquisition of similar land in
the future due to the high cost of maintenance associated with the dispersed locations
of these parks within the community. The system is adequate to provide for lands within
the projected MUSA boundary. The bulk of the lands outside of the ultimate MUSA are
planned to develop with 2.5 acre residential lots. The acreage lots provide land area for
private recreation purposes that is larger than that typically dedicated for mini parks (2
acres or less). As such, the City may choose to add additional property to some of the
mini park areas or look to acquire neighborhood parks in the future.
Table 2 and Exhibit A, Park Service Area Map, illustrates that as the City grows within
the 2020 MUSA, the current Neighborhood Parks provide sufficient acreage and
distribution to accomplish the Comprehensive Plan recommendations. Additional
community parks and community playfields must yet be acquired and developed.
ANDOVER PARK ACREAGE COMPARISON WITH NATIONAL STANDARDS
The existing park system was further analyzed in terms of the service area per 1,000
/ '\ population guidelines established by the National Recreation and Park Association.
0 The U.S. Census (2000) population figure of 26,588 was used to evaluate the park
system acreage. The following table indicates that the City currently exceeds the park
acres per 1,000 population guidelines in all park categories with the exception of
Community Parks where the current system is about 2 acres short. It should be noted
that the park acreages listed in the "Existing Park Acres" column in Table 3 represent
the amount of acres of park owned by the City and net buildable park acres. However,
even when the existing unbuildable acres are deleted, the existing park system still has
more park acres than suggested by the National Recreation and Park Association
Guidelines.
TABLE 3
PARK TYPE SERVICE NRPA EXISTING PARK NRPA
AREA1 STANDARD2 ACRES SUGGESTED
GROSS BUILDABLE ACRES3
Mini Park y.. Mile .38 acl1000 30 26 10
Neighborhood Park y..-Y2 3 acl1000 254 193 81
Mile
Community Park 2 Mile 6.5 acl1000 174 174 176
Community Plavfield 2 Mile 2.25 acl1000 44 44 61
Total Acres 502 437 328
Metropolitan Council Guideline (Park Facility Service Area)
2 National Recreation and Park Association Guidelines (Acres of Park per 1,000 Population)
\ 3 National Recreation and Park Association Guidelines (Based upon 2000 Census Population of 26,588)
,-)
"DRAFT" - June 28, 2005
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
9 of 21
'.
\
'oJ COMMUNITY GROWTH
The City's existing and future population and household growth will be compared to City
park system value estimates to provide a proportionate park dedication fee. The
Andover 2020 Comprehensive Plan forecasts a 2020 population of approximately
39,000 people in 14,516 households. This anticipated future development is in both the
2020 MUSA and the City's Rural Reserve Area. Andover's 2000 household count of
8,205 represent approximately 56% of the City's 2020 household forecast. The
estimated June 1, 2005 household count of 9,592 represents approximately 66%
of the City's 2020 household forecast.
As a requirement of Metropolitan Council approval of Andover's 2020 Comprehensive
Plan, the City is undertook a Rural Reserve Area Study that identified a Rural Reserve
Area for potential future urban growth beyond the current 2020 MUSA.
The Rural Reserve Area which was approved as a future growth area is indicated on
Exhibit A, Park Service Area Map (as 1,020 gross acres). However the net buildable
area is estimated at 759 acres. This is as a result of all the low Iyin~ area and the
lar~e amount of land area that will be needed for soils correction/lakes/storm
ponds. that is located between Round Lake Boulevard. This results in a
forecasted build out population that may reach 45,148 people and 16.793
households. Table 4 illustrates the population and household estimates of the City
\ based upon 2000 U.S. Census data, 2020 population and household projections cited in
'J the Transportation Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan, and projections for the Rural
Reserve Area to determine total community build out population.
TABLE 4
ANDOVER POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLD ESTIMATES
POPULATION HOUSEHOLDS
2000 Census 26,588 8,205
June 1, 2005 31,461 9,592
2010 Estimate 33,007 12,091
2020 Estimate 39,000 14,516
Rural Reserve Area (6,148) 45,148 (2,277) 16,793
This update to the park dedication study will rely on the following demographic statistics.
The City will have a 2020 population of 39,000 people and a 2020 household count of
14,516 according to the City's Comprehensive Plan. The addition of the Rural Reserve
Area yields the following forecasts to population and households:
The Rural Reserve Area has approximately 1,020 gross acres of land, assuming a
density of 3.0 units per acre. This will generate 2,277 households. At an average of 2.7
'- ) people per household, this will result in a build out population of 6,148 people. The rural
reserve area demographic forecasts in addition to the 2020 forecasts will provide
"DRAFT" - June 28, 2005
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
10 of 21
, Andover with a City-wide build out population of 45,148 people and a household count
, . ~ of 16,793. The June 1, 2005 estimate of population and households indicates that
we are at 80% of this build out population and 66% of the build out households.
This does not include the Rural Reserve Area in the calculation.
RURAL RESERVE AREA PARK NEEDS
Tables 5 and 6 illustrate the park needs for the Rural Reserve Area. Table 5 illustrates
the NRPA guidelines for park land acres per 1,000 population and acreage by park
type.
\
,_J
"'
\
,----j
"DRAFT" - June 28, 2005
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
11 of 21
/ TABLE 5
,
\. J RURAL RESERVE AREA PARK LAND NEEDS
PARK ACRES PER 1,000 POPULATION
PARK TYPE NRPA' AREA 1 RURAL RESERVE
STANDARD BUILD OUT AREA PARK
POPULATION ACREAGE
(1,000s) NEEDED
Mini .38/1,000 9.6 4 acres
Neiqhborhood 3/1,000 9.6 29 acres
Community 6.5/1,000 9.6 63 acres
Community 2.25/1,000 9.6 22 acres
Plavfield
TOTAL 118 acres
NRPA National Recreation and Park Association (Standards #Iacre per 1,000 population).
Based on national standards and the City's forecasted population, the City has sufficient
acreage of Mini and Neighborhood Parks to meet future demand. However, the location
of existing Mini and Neighborhood Parks do not provide service area coverage for either
of the rural reserve study area. The addition of Neighborhood Parks will be required to
meet the location and park service area needs of the Rural Reserve Area for future
urban growth.
/ \ There will also be a need to provide additional Community Park and Community
'- .I Playfield facilities to the system to accommodate the future growth from the Rural
Reserve Area. When development occurs in the Rural Reserve Area, the City will need
to add 63 acres of Community Park and 22 acres of Community Playfields. Based upon
the Comprehensive Plan Soil and Slope Map, there are substantial areas within the
Rural Reserve Area that contain restricted soil types and therefore the potential
locations for additional playfields are limited.
The information in Table 6 illustrates the number of parks anticipated to be needed to
provide park and recreation service to the Rural Reserve Area, (utilizing National
Recreation and Park Association Guidelines).
TABLE 6
NUMBER AND TYPE OF PARKS NEEDED FOR POTENTIAL
RURAL RESERVE AREAS
Park Type Park Size' Rural Reserve Area
# Parks Needed
Mini Park 2 acres 2
Neiqhborhood Park 18 acres 2
Community Park 40 acres 2
Community Playfield 40 acres .5
National Recreation and Park Association Guideline (Average Park Size per Park Type)
. \
,
"DRAFT" - June 28, 2005
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
12 of 21
r ,
PARK DEDICATION ANALYSIS - RAW LAND VALUE VS. VALUE AT FINAL PLAT
Pursuant to State Statute, the City can collect park dedication based upon the value of
land at the time of final plat. The value should include raw land value plus the value
from lots created by final plat approval. The land value at final plat should comprise the
retail value of the lot less improvement costs. Residential developers were contacted to
identify typical lot improvement costs (assuming an 80 foot wide lot), associated with
single-family subdivisions. Typical improvement costs for single-family developments
consist of utilities, roads, grading, engineering, area connection charges and fees,
which approximate 48% of the total vacant lot sales price. The developers that were
contacted also indicated that a development must yield a minimum 20% retail value
added per lot to be a viable project. For illustration purposes, the following table
provides an example breakdown of land values as they relate to the collection of park
dedication based upon raw land value versus the value of land at the time of final plat.
TABLE 7
PARK DEDICATION / RAW LAND VS VALUE AT FINAL PLAT
LAND RAW LAND
VALUE VALUE
AT FINAL
PLAT
, Typical vacant lot sales price $100,000 $80,000 placre
\ , - Typical development costs for utilities etc. (48% lot sales price) - 48.000 Or
Lot cost + 20% Retail Value $ 52,000 $40.000 pIlot *
X 10% Park Dedication Fee X 10% X 10% Park Ded.
Park dedication collected at the time of final plat $ 5,200 $4,000 per unit
* Based upon 2 units per acre
The application of park dedication at the time of final plat, based upon the retail value of
the lots, results in an equitable dedication policy in that the same value will be applied
regardless of whether cash or land is required from a development project.
RESIDENTIAL PARK DEDICATION ANALYSIS
Exhibit C, Andover - Park Facilities Chart identifies the park sites pursuant to the City
Parks Map. The name and address of each park including existing and future acres,
facilities and values are also identified. City Staff provided the list of facilities and
corresponding cost estimates. The park system analysis included a land use review to
determine the service areas for the existing parks and to identify the proportion of
existing and future development that will impact the system. As stated earlier, the
current park areas are spread throughout the community and are relatively evenly
distributed. Many of the existing parks are located in areas of the community where
future development will occur and as such, a proportion of the park infrastructure should
be paid for by new development. In fully developed areas in the southern part of the
City, improvements to existing parks should be and have been paid for by current
/ " development within the service area of the specific park facility.
"-_/
"DRAFT" - June 28, 2005
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
13 of 21
~J City Staff provided a list of existing and future planned park facilities, which was used to
establish the value of the existing park system and to identify costs reasonably
expected to complete the future park system based upon full build out contemplated by
the 2020 Comprehensive Plan. It should be noted that the information contained herein
is the best estimate of future facilities that can be made at this time and that the specific
facilities and dollar figures may be subject to change/revision as time goes by and
market conditions fluctuate. See Exhibit D, City of Andover 2004 Existing and Future
Park Facilities Chart for reference. Based on the estimated value of the complete 2020
park system, Table 8 illustrates that the park system is 70.5% developed and has been
paid for by existing development through taxes, park dedication donations, grants etc.
Future development will benefit from the infrastructure that is currently in place and as
such, should be responsible to pay a proportionate share for replacement of the existing
system.
A major component of the park system is land and to determine present land values for
Andover, recent sales indicated that the average value for land within the MUSA
approximates $57,500 per acre and average land value in the rural service area
approximates $37,950 per acre. The Anoka County Assessor's database was utilized
to establish the land value for park areas that contain a large percentage of wetland or
lakes (generally the 65 acres of parkland that staff believes will not be developed due to
topographic constraints).
(J The Andover Comprehensive Park Plan recommends 358 acres of Community Park
and 184 acres of Community Playfield by 2020 as illustrated in Table 2. The City will
need to add 18 acres of Community Park and 80 acres of Community Playfield to fulfill
the Comprehensive Plan recommendations. The inclusion of the Rural Reserve Area
will also generate demand for 63 acres of additional Community Park and 22 acres of
additional Community Playfields.
The Rural Reserve Area is not adequately served by Neighborhood and Mini Parks.
The recommendation of this report is for the City to plan a 22 acre Community
Playfields and two additional Neighborhood Parks to accommodate the additional
population that will be added from the Rural Reserve Area.
Table 8 illustrates the values of the planned park system based upon the current
Comprehensive Plan and the future development of the Rural Reserve Area along with
the recommendation to add one additional Community Playfield (similar to the Sunshine
Park complex) and two Neighborhood Parks to the system. To calculate the values of
the existing and future system, staff utilized the City of Andover Directory of Parks, City
Capital Improvements Plan, and research of facility vendors as well as comparable
improvements within the City. A list of the future facility acquisitions and values is
attached as Exhibit D, City of Andover 2004 Existing and Future Park Facilities Chart.
~
"DRAFT" - June 28, 2005
City of Andoyer
Park Dedication Report
14 of 21
~) TABLE 8
PARK SYSTEM ESTIMATED VALUE BASED ON
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN & RURAL RESERVE
Total Park System Estimated Value of %of Estimated Value of Future % of
Value Existing Park Facilities Total Park Facilities Total
$35,890,796 $25,320,735 70.5% $10,570,061 29.5%
$40,074,394 '.L.O $25,320,735 63% $14,753,659'.2.3 37%
, Rural Reserve Area - Two additional Neighborhood Parks needed at a total cost of $1,247,598
2 One Additional Community Playfield (similar to the City Hall complex) at a total cost of $2,936,000
3 Includes costs of improvements City wide of $1 0,570,061
Park dedication is collected as conditions of subdivision approval. In this respect, the
park land dedication fee is estimated on the basis of new housing units or households.
Currently, the City has completed approximately 70.5% of its 2020 park system based
estimated value and future improvements. As described in pages 10 and 11 of this
report, shows the actual household count, compared to the amount of parks that have
been built already. This indicates that the current park system is over built for its current
population and has capacity to accommodate future growth. Future household growth
should pay an equitable share in providing the City's ultimate park system.
To determine the equitable distribution of future park system value to residential units,
the ultimate system value is divided by projected household counts.. Table 9 provides
park dedication fees per unit based on different park improvement assumptions and the
, '\ additional land area in the Rural Reserve Area.
'.J
TABLE 9
PARK VALUE AND DEDICATION FEE W/1 ADDITIONAL COMMUNITY
BALLFIELD COMPLEX
Total Estimated # Housing Units Park Dedication Fee
System Value Per Unit
2020 $35,890,796 14,516 - $2,473
Rural $40,074,394' 2 16,793 = $2,386
.
Reserve
Area
*Rural Reserve Area - households added to 2010 Census Data
, Rural Reserve Area - Two additional Neighborhood Parks needed at a total cost of $1 ,247,598
2 One Additional Community Playfield (similar to City Hall Complex) at a total cost of $2,936,000
Table 9 assumptions illustrate the inclusion of one Community Playfield.
Exhibit F provides a comparison of park land fees from other metropolitan communities.
The suggested fees in Table 9 are high when compared with neighboring communities
of Blaine, Anoka, and Coon Rapids. However, the fees are in line with some of the
larger, fast-growing communities such as Brooklyn Park, Eden Prairie, and Plymouth.
The City Council will need to select both the park system development option and
. '\ growth options that best suits the City of Andover to determine the park dedication fee.
,J
"DRAFT" - June 28, 2005
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
150f21
~) Table 9 represents the preferred park dedication option. The per unit charge outlined in
Table 9 above, assumes that all of the land area needed for the park system will be in
place by the year 2006 with the exception of one additional Community Playfield (similar
to the City Hall Complex) and two Neighborhood Parks (planned for the Rural Reserve
Area growth). The current system and future planned improvements are consistent with
the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Plan. It is fair to assume that the park system
will likely continue to be upgraded in the future to maintain the user capacity of the
system. The $2,473 dollar per unit charge should reasonably cover the costs for
complete development of the system and carrying costs through system build out. With
the incorporation of the Rural Reserve Area, the residential park dedication charge
could be reduced to $2,386 dollars per unit.
The charge of $2,473 dollars per residential unit is the level of funding that will need to
be generated to provide for the planned park system for Andover, based upon
implementation of the plan with the lands and facilities described in Exhibit D, City of
Andover 2002 Existing and Future Park Facilities Chart, which are based upon the
Comprehensive Park Plan. The $2,473 dollar figure takes into account the park service
areas (% of park need associated with new vs. existing development), existing and
projected costs for the park system, desig n/adm i nistrative costs and future
population/household projections and is therefore our best estimate of park need per
unit. It is important to note that the City should re-evaluate the system value; current
land values and system needs on a periodic basis and adjust the park dedication
> '", accordingly. City Staff suggests that park facilities costs be reviewed and updated
\.,J annually based upon the Engineering News Record Cost Index. The City may desire to
adjust the park dedication per residential unit based upon formal adoption of the rural
reserve area pursuant to the rate of $2,386 per unit.
Park maintenance and future improvements above and beyond those identified in
Exhibit D should not be financed using park dedication funds. The operational and
future improvement costs must be budgeted within the City's general funds with costs
shared by all community residents.
COMMERCIAUINDUSTRIAL PARK DEDICATION ANALYSIS
Minnesota Statutes and recent case law have identified that Cities must now be able to
articulate and justify dedication requirements on a project-by-project basis. Cities have
the burden of determining that the park dedication requirement is related to the park
benefit that will be derived due to the development. Individualized determinations must
be made for each project and the City has the responsibility to demonstrate that there is
a reasonable relationship between the dedication requirement and the park needs
generated by the development.
As illustrated in Exhibit F, many metropolitan communities have a commercial! industrial
park land dedication. The general issue in establishing a commercial! industrial park
~~ land fee is establishing a nexus between commercial and industrial use and the benefit
they receive through the City's park system. In the case of Andover, City staff has
"DRAFT" - June 28, 2005
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
16 of 21
\ indicated that the City has no commercial or industrial league programs, with the
\. --) exception of a couple of local bar/restaurant sponsored tournaments. In this respect,
there is no empirical data that currently illustrates a direct park benefit to the commercial
and industrial properties exists or does not exist.
There are discussions that suggest that there is intrinsic benefit to all land uses from a
quality park system related to quality of life within a community. The issue at hand is to
determine the proportionate need that commercial/industrial developments generate for
the community park system. The current City park dedication requirement for
commercial/industrial projects is 10% which is the same as the requirement for
residential projects containing up to 3 units per acre. For example, the current
dedication requirement equates the park impact of 10 acres of commercial/industrial
land to 51.6 residential units or (139 people).
The following formula illustrates the relationship of the current commercial/industrial
park dedication requirement to residential development:
$120,000 per acre (C/lland value) x 10% (park dedication requirement) = $12,000
i '\ $12,000 dollars x 10 acres = $120,000 + $2,325 (current park dedication
,,-~ feelresidential dedication equivalent) = 71 residential units
51.6 units x 2.7 persons per household = 139 people
As the City Staff have indicated that there is some tournament play use of athletic fields
it is reasonable to state that commercial/industrial developments have some benefit
from the City park system. It is likely that employees of local businesses use parks for
lunch breaks, walking and/or recreating. The question is, does the commercial
development generate the same need on the park system as an equivalent residential
development? The proportionate benefit is unknown for the City of Andover, due to the
lack of information about the degree to which the commerciallindustrial developments
use the system. If the City desires to continue collection of commerciallindustrial park
dedication fees it is suggested that the City consider establishing a fee structure that
approximates charges of other similarly situated communities and/or modify the
percentage of dedication associated with commerciallindustrial projects. Table 12
illustrates commercial park dedication fees which are currently charged by other
developing communities. If the City implements a commercial/industrial park
dedication, the residential unit fee may be reduced.
, \
,
'-J
"DRAFT" - June 28, 2005
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
17 of 21
\
'__ J J
COMMUNITY
Blaine
Brookl n Park
Cham lin
Chaska
Coon Ra ids
Eden Prairie
Ma Ie Grove
Shako ee
SUMMARY
. Case law and Minnesota Statutes provide that dedication requirements can only be
applied to facilities that will be impacted by the specific project. Future park
dedication fees cannot be utilized to improve 'or maintain existing park and trail
systems in fully developed neighborhoods unless a correlation can be made
between the new development and park use. However, park dedication fees can be
used to replace or upgrade equipment within City parks.
. The current park system has more land and facilities than is needed to serve the
,-j current population based on national park per capita standards. The existing system
provides for more land acreage per 1000 population than is required (based upon
National Recreation and Park Association guidelines).
. The City of Andover is planning for future growth in the Rural Reserve Area. If the
City holds to its 2020 MUSA, the projected population is 39,000 with a household
count of 14,516. The 2000 population and household represents 68% of 2020
population on 56% of the 2020 household count. With the inclusion of the rural
reserve areas in the future MUSA, the build out population may reach 45,148 and
the household count may reach 16,793.
. In the event that the City extends the MUSA pursuant to the Rural Reserve Area on
Exhibit A, Park Service Area Map, additional facilities and land will be needed to
accommodate the projected future population.
. A minimum of one additional Community Playfield (comparable to the current City
Hall complex) is recommended if the MUSA is expanded. When the Rural Reserve
Area is developed, two additional Neighborhood Parks will be needed and a total
projected system value of $40,074,394 is anticipated. A park dedication fee of
$2,386 per residential unit would be needed to provide for all of the facilities
(including 2 additional Neighborhood Parks and 1 additional Community Playfield,
/ '\ comparable to the City Hall complex).
0
"DRAFT" - June 28, 2005
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
18 of 21
r The amount of cashlland dedication required from new development must be
, .
,
'- . proportional to the need that the project will generate on the park and trail system.
Minnesota Statutes also provide that park dedication may be based upon the value
of land at the time of final plat. As Table 7 indicates, the value of land at the time of
final plat is generally higher than raw land value.
. It is recommended that the City consider amending its Subdivision Ordinance to
change Section 9.07.1 to delete reference to "equivalent amount in cash based upon
the undeveloped land value of that portion of said land that would have otherwise
been required to be dedicated" and to add "Park cash contributions are to be
calculated and established based on land value at time of final plat."
. The total planned park system is estimated to cost $35,890,796 dollars, based upon
the 2020 Comprehensive Plan, land values, current and projected facility costs.
. Using the current (June 1, 2005) estimated household count represents 66% of its
2020 build out, the City has about 70.5% of the 2020 park system in place. The park
system is in place and has been paid for by existing development through taxes,
park dedication, donations, grants, etc.
. As illustrated in Tables 9, the City's residential park dedication fees will depend on
" the City Council's decision on future park improvements and community growth
.... ...--') options. Table 9 represents the recommended residential park dedication fee.
. With the exception of additional land that may be needed to accommodate potential
expansion of the MUSA, (Rural Reserve Area illustrated on Exhibit A, Park Service
Area Map, the land acquisition for the park system is reasonably expected to be
completed by the end of 2006. Provided the planned improvements are installed by
that time, the system is reasonably expected to provide for community needs
through the year 2020.
. The current policy of the City to charge commercial and industrial developments the
same proportion of park dedication as is charged to residential projects containing
up to 3 units per acre, should be further reviewed by the City Council. If the City
desires to charge park dedication fees for commercial and industrial development, it
is suggested that the fee amount should approximate that charged by other similarly
situated communities and/or that the percentage should be reduced to less than
10%. If the City implements a commercial industrial park dedication fee, then the
residential fee should be reduced to reflect a proportional distribution of costs.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. In 2003, the City updated its Subdivision Ordinance to incorporate the Minnesota
Statute language specifying that land value (for the purpose of calculating park
, " dedication) will be determined based upon the value of the land at the time of final
I plat.
,----/
"DRAFT" - June 28, 2005
City of Andoyer
Park Dedication Report
19 of 21
2. The current park system and plan is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land
Use Plan and as such, the park dedication fee structure for new residential
developments should be based upon the analysis provided for in Table 9. Based
upon this analysis, a park dedication fee of approximately $2,473 dollars per
residential unit should be instituted to cover build out cost of the City's planned park
system and to develop one additional community playfield. A periodic review of land
values and facility costs should be done to ensure that the park dedication fee
remains current based upon market conditions. Staff recommends that the
Engineering News Record Cost Index (ENR Cost Index) be utilized as the source to
annually update facility values to account for inflationary factors.
3. The Subdivision Ordinance should be amended to provide an alternative to the
developer to conduct an individualized study for the subdivision to determine park
needs, should there be a question as to the applicability of the residential unit fee.
The following language is suggested:
If the applicant or developer does not believe that the estimates contained in the City
fee schedule (pursuant to this park dedication analysis) fairly and accurately
represent the effect of the subdivision on the park or trail system of the City, the
applicant or developer may request that the City prepare an in-depth study of the
effect of the subdivision on the park and trail system and an estimate of that effect in
money and/or land. All costs of said study shall be borne by the developer or
. I applicant. If the developer or applicant requests the preparation of such a study, no
application for development submitted shall be deemed complete until the study has
been completed and a determination is made as to the appropriate amount of land
or money necessary to offset the effects of the subdivision.
Based upon past experience, no developer has requested a special study to
determine individual subdivision impacts to a municipal park system to date. In the
event that a developer requests a special study, all costs of the study would be paid
for by the developer. The study would consist of an analysis of the park system to
define the improvements needed to complete the affected facilities. The analysis
would include a review of the specific impacts the development project would have
on the planned park facilities, current land value, current facility costs and other
pertinent information. The resulting costs of the land and facilities needed to provide
for the development project would be estimated and assigned accordingly to the
development project. The recommended park dedication fees are based on the
costs identified in Exhibit D.
4. The City should consider incorporating park redevelopment infrastructure planning
as part of the 5-year Capital Improvements Plan. Minnesota Statutes specify that
park dedication fees may not be used for maintenance purposes and therefore it is
important for the City to continue to provide a separate budget fund for maintenance.
" In conferring with the City Attorney, it is possible to use park dedication fees for new
; or replacement of facilities. However, any park improvements above those identified
"DRAFT" - June 28, 2005
City of Andoyer
Park Dedication Report
20 of 21
" \ in Exhibit D will need to be financed outside of the park dedication funds. As the
'J park system ages, there will be an increased need to retrofit existing facilities, as
they will have aged beyond their useful life in the older parks. Park dedication fees
can be used to replace some facilities and infrastructure however, the City may need
to establish other sources to pay for replacement of the park system facilities in full
developed neighborhoods or park service areas.
5. The City has accepted a number of Mini and Neighborhood Park areas (65 acres or
12% of the total parkland), in the past which are not developable due to topographic
and natural features constraints. To avoid this situation in the future, the City should
consider amending its Subdivision Ordinance to identify the type of land that will be
acceptable for parkland dedication, should the community decide to acquire
additional land. The following language is suggested:
To be eligible for park dedication credit, land dedicated is to be located outside of
drainage ways, or pond areas. Grades exceeding twelve (12) percent or areas
unsuitable for park development shall not be considered for dedication as defined by
the City Engineer. Parkland to be dedicated shall be above the ordinary high water
level as approved by the City Engineer.
7. The City should further evaluate its commercial/industrial park dedication standards
to determine the proportional need that said uses place on Andover's park system.
\ In the event that the City chooses to continue the commercial/industrial park
J dedication, the residential dedication fee should be reduced accordingly.
8. In the event that the City is contemplating park improvement upgrades, facility or
equipment replacement in the future that have not been identified in Exhibit D, the
City should include these improvements in the Capital Improvement Plan and budget
for these improvements in the City's general funds. These improvements should not
be funded out of the park dedication fees.
Attachments:
Exhibit A: Park Service Area Map <not included at this time)
Exhibit B: Andover Parks Map <not included at this time)
Exhibit C: Andover - Park Facilities Chart <not included at this time)
Exhibit D: City of Andover 2004 Existing and Future Park Facilities Chart
Exhibit E: Letter from William G. Hawkins and Associates to Mr. Todd Haas, dated
March 3, 1999 <not included at this time)
Exhibit F: Survey of Park Dedication Fees <not included at this time)
,J
"DRAFT" - June 28, 2005
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
21 of 21
@
:J
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304. (763) 755-5100
FAX (763) 755-8923 . WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US
,
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: Jim Dickinson, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Community Center Update
DATE: June 28, 2005
A verbal presentation relative to the Community Center will accompany the following topics:
1. Project Completion Schedule:
The most recent schedule is attached (Exhibit 1) for the Council's reference.
"
-...J 2. Hanson Boulevard Access Update:
Staff met with the Anoka County Highway Department (ACHD) and the School
District on June 8th to discuss the 154th Avenue & Hanson Boulevard traffic signal
project, the % intersection at Bluebird and Hanson and the turn lane for the
Community Center. ACHD will take the lead on designing the improvements. All
three projects will be designed, bid and built as one large project. If the %
intersection at Bluebird does not move forward, the ACHD will be prepared to
construct a permanent median at Bluebird as part of this project. On Monday, June
13th ACHD installed barrelslbarricades at Bluebird to prevent left turn movements.
These will stay in place until the final improvements are complete. The construction
of the project is expected to begin in early September. Hanson will be opened to
traffic during construction so that access to the Community Center, Oak View Middle
School, local businesses and other surrounding areas will remain.
3. Landscaping and Irrigation
The City of Andover Parks Department will be completing the landscaping and
irrigation project for the Community Center. You may recall when the project was
originally bid the Council rejected the bids (budget was $95K, lowest bid was $130K)
and directed staffto review other options. With the City taking control of this portion
\ ofthe project, costs can be contained and the Parks Department has the opportunity to
,J showcase their talents. I have attached (Exhibit 2) the budget currently being used,
please note that the budget amount was reduced from the $95K to $85K.
"' 4. North End of City Hall:
',,)
As part of the Community Center project, the Parks Department and Facility
Management will be performing some landscaping and cosmetic improvements to
improve the look of the north end of City Hall. Thanks to our resident landscape
architect, Will Neumeister, for leading the landscape design for this project. This will
be an opportunity for the City to utilize some residual materials from other City
projects and funding is available in the Facility Management budget to complete the
improvements.
5. Community Center Project Budget:
Handouts will be provided at the meeting to provide the Council a budget progress
report, an update on the project contingency and an update on project funding.
6. YMCA Sublease Agreement Update:
Administration is currently working on the "Confirmation of Turnover and Punch
List" format as described in the sublease. This item is a key document that will need
to be worked out with the YMCA to trigger the rent commencement date.
\ Administration is currently working on preparing a detailed statement indicating the
.I monthly and annual estimates of the YMCA's proportionate share of common area
costs. This statement, pursuant to the sublease, is due on or before September 1,
2005.
Upon receipt of the meeting packet, if a member of the Council would like an update on a
particular item not identified, please notify me so an adequate update can be made.
----
Attachments
,J
. E)(~~b~t 1
?'O~=__z
:g~JI
'_/ _Iii
~~ ,~7~ <, . ,,'
~~.. ., "'LU. 1: "
~l'~ >~ " ~
;,&.ll-~. " ,.;
~".;~ < "c.
7~
.." ,'"
"'", "d: II .-
~~ ''',
..".~ '
~~I- .~
~ ~
~'" ~L:;' ~,.
7~OLl. =~: I: ~ r
~"l-.' .",', ,. '1-- .:
~~: I. ~, .~ _ !; ~ <.
~~ ~,-~~, _II' iF
~~: ;;; -~ ir ~ ~
~ '. < . itl '.
~/~' < ". ,< ,,"'-'
l~......",,~. LOu.,', r .
~~ > t
.." ,- >-
0,,1-
/' ~..."'<.~ " I.....~ :f--
, .. ;:,. -
,J ., "
,..,/ ~...~.., < --.'
~ 1-"
Ol: I- ". '" lf4. "= ~
~:;. ..: . ~. "I .,~
~~~" _: . .,'
.....s'o.~u. ^~ ; ~
~.s'~~ ::,." ~~"
" I- . .. 1iii
or. . - ~
~~ ., .,. _"- oM ',",'
~ W'. .. ii
";: llli
~"'A =. .. ',;
~ ~ rI'
~? '''-i . "
"".... I- ;,.
~ 0~
~~~ .~
~:;. ~
"..
~ _ "B ';1;
w
"0
_ 0
2 15~ ~ ~ .~
~ .~ IV _ .... g a: ~ "5
g "'2 =S ~ :B..... li5 l5 c:: 1; ~ I ~ g c
o ~ 0 .2 ;:: Cll E E ..J CD ~ I 0 Cll ,2 ~ :3
;:~: ~ "- g ~_.~I 0 -@.2 E5- mCi ~ 8!2
~ -5 III ~ B:D U0>2~~ O:c~ g'~5 rog 111-5 CUi
~-g 5~ <:5 ~ ~ .~~~~~ :: ai~ -6~~ o~~ :ffi.~~-g
~ ~ ~ g :i ~ lfl ~ "0 ~ ~ .~ ~ .~ g :i g 0 ~I g ~ ~ _ g ~.~ .~ ~ ~ t5 ~
~~ ~.~ o:::9c liill'l~~roE.B<Il~ 0:: ~'c.~'-ocglll:::~ uffi~9.!o
[U,o.....g <C.....e ;;;~cn'E~iii:.i'~~ <( ~2E$;;;::og:;c[Q "_LlUlg
z t:~_Ill~ a:::ro'Q) o!;.aCro3lQ~c.!; 0: !S!.!;~~1iioiii9.~.ffiltl~ffig.5o!;;;':::
Q 0v~~~ o~~~~~~~~Ei8~ o~~aBE~=~~B!~a~~S~
~ D::-g.5~~""U:; g~u:;~ffig15c~~o2~"'o;; giii~go2-;g1ii1iiU~1ii2!ffim~"
" ) _ 0 w ~ _ 0 :5 = LL.- L.. Of L.. 0_ ~ I'll W U L.. ~ .... 5 = LL. C .- Cll Q ~ .- 0 .... ..... 5 IV ..... ::J ~ ;:J -
: 5 ~~~~~i~ ~~~~I~i~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~i~~!*~i!~j~~~ffi~
'- U) ....offio~..!!!:~ ~IVC-EIV~.OO~!2C1>OQl~~ !e=IV.Q;90IVQ.$~x2~===!!!3.:~~
c( W >(1Il_Itl...u-:- l::!:::U.- ~l;l_~IIl;""OU"OU,,:, !::!::IIlU_IIlUUvOOQlOO;;::;;;::';::'U10U,-,
U C W" " LL' " , , , " LL.' , , , , , , I , , ,
,;
>-
:;;
>
o
"0
C
'"
I
==-=-=.-.,-",2
:'~~~;
, .....,..- t;
~~ ~~>~ II'.~' '."
~... ~o. "}... ~, , ,
~ ~.;,
~"'o. "'..~I- ~.' II :
7~ ,~
~~ -
~~ ~, ~
~~ ~ ~
~< . ~~.
~" ~" t'
~"% -,
~ . ~ ~
iPOIL. ~;; <<- ""
~"'''\.^ ,', ~ .' ,.
.~ """ '"
<O~ .; !.<
~"'o./~...:- ;;":,"~'
,,~ ., -
~~~ ~ 'o>~ ~,'.: ,~
'~"''''o.~~/:''I- .;..' ; =.,q. ~
;&o:!!: t'l
=-' '".
~~:...' ,~. I 'K 3, I~; ,.,
,,,,o.~ ~ <Co~, J ~ '..
~ ," ",: ;':;-;'.
~ " < '~j$, '.~ I.r
~'(,... ~ I- _. ' : ....., ": m! _ ~.~.~ 2,'.1 ~
l",o.~~: .' ; ~ c: If. <
,J ~'"..." I:' ,,' ~B' i;:c
l",,,~1- ~~ " H! ~ ~!~
~~ ~ ~ ilfi . 11,-
~l"'~" = :\ i~ ~.~; 0 ~~ ".
... 11..1 ,-.
~,,"<-. . ~f~'.~ '0 .~~
., "~" - 1'1
~~: ",~ y~" .~--' . i~ ~
'\:::..~ '; ';; . ~;N;
'''''\~ I- :, :: ':'.. .<l'''
~v... ~ . ~ ," '.. "".
~_ _ 8 ~
''i .,. *~-.~_ 'fj~ :;;;.;;
g -5
~ ro w 0 IS en
E -5 ~ 11> U) C a;"iii .c
-On ~.~ 5 ~ c:~ ~~
~ ffi-gEE~ ~1Il Bill ~ m.~';~.~ ffi~
:x I~E.Eo.a~.....'tiiItl..Jij):;' _ <~~~'tl~."
;; ~!2'OUQlC:~!:!:!..c C ro -::m--fij EC .....
BClI> ....c:c:~.-Ill ILU ctu) U)<.J,~ rom ffi
lll~ ~ .-0.... l1l(llo.....:eo u. uc: c o:{-"CIIl._:: '-~ E
c: '- -_.=:Ul~X._1Il1tI G.l .- we: t;......... f:
~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~'~~iig L5~; L3~ :~-g ~:~~~ ~~ 's
~ i ~ cn B .~ ~ ~ ~I g ; ~ 5 i ~ ~ .~ :~ ~ 'f ~ ~ ~ !2 .~ i ~ ~ ~I ~ ~ ~ ~ .~I g ~ ~
~ ~ lU 1S .~ m ~ ~ f '~ 'is 'E 'Ei ~ $ g .E .2 ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ 'E ~ ~ 0 ~ : ~ ~ .... .~ (ij ~ 'g ~ ~
t= 8 1ii1 '; :e :s ~ "U U -5 ,g 8 g ~ : := il '0 2 '"... g ~ " _... g 3: 8 .... :Sl ~ _ ~.f! 0 "0 .2 ~ 11l 5 ~ ,g ~ ~ Q _
11. ..J ~I i: !!l i3 u ~ ..Q 0 'E I;: I;: ~ In ~ - .:;: In ~.~ ..J 2 ffi ~.~ ...J ~ I;: E -I g ~ C ~ .2 5: .... .~ Q) i3 u C - .;:: :J .~
, ~ ~~~~~~~gi.!Q)Q)1ii~"5t5c~ ~~~c~ ~~Q)~~c~ z.g;~~~~~~~~~c~
)' 0 "'tE~S;:~olll_=~~_.-o :::::ElUC: "'_octlc I-pEE=ctlc Ocuo>2cuES;:~==::::ctlc
'. ./ ~ ~ til ~ :g ~ :g .g ~ ~ ~ B B .f; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I B ~ ,f; .g ~ E ~ 5 rl 8 .g ~ E b3:E ~ "* ~ E 8 ~ :g ~ ~ ~ ~ t
(:) Cl lL" ~ ' ~ ' "(/) , , 1
'"
>-
ID
>
o
u
c
<(
EXh~b .t ~
6/24/2005
\
Community Center Irrigation & Landscape Budget
Irrigation lines and controls $30,000.00
Rentals $3,000.00
Plantings $15,000.00
Flag poles $5,000.00
Furnishingslbenches/etc. $9,000.00
Sod/seed $18,000.00
Electrical $2,500.00
Site signage - County Highway $2,500.00
$85,000.00
- ,
,
, i
Page 1
~&..&
Andover I YMCA Community Center ~
6/28/2005 Sources and Uses & -,;J 'if-O~
Sources:
~J Bond Proceeds $ 19,580,000.00
Less:
Discount $ 478,329.25
Debt Service Reserve 722,570.00
Issuance Fees 71,709.24
Recording Fees 1,394.65 (1,274,003.14)
Net Bond Proceeds 18,305,996.86
Interest Income (to date)
May 04 2,415.83
Jan 05 154,450.91
Apr 05 264.71
Projected Add'l 44,000.00 201,131.45
Bonded Proceeds 18,507,128.31
Other Projected Sources
High School Team Room Lease 189,000.00
CDBG Grant 157,038.55
Total Other Projected Sourc.es 346,038.55
Total Sources Available 18,853,166.86
Uses:
" " Community Center Budget 18,450,000.00
\.....) High School Team Rooms 189,000.00
Total Construction Budget 18,639,000.00
Balance $ 214,166.86
Budget ActuallProiected Diff
Outside ofproject budget -
PennitlSACfW AC * $ 65,000.00 $ 100,501.98 $ (35,501.98)
Architectural Fees - Printing & Reimbursables ** 10,352.00 II 0,000.00 (99,648.00)
Testing & inspections overage 35,000.00 45,000.00 (10,000.00)
Owner furniture & fixtures 37,700.00 49,868.30 (12,168.30)
Cost issues being priced (estimated) *** - 35,000.00 (35,000.00)
Miscellaneous - 10,000.00 (10,000.00)
Total (202,318.28)
0
Net Available 11,848.58
* Original Met Council estimate
** Plan printing was do to the number of bidders and rebidding.
*** Includes: Trash enclosure, rooftop unit painting, concrete spillways, data cabling.
. (U,~
h;)f-OS'
~J N Q; R "(, H Wi E; S: t A S; Sf Q; C; ~~, t ~ Q; C;Qi~,S;U; t.lA N,,('S~, I,~, C;.,
_ __N_.__' - ---
5775 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 555, St. Louis Park, MN 55416
Telephone: 952.595.9636 Facsimile: 952.595.9837 planners@nacplanning.com
MEMORANDUM
TO: Todd Haas
FROM: Alan Brixius / Deb Garross
DATE: November 7,2002
RE: Andover - Park Dedication Study
FILE NO: 111.06
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this memorandum is to provide recommendations to the City of Andover
concerning park dedication standards and the ordinance amendments suggested to
~) implement the Park Plan Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. The City's existing park
system has been developed based upon the current Comprehensive Plan (which
describes land use, transportation, parks and community goals and objectives as well
as demographic projections to the year 2020). The City is currently conducting.a Rural
Reserve Study which may result in a future Comprehensive Plan amendment adding
additional land to the City's urban service area. The park dedication study also
addresses future park needs and dedication standards for the two potential rural
reserve areas.
ISSUES I ANALYSIS
Andover has been successful in acquiring land during the subdivision process to
provide neighborhood and mini parks throughout the community. Athletic fields and
other recreation improvements have been provided based upon a combination of City,
School District and regional park facilities. The City is in a good position with respect to
its park and recreation system in that the variety, location, number and facilities
provided by the system exceed national guidelines. The existing Parks and Open Space
Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan utilized both Metropolitan Council and National
Recreation and Parks Association 1 Guidelines to develop the park system standards
identified in the Comprehensive Plan. The current City park system exceeds the
1 National Recreation and Parks Association (NRPA) guidelines were utilized to analyze the park system
by park type and the number of acres of parkland per 1,000 population because these guidelines were
~) utilized in the 1999 Park Chapter of the Comprehensiye Plan. The NRPA is a professional association
that provides accreditation programs for universities and advises national lawmakers on policy matters,
programs and legislation related to public parks and recreation.
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
1 of 22
.
national standards (based upon the number of acres of park land provided per 1,000 . ,
population), identified by the existing Comprehensive Plan. The City has provided parks
throughout the community which allow residents good access to the system and there
are a variety of recreational facilities to choose from including natural areas, linear
parks, playgrounds and athletic facilities. Andover has also done an excellent job of
mapping and maintaining an inventory of its park facilities and providing clear guidance
through the Capital Improvement Project (CIP) process for implementation of future
facilities.
The purpose of this study is to identify the cost or value of the Andover ultimate park
system and distribute the costs of developing this system equitably to the existing and
future households and land uses that benefit from the City's park system. The following
points summarize the key issues that will affect the City's park system:
1. Andover is considering three future growth options. The 2020 MUSA will have a
build out population of 39,000 people and 14,516 households. As part of the
Rural Reserve Study, two additional growth areas are being considered in
addition to the 2020 MUSA. If Rural Reserve Area 1 (1,020 acres) is selected,
the forecasted build out population may reach 48,639 people and 18,086
households. If Rural Reserve Area 2 (1,293 acres) is selected, the forecasted
build out population may reach 51,220 people and 19,042 households.
2. The community has done a good job of acquiring land for park and recreation . ,
purposes and providing equipment/facilities to serve the recreation needs of the
City. The location and type of parks within the existing system exceed national
standards (suggested by the National Recreation and Park Association), based
upon the current population of 26,588 residents (2000 U.S. Census).
3. Based upon a staff review of the existing land areas which have been acquired or
dedicated to the City over time, staff believes that about 65 acres of the 545
acres or about 12% of the total parkland will never be developed due to
topography constraints such as steep slopes, wetlands and lakes.
4. The existing park system is predominantly comprised of smaller Mini and
Neighborhood Parks which are located throughout the community. City staff has
indicated that the number and proximity of smaller parks are expensive to
maintain and as such, the City may choose to limit further acquisition of small
park sites within the community in favor of larger Neighborhood Parks.
5. The 2000 U.S. Census data indicates that over 67% of the City's population is
comprised of young residents between the ages of 5 to 44 years of age. Almost
20% of the population is comprised of children under 10 years old. The Census
figures indicate that the community has a large population of young active
residents who typically generate park and recreation demands on the community.
Considering the large number of children, teens and young adults, it is "
anticipated that park and recreation use will be strong for the foreseeable future.
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
2 of 22
,~ )
6. As the community develops and lands within the Metropolitan Urban Service
Area (MUSA) decline, future growth will occur in the rural service area and the
density of development will ultimately decline. While the need for parks will
continue to be strong, the financial resources that will be dedicated to the park
system are expected to decline. The anticipated decreased density of
development in the rural areas will result in a decline in the amount of park
dedication fees that will be collected over the long-term. The land supply within
the MUSA is limited and the cost of land for park acquisition is high.
7. The current City park system contains about 545 acres of parkland, which is
divided into 59 separate park facilities, (including the 15 acre site located south of
WDE Landfill). The total value of the park system based upon full build out
(including existing and future planned facilities, land costs and 30%
design/administration costs) approximates $35,178,322 dollars. The existing
park system is valued at $22,168,389 dollars with approximately $13,009,933
dollars of future improvements to be constructed to complete the 2020
Comprehensive Plan park system.
8. The planned park system (based upon the 2020 Comprehensive Plan), is about
63% developed at this time and has been paid for by existing development
\ (through taxes, Community Development Block Grants, other grants and park
, dedication fees, donations etc). As the City is currently only about 56%
"/
developed, (8,200 households based upon the 2000 Census out of the potential
14,516 projected 2020 build out households), existing development has already
paid for over 63% of the total planned system. Future development should be
responsible to pay for the remaining 37% ($13,009,933 dollars) plus a
percentage of the existing system (including some facility upgrades and
replacement), in order to provide for their proportionate share of the total system
costs.
STATUTE I CASE LAW
The City authorized this study to be conducted by NAC to review current regulations
and dedication requirements to determine if current practices are adequately providing
for existing and future anticipated park demands. This Report will summarize the
objectives of the current Park Plan chapter of the Comprehensive Plan and provide
updated inventory information to establish a base line for future dedication needs.
Factors including property valuation, service area needs, facility cost analysis, future
development and implementation strategies will be reviewed. Recommendations will be
set forth establishing mechanisms for the City to provide park facilities in a manner that
meets Comprehensive Plan goals, establishes a relationship between park need and
development impact and that will build out the system in an equitable manner,
consistent with Minnesota Statutes and recent case law. It should be noted that the City
U requested that this study exclude analysis of the community trail system therefore this
aspect of the community park and recreation system will not be analyzed.
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
3 of 22
Minnesota Statutes - Park Dedication .
Minnesota Statutes 462.358 Subd. 2b. provides the enabling legislation that allows
municipalities to extract parkland or cash. dedications for park acquisition and
development. The statute specifically provides: "that a reasonable portion of any
proposed subdivision be dedicated to the public or preserved for conservation purposes
or for public use as parks. recreational facilities. plaYQrounds. trails. wetlands. or open
space." The statute further provides that the municipality may:
a. choose to accept an equivalent amount in cash from the applicant for part or all
of the portion required to be dedicated to such public uses or purposes based on
the fair market value of the land no later than at the time of final approval,
b. any cash payments received shall be placed in a special fund by the municipality
used only for the purposes for which the money was obtained,
c. in establishing the reasonable portion to be dedicated, the regulations may
consider the open space, park, recreational, or common areas and facilities
which the applicant proposes to reserve for the subdivision, and
d. the municipality reasonably determines that it will need to acquire that portion of
land for the purposes stated in Subd. 2b. as a result of approval of the
subdivision.
.
Collis v. City of BloominQton (1976)
The statute described above was further interpreted by the case of Collis vs. City of
Bloomington. In this case, the Minnesota Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of
Bloomington's Ordinance, which set forth a ten (10) percent park dedication
requirement "as a general rule." The Court found for this particular case and
developer/project, that "as a general rule, it was reasonable for the City to require
dedication of ten percent of land or payment of ten percent of the value of undeveloped
land for park dedication." The Court noted that the ten percent reauirement miQht be
arbitrary as a matter of law because it does not consider the relationship between the
particular subdivision and recreational need in the community. The Court was not,
however, prepared to say that the ten percent requirement was unreasonable or
arbitrary. (Letter from William G. Hawkins and Associates to Mr. Todd Haas, dated
March 3, 1999).
Dolan vs. Tiaard (1994)
The enabling legislation of Minnesota Statutes 462.358 Subd. 2b cited earlier in this
report has been further influenced by case law. The U.S. Supreme Count (Dolan vs.
Tigard) found that land use extractions must be reflective of a development impact on
the infrastructure system. In this respect, park dedication extracted from a land use
must reflect the demand they generate for park and recreational facilities. This case
established that a rational nexus or relationship must exist between the fees charQed for
parks and the related impacts that are Qenerated by the use. "
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
4 of 22
: ) Kottschade vs. City of Rochester (1995)
In this case, the Minnesota Court of Appeals noted that in the case of a dedication, the
City is requiring a property owner to give up a constitutional right - the right to receive
just compensation when private property is taken for a public purpose. In order to
uphold a dedication requirement the City has the burden of provinq the required
relationship between the property development and the City's need for land dedication.
To meet that burden. the City must prove that an "essential nexus" exists between the
need for the land and the dedication requirement. If the nexus can be demonstrated,
the City must also demonstrate a "rouqh proportionality" between the development and
the City's dedication requirement. (Letter from William G. Hawkins and Associates to
Mr. Todd Haas, dated March 3, 1999).
In other words, the City must be able to prove that the proposed project will create a
need for additional park facilities and that the amount of dedication required is roughly
proportionate to the need that will be generated from the development. A precise
mathematical calculation is not required, however, the City must demonstrate that an
individualized determination has been made to support the landlcash dedication
requirement.
City Attornev Comments - (Exhibit E, Letter from William G. Hawkins and Associates to
Mr. Todd Haas, dated March 3, 1999). "In a park dedication situation, the City must be
:) able to prove two things. First, that the proposed development will create a need for
additional park facilities. Second, the City must be able to prove that the amount of the
dedication is roughly proportionate to the impact from the development. A precise
mathematical calculation is not required; what is required is some sort of individualized
determination. It should not be difficult for the City to meet the first or nexus part of the
standard, Le., that the proposed subdivision will create the need for additional park
facilities. However, it is my opinion that a unit charge for park dedication fees does not
pass the second part of the test. A flat fee charge that is not based upon a community
park plan and facilities analysis, does not provide an individualized determination that
the amount of the charge is roughly proportionate to the need created by the
development. The statute makes clear that a dedication must be reasonable and must
be based on the fair market value of the land."
1999 PARK COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The City of Andover Comprehensive Plan including the Parks and Open Space
Chapter, sets forth goals and objectives for the park system. The objectives of the plan
are to:
1. Provide areas that meet present park needs and plan for future needs of the
City.
2. Maintain, upgrade and expand community recreational facilities and trail
systems to serve all residents of the City.
~J
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
5 of 22
3. Promote, protect, preserve and enhance the City's rural and open space and
amenities.
The City of Andover contains 59 parks (including the 15 acre site located south of the
WDE Landfill), ranging in size from under 1 acre to over 130 acres. Anoka County
operates two Regional Parks, Bunker Hills Regional Park and Rum River Central
Regional Park that abut the City. Exhibit A, Park Service Area Map indicates the
location of all of the existing parks and developable planned future parks within the City.
The park system contains land areas that are designed to meet varying recreational
needs of residents. The parks are classified according to factors including size, use,
service area, location and site improvements. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the
following parkland classifications:
Mini Park. This type of park is intended to provide specialized facilities that serve a
concentrated or limited population or specific group such as tots or senior citizens. Mini
parks are typically located within neighborhoods and serve people living within less than
~ mile of the Mini Park and have an area of 2 acres or less. The Comprehensive Plan
contemplates development of 20 Mini Parks (30 acres) throughout the City.
Neiahborhood Park. This type of facility is intended to provide areas. for intense
recreational activities such as field games, courts, apparatus areas, skating, etc. The .
majority of the City parks fall into this classification. The service areas range from ~ to
% mile and this type of facility is generally intended to serve a population of 4,000 to
5,000 people. Park sizes for existing Neighborhood Parks within the City range from
2.17 acres (Northwoods East Park) to almost 20 acres (Prairie Knoll Park). The
Comprehensive Plan contemplates development of 33 Neighborhood Parks
(approximately 254 acres) throughout the City.
Linear Park. This type of facility is typically developed for one or more varying modes of
recreational travel such as hiking, biking, skiing, canoeing etc. There is currently only
one Linear Park within the City (Coon Creek Park). The park contains bituminous trails
that follow Coon Creek between Hanson Blvd. NW and the Burlington Northern
Railroad. Non-motorized uses including biking, hiking, roller blading and cross-country
skiing are permitted in the park. Coon Creek Park contains 38 acres of land.
Special Use Park. Special Use Parks are generally areas established to provide
specialized or single purpose recreational activities such as golf course, nature center,
marina, zoo, display gardens etc. The. Round Lake and Crooked Lake Boat Landings
are designated as Special Use Parks. Crooked Lake has a picnic shelter and play
equipment; Round Lake contains no recreational equipment.
Undeveloped Parks. The City has a number of Undeveloped Parks where land has
been dedicated or acquired but facilities have not yet been installed. The Undeveloped
Park areas range from less than 1 acre to over 10 acres in size. Many of the areas .,
contain wetlands and are unsuitable for active plan and/or recreational equipment.
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
6 of 22
\ Larger areas may be suitable for future trail development. A total of 98 acres of land are
'. j
owned by the City but are currently undeveloped. Of these acres, approximately 65
acres will likely not be developed due to topographic conditions and wetlands which
leave approximately 33 acres of parkland to be developed in the future.
Community Parks. The Comprehensive Plan includes both parks and playfields within
this park classification. Community Parks are generally intended to provide areas of
natural or ornamental quality for outdoor recreation activities including walking,
picnicking, fields and court athletic activities. Three parks are designed for community
use. These parks serve the City as a whole and typically include between 25 to 50
acres of land. Kelsey Round Lake Park and Coon Creek Park are both designated as a
Community Parks. Sunshine and City Hall parks are designated as Community
Playfields. Both are active use parks with recreational facilities designed for league play
in baseball, softball, soccer and tennis. Kelsey Round Lake Park is a passive use park
containing bituminous, gravel and wood chip nature trails. The City has about 245 acres
of land currently developed for Community Park purposes.
Reaional Parks. Two Regional Parks, (Bunker Hills Regional Park and Rum River
Central Regional Park) are located adjacent to the City. Bunker Hills Regional Park is
located in the southwest corner of the City and extends into the adjacent cities of Blaine,
Coon Rapids and Ham Lake. The park includes numerous recreation facilities such as
/ \ picnic areas, playgrounds, camping, swimming, bituminous and hiking trails. Rum River
'- ) Central Regional Park is located adjacent to the northwest corner of the City on the
west bank of the Rum River in the City of Ramsey. Construction has begun on
developing recreational activities and trails.
Trails. The City is currently in the process of developing a comprehensive trail system
for the community. As this planning is currently underway, the City requested that this
park dedication analysis not include trails as part of the study. The study does however
contain trail access for the individual parks, which is needed to comply with the ADA,
Americans with Disabilities Act requirements.
Open Space. The Comprehensive Plan identifies open space as a part of the overall
park system. Open space is defined as areas set aside for the preservation of natural
open spaces to counteract the effects qf urban congestion and monotony. "Many new
citizens cite Andover's natural amenities as a reason for moving into the City."2 As
such, an objective of the Comprehensive Plan is to protect, preserve and enhance the
open space character of the City.
Unbuildable Parks. Within the existing park system, there are nine parks totaling 65
acres, currently shown on Exhibit C, Andover Park Facilities Chart and illustrated on
Exhibit B, Andover Park Map that will not likely be developed due to the fact that the
land dedication consists primarily of wetlands, lakes, or steep slopes and there is
. '\ insufficient upland area to develop an active park. This unbuildable park land generally
. J
'----/
2 City of Andover Comprehensive Plan - Chapter 8, pg. 4 of 9, Draft Copy - December 1999.
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
7 of 22
fills the classification of Mini and Neighborhood Parks. The specific parks and acreage .
are identified in Table 1.
TABLE 1
UNBUILDABLE PARKS
PARK NAME PARKS MAP PARK EXISTING
NUMBER (I.D.) CLASSIFICATION ACRES
Mini Parks
Tulip Park 13 UM 1.85
Meadow Wood South 29 UM 0.45
Hartfields 32 UM 1.47
Subtotal Mini Parks Acreaqe 3.77
Neighborhood Parks
Birch Ridqe 1 UN 13.99
Grow Oak View 8 UN 12.77
White Oaks , 9 UN 9.30
Valley View 11 UN 8.74
Redwood Park 45 UN 5.59
Shadowbrook West 47 UN 11.39
Subtotal Neiqhborhood Park Acreaoe 61.23
Total Unbuildable Park Acreaae 65.00
"
In addition to the stated park system objectives, the 1999 Comprehensive Plan also
provides recommendations for park system acreage to accommodate community
growth through 2020. Table 2 compares the Comprehensive Plan acreage
recommended with the existing park system to illustrate where the City stands in
relationship to its build out park system.
TABLE 2
PARK TYPE 1999 COMP PLAN EXISTING PARK EXISTING SURPLUSI
ACREAGE ACREAGE PARK DEFICIT**
RECOMMENDATION GROSS ACRES ACREAGE NET
BUILDABLE*
Mini 30 30 26 - 3.77
Neiqhborhood 165 254 193 + 27.77
Common Park 358 174 174 - 184.00
Community 124 72 72 - 52.00
Plavfields
TOTAL 677 530 465 - 212.00
* These figures represent adjusted acres subtracting out un buildable park acreages from Table 1.
** SurpluslDeficit represents 1999 Comprehensive Plan acreage recommendations minus existing park
acreage net buildable.
",
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
8 of 22
, "'
'--~ City staff indicated that although the existing parkland consists of a multitude of smaller
Mini and Neighborhood Parks, the City may not continue acquisition of similar land in
the future due to the high cost of maintenance associated with the dispersed locations
of these parks within the community. The system is adequate to provide for lands within
the projected MUSA boundary. The bulk of the lands outside of the ultimate MUSA are
planned to develop with 2.5 acre residential lots. The acreage lots provide land area for
private recreation purposes that is larger than that typically dedicated for mini parks (2
acres or less). As such, the City may choose to add additional property to some of the
mini park areas or look to acquire neighborhood parks in the future.
Table 2 and Exhibit A, Park Service Area Map, illustrates that as the City grows within
the 2020 MUSA, the current Neighborhood Parks provide sufficient acreage and
distribution to accomplish the Comprehensive Plan recommendations. Additional
community parks and community playfields must yet be acquired and developed.
ANDOVER PARK ACREAGE COMPARISON WITH NATIONAL STANDARDS
The existing park system was further analyzed in terms of the service area per 1,000
population guidelines established by the National Recreation and Park Association.
The U.S. Census (2000) population figure of 26,588 was used to evaluate the park
system acreage. The following table indicates that the City currently exceeds the park
acres per 1,000 population guidelines in all park categories with the exception of
, ) Community Parks where the current system is about 2 acres short. It should be noted
that the park acreages listed in the "Existing Park Acres" column in Table 3 represent
the amount of acres of park owned by the City and net buildable park acres. However,
even when the existing unbuildable acres are deleted, the existing park system still has
more park acres than suggested by the National Recreation and Park Association
Guidelines.
TABLE 3
PARK TYPE SERVICE NRPA EXISTING PARK NRPA
AREA' ST ANDARD2 ACRES SUGGESTED
GROSS BUILDABLE ACRES3
Mini Park X Mile .38 acl1000 30 26 10
Neighborhood Park X-Y2 3 acl1000 254 193 81
Mile
Community Park 2 Mile 6.5 acl1000 174 174 176
Community Playfield 2 Mile 2.25 acl1000 72 72 61
Total Acres 530 465 328
, Metropolitan Council Guideline (Park Facility Service Area)
2 National Recreation and Park Association Guidelines (Acres of Park per 1,000 Population)
3 National Recreation and Park Association Guidelines (Based upon 2000 Census Population of 26,588)
. '\
0
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
9 of 22
COMMUNITY GROWTH ,
The City's existing and future population and household growth will be compared to City
park system value estimates to provide a proportionate park dedication fee. The
Andover 2020 Comprehensive Plan forecasts a 2020 population of approximately
39,000 people in 14,516 households. This anticipated future development is in both the
2020 MUSA and the City's rural service areas. Andover's 2000 household count of
8,205 represent approximately 56% of the City's 2020 population forecast.
As a requirement of Metropolitan Council approval of Andover's 2020 Comprehensive
Plan, the City is undertaking a Rural Reserve Area Study that identifies two options for
potential future urban growth beyond the 2020 MUSA.
The two additional rural reserve areas under consideration are indicated on Exhibit A,
Park Service Area Map as Area 1 (1,020 gross acres) and Area 2 (1,293 gross acres).
Table 4 illustrates the population and household estimates of the City based upon 2000
U.S. Census data, 2020 population and household projections cited In the
Transportation Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan, and projections for either of the two
potential MUSA expansion areas to determine total community build out population.
TABLE 4
ANDOVER POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLD ESTIMATES
POPULATION HOUSEHOLDS ~ ,
2000 Census 26,588 8,205
2010 Estimate 33,007 12,091
2020 Estimate 39,000 14,516
Rural Reserve Area #1 (9,639) 48,639 (3,570) 18,086
Rural Reserve Area #2 (12,220) 51,220 (4,526) 19,042
This park land dedication study will rely on the following demographic statistics. The
City will have a 2020 population of 39,000 people and a 2020 household count of
14,516 according to the City's Comprehensive Plan. If the City selects either of the
rural reserve areas for future MUSA expansion, the following forecasts will be applied.
Area 1 has approximately 1,020 gross acres of land, assuming a density of 3.5 units per
acre. This will generate 3,570 households. At an average of 2.7 people per household,
this will result in a build out population of 9,639 people. The rural reserve area
demographic forecasts in addition to the 2020 forecasts will provide Andover with a
City-side build out population of 48,639 people and a household count of 18,086. The
2000 demographic estimates represent 54% of this build out population and 45% of the
build out households.
Area 2 has approximately 1,293 gross acres of land, assuming a density of 3.5 units per
acre. This will generate 4,526 households. At an average of 2.7 people per household, '"
this will result in a build out population of 12,220 people. Rural Reserve Area 2
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
10 of 22
,
"
\ forecasts, in addition to the 2020 demographic forecasts, will provide Andover with a
'__J
City-wide build out population of 51,220 people and a household count of 19,042. The
2000 demographic estimates represents 52% of this build out population and 48% of
the build out households.
RURAL RESERVE AREA PARK NEEDS
Tables 5 and 6 illustrate the park needs for both of the rural reserve areas. Table 5
illustrates the NRPA guidelines for park land acres per 1,000 population and acreage by
park type.
TABLE 5
RURAL RESERVE AREA PARK LAND NEEDS
PARK ACRES PER 1,000 POPULATION
PARK TYPE NRPA' AREA 1 AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA 2
STANDARD BUILD OUT PARK BUILD OUT PARK
POPULATION ACREAGE POPULATION ACREAGE
(1,OOOs) NEEDED (1,000s) NEEDED
Mini .38/1,000 9.6 4 acres 12.2 5 acres
Neiahborhood 3/1,000 9.6 29 acres 12.2 37 acres
Community 65/1,000 9.6 63 acres 12.2 80 acres
Community 2.25/1,000 9.6 22 acres 12.2 28 acres
~J Plavfield
TOTAL 118 acres 150 acres
1 NRPA National Recreation and Park Association (Standards #Iacre per 1,000 population.
Based on national standards and the City's forecasted population, the City has sufficient
acreage of Mini and Neighborhood Parks to meet future demand. However, the location
of existing Mini and Neighborhood Parks do not provide service area coverage for either
of the two rural reserve study areas. The addition of Neighborhood Parks will be
required to meet the location and park service area needs of the rural reserve area
selected by the City for future urban growth.
There will also be a need to provide additional Community Park and Community
Playfield facilities to the system to accommodate the future growth from either rural
reserve selected for future MUSA. Depending which rural reserve area is selected, the
City will need to add either 63 or 80 acres of Community Park and either 22 or 28 acres
of Community Playfields. Based upon the Comprehensive Plan Soil and Slope Map,
there are substantial areas within both Rural Reserve Area 1 and 2 that contain
restricted soil types and therefore the potential locations for additional playfields are
limited.
The information in Table 6 illustrates the number of parks anticipated to be needed to
\J provide park and recreation service to the two rural reserve areas, (utilizing National
Recreation and Park Association Guidelines).
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
11 of 22
.
TABLE 6
NUMBER AND TYPE OF PARKS NEEDED FOR POTENTIAL
RURAL RESERVE AREAS 1 AND 2
Park Type Park Size' Area 1 Area 2
# Parks Needed # Parks Needed
Mini Park 2 acres 2 3
Neiqhborhood Park 18 acres 2 2
Community Park 40 acres 2 2
Community Plavfield 40 acres .5 .5
National Recreation and Park Association Guideline (Average Park Size per Park Type)
PARK DEDICATION ANALYSIS - RAW LAND VALUE VS. VALUE AT FINAL PLAT
Pursuant to State Statute, the City can collect park dedication based upon the value of
land at the time of final plat. It is NAC's opinion that value should include raw land value
plus the value from lots created by final plat approval. The land value at final plat
should comprise the retail value of the lot less improvement costs. Residential
developers were contacted to identify typical lot improvement costs (assuming an 80
foot wide lot), associated with single-family subdivisions. Typical improvement costs for
single-family developments consist of utilities, roads, grading, engineering, area
connection charges and fees, which approximate 48% of the total vacant lot sales price.
The developers that were contacted also indicated that a development must yield a . ,
minimum 20% retail value added per lot to be a viable project. For illustration purposes,
the following table provides an example breakdown of land values as they relate to the
collection of park dedication based upon raw land value versus the value of land at the
time of final plat.
TABLE 7
PARK DEDICATION I RAW LAND VS VALUE AT FINAL PLAT
LAND RAW LAND
VALUE VALUE
AT FINAL
PLAT
Typical vacant lot sales price $42,995 $ 28,000 placre
- Typical development costs for utilities etc. (48% lot sales price) - 20.637 Or
Lot cost + 20% Retail Value $22,358 $14.000 pilot *
X 10% Park Dedication Fee X 10% X 10% Park Ded.
Park dedication collected at the time of final plat $ 2,235 $1,400 Der unit
* Based upon 2 units per acre
The application of park dedication at the time of final plat, based upon the retail value of
the lots, results in an equitable dedication policy in that the same value will be applied
regardless of whether cash or land is required from a development project.
"
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
12 of 22
. "'
" )
RESIDENTIAL PARK DEDICATION ANALYSIS
Exhibit C, Andover - Park Facilities Chart identifies the park sites pursuant to the City
Parks Map. The name and address of each park including existing and future acres,
facilities and values are also identified. City Staff provided the list of facilities and
corresponding cost estimates. The park system analysis included a land use review to
determine the service areas for the existing parks and to identify the proportion of
existing and future development that will impact the system. As stated earlier, the
current park areas are spread throughout the community and are relatively evenly
distributed. Many of the existing parks are located in areas of the community where
future development will occur and as such, a proportion of the park infrastructure should
be paid for by new development. In fully developed areas in the southern part of the
City, improvements to existing parks should be and have been paid for by current
development within the service area of the specific park facility.
City Staff provided a list of existing and future planned park facilities, which was used to
establish the value of the existing park system and to identify costs reasonably
expected to complete the future park system based upon full build out contemplated by
the 2020 Comprehensive Plan. It should be noted that the information contained herein
is the best estimate of future facilities that can be made at this time and that the specific
facilities and dollar figures may be subject to changelrevision as time goes by and
\ market conditions fluctuate. See Exhibit D, City of Andover 2002 Existing and Future
, , ) Park Facilities Chart for reference. Based on the estimated value of the complete 2020
park system, Table 8 illustrates that the park system is 63% developed and has been
paid for by existing development through taxes, park dedication donations, grants etc.
Future development will benefit from the infrastructure that is currently in place and as
such, should be responsible to pay a proportionate share for replacement of the existing
system.
A major component of the park system is land and to determine present land values for
Andover, recent sales indicated that the average value for land within the MUSA
approximates $50,000 per acre and average land value in the rural service area
approximates $33,000 per acre. The Anoka County Assessor's database was utilized
to establish the land value for park areas that contain a large percentage of wetland or
lakes (generally the 65 acres of parkland that staff believes will not be developed due to
topographic constraints).
The 1999 Andover Comprehensive Park Plan recommends 358 acres of Community
Park and 124 acres of Community Playfield by 2020 is illustrated in Table 2. The City
will need to add 194 acres of Community Park and 52 acres of Community Playfield to
fulfill the Comprehensive Plan recommendations. The inclusion of one of the rural
reserve areas as future MUSA will also generate demand for between 63 to 80 acres of
additional Community Park and between 22 to 28 acres of additional Community
Playfields.
. "\
'J
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
13 of 22
The Rural Reserve Areas are not however, adequately served by Neighborhood and .
Mini Parks. The recommendation of this report is for the City to plan for 1 or 2
additional Community Playfields and five additional Neighborhood Parks to
accommodate the additional population that will be added from the selected rural
reserve areas.
Table 8 illustrates the values of the planned park system based upon the current
Comprehensive Plan and two rural reserve area options along with the recommendation
to add one additional Community Playfield (similar to the City Hall complex) and five
Neighborhood Parks to the system. To calculate the values of the existing and future
. system, staff utilized the City of Andover Directory of Parks, City Capital Improvements
Plan, and research of facility vendors as 'well as comparable improvements within the
City. A list of the future facility acquisitions and values is attached as Exhibit 0, City of
Andover 2002 Existing and Future Park Facilities Chart.
TABLE 8
PARK SYSTEM ESTIMATED VALUE BASED ON
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN & POTENTIAL RURAL RESERVE
Total Park System Estimated Value of %of Estimated Value of Future % of
Value Existinq Park Facilities Total Park Facilities Total
$35,178,322 $22,168,389 63% $13,009,933 37%
$38,981,593 l.~ $22,168,389 57% $16,813,204'.3 43%
$39,548,683 ~.~ $22,168,389 56% $17,380,294 2~ 44% . ,
1 Rural Reserve Area 1 - Two additional Neighborhood Parks needed at a total cost of $1,134,180
2 Rural Reserve Area 2 - Three additional Neighborhood Parks needed at a total cost of $1,701,270
3 One Additional Community Playfield (similar to the City Hall complex) at a total cost of $2,669,091
Park dedication is collected as conditions of subdivision approval. In this respect, the
park land dedication fee is estimated on the basis of new housing units or households.
Currently, the City has completed approximately 63% of its 2020 park system based
estimated value and future improvements. As described in pages 10 and 11 of this
report, the household count compared to the City's build out option range from 56%
within the 2020 MUSA to a low of 43% of Reserve Area 2 build out. This indicates that
the current park system is over built for its current population and has capacity to
accommodate future growth. Future household growth should pay an equitable share in
providing the City's ultimate park system.
To determine the equitable distribution of future park system value to residential units,
the ultimate system value is divided by projected household counts. Tables 9, 10, and
11 provide alternative park dedication fees per unit based on different park improvement
assumptions and three different growth options.
"-
City of Andoyer
Park Dedication Report
14 of 22
1
\
'- ) TABLE 9
ESTIMATED PARK VALUE AND DEDICATION FEE WI NO
ADDITIONAL COMMUNITY BALLFIELD COMPLEXES
Total Estimated # Housing Units Park Dedication Fee
S stem Value Per Unit
$35,178.322 = $2,423
=
1 Rural Reserve Area 1 - Two additional Neighborhood Parks needed at total cost of $1,134,180
2 Rural Reserve Area 2 - Three additional Neighborhood Parks needed at total cost of $1,701.270
TABLE 10
PARK VALUE AND DEDICATION FEE W/1 ADDITIONAL COMMUNITY
BALLFIELD COMPLEX 3
Total Estimated # Housing Units Park Dedication Fee
S stem Value Per Unit
$37,847,413 $2,607
$38,981.593
Area 2 $39,548,683 19,042 - $2,077
\
, ) *Rural Reserve Area 1 and 2 - households per Area added to 2010 Census Data
1 Rural Reserve Area 1 - Two additional Neighborhood Parks needed at a total cost of $1,134,180
2 Rural Reserve Area 2 - Three additional Neighborhood Parks needed at a total cost of $1.701,270
3 One Additional Community Playfield (similar to City Hall Complex) at a total cost of $2,669,091
TABLE 11
PARK VALUE AND DEDICATION FEE W/2 ADDITIONAL COMMUNITY
BALLFIELD COMPLEXES 3
Total Estimated # Housing Units
S stem Value
$40,516,504 =
$41,650,684
Area 2 $42.217,774 19,042 = $2,217
"Area 1 and 2 - households per Area added to 2010 Census Data
, Rural Reserve Area 1 - Two additional Neighborhood Parks needed at a total cost of $1,134,180
2 Rural Reserve Area 2 - Three additional Neighborhood Parks needed at a total cost of $1,701,270
3 Two Additional Community Playfields ( similar to City Hall Complex) at a total cost of $5,338.182
Table 9 represents park dedication fees based on the build out of the 2020 Andover
park system and neighborhood parks for either of the rural reserve study areas. Tables
\ 10 and 11 expand on Table 9 assumptions illustrating the inclusion of one or two
\.~ Community Playfields.
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
15 of 22
Exhibit F provides a comparison of park land fees from other metropolitan communities.
The suggested fees in Tables 9, 10 and 11 are high when compared with neighboring
communities of Blaine, Anoka, and Coon Rapids. However, the fees are in line with
some of the larger, fast-growing communities such as Brooklyn Park, Eden Prairie, and
Plymouth. The City Council will need to select both the park system development
option and growth options that best suits the City of Andover to determine the park
dedication fee.
In discussion with staff, it appears Table 10 represents the preferred park dedication
option. The per unit charge outlined in Table 10 above, assumes that all of the land
area needed for the park system will be in place by the year 2006 with the exception of
one additional Community Playfield (similar to the City Hall Complex) and two
Neighborhood Parks (under potential Rural Reserve Area 1 expansion) or three
Neighborhood Parks (under Rural Reserve Area 2 expansion). The current system and
future planned improvements are consistent with the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land
Use Plan. It is fair to assume that the park system will likely continue to be upgraded in
the future to maintain the user capacity of the system. The $2,607 dollar per unit charge
should reasonably cover the costs for complete development of the system and carrying
costs through system build out. In the event that the MUSA is expanded to incorporate
Area 1, the residential park dedication charge could be reduced to $2,489 dollars per
unit. In the event that the MUSA is expanded to incorporate Area 2, the residential park
dedication charge could be reduced to $2,380 dollars per unit.
The charge of $2,607 dollars per residential unit is the level of funding that will need to
be generated to provide for the planned park system for Andover, based upon
implementation of the plan with the lands and facilities described in Exhibit D, City of
Andover 2002 Existing and Future Park Facilities Chart, which are based upon the
Comprehensive Park Plan. The $2,607 dollar figure takes into account the park service
areas (% of park need associated with new vs. existing development), existing and
projected costs for the park system, design/adm i n istrative costs and future
population/household projections and is therefore our best estimate of park need per
unit. It is important to note that the City should re-evaluate the system value; current
land values and system needs on a periodic basis and adjust the park dedication
accordingly. City Staff suggests that park facilities costs be reviewed and updated
annually based upon the Engineers News Record Cost Index. The City may desire to
adjust the park dedication per residential unit based upon formal adoption of the
potential rural reserve area(s) pursuant to the rate of $2,489 per unit under Area 1 or
$2,380 per unit under Area 2.
Park maintenance and future improvements above and beyond those identified in
Exhibit D should not be financed using park dedication funds. The operational and
future improvement costs must be budgeted within the City's general funds with costs
shared by all community residents.
. ,
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
16 of 22
,
, \
, ) COMMERCIAUINDUSTRIAL PARK DEDICATION ANALYSIS
Minnesota Statutes and recent case law have identified that Cities must now be able to
articulate and justify dedication requirements on a project-by-project basis. Cities have
the burden of determining that the park dedication requirement is related to the park
benefit that will be derived due to the development. Individualized determinations must
be made for each project and the City has the responsibility to demonstrate that there is
a reasonable relationship between the dedication requirement and the park needs
generated by the development.
As illustrated in Exhibit F, many metropolitan communities have a commercial! industrial
park land dedication. The general issue in establishing a commerciall industrial park
land fee is establishing a nexus between commercial and industrial use and the benefit
they receive through the City's park system. In the case of Andover, City staff has
indicated that the City has no commercial or industrial league programs, with the
exception of a couple of local bar/restaurant sponsored tournaments. In this respect,
there is no empirical data that currently illustrates a direct park benefit to the commercial
and industrial properties exists or does not exist.
There are discussions that suggest that there is intrinsic benefit to all land uses from a
quality park system related to quality of life within a community. The issue at hand is to
determine the proportionate need that commerciallindustrial developments generate for
the community park system. The current City park dedication requirement for
, commerciallindustrial projects is 10% which is the same as the requirement for
'- ;J
residential projects containing up to 3 units per acre. For example, the current
dedication requirement equates the park impact of 10 acres of commerciallindustrial
land to 71 residential units or (192 people). The following formula illustrates the
relationship of the current commercial/industrial park dedication requirement to
residential development:
$120,000 per acre (C/lland value) x 10% (park dedication requirement) = $12,000
$12,000 dollars x 10 acres = $120,000 + $1,700 (current park dedication
fee/residential dedication equivalent) = 71 residential units
71 units x 2.7 persons per household = 192 people
As the City Staff has indicated that there is some tournament play use of athletic fields it
is reasonable to state that commerciallindustrial developments have some benefit from
the City park system. It is likely that employees of local businesses use parks for lunch
breaks, walking and/or recreating. The question is, does the commercial development
generate the same need on the park system as an equivalent residential development?
The proportionate benefit is unknown for the City of Andover, due to the lack of
information about the degree to which the commercial/industrial developments use the
system. If the City desires to continue collection of commercial/industrial park
\ dedication fees it is suggested that the City consider establishing a fee structure that
'----" ) approximates charges of other similarly situated communities and/or modify the
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
170f22
.
percentage of dedication associated with commerciallindustrial projects. Table 12
illustrates commercial park dedication fees which are currently charged by other
developing communities. If the City implements a commerciallind ustria I park
dedication, the residential unit fee may be reduced.
COMMUNITY
Blaine
Brookl n Park
Cham lin
Chaska
Coon Ra ids
Eden Prairie
Ma Ie Grove
Shako ee
SUMMARY
. Case law and Minnesota Statutes provide that dedication requirements can only be
applied to facilities that will be impacted by the specific project. Future park
dedication fees cannot be utilized to improve or maintain existing park and trail
systems in fully developed neighborhoods unless a correlation can be made .
between the new development and park use. However, park dedication fees can be
used to replace or upgrade equipment within City parks.
. The current park system has more land and facilities than is needed to serve the
current population based on national park per capita standards. The existing system
provides for more land acreage per 1000 population than is required (based upon
National Recreation and Park Association guidelines).
. The City of Andover is currently considering three future growth options. If the City
holds to its 2020 MUSA, the project population is 39,000 with a household count of
14,516. The 2000 population and household represents 68% of 2020 population on
56% of the 2020 household count.
. With the inclusion of one of the rural reserve areas in the future MUSA, the build out
population may range from 48,639 to 51,220, and the household count would range
from 18,086 to 19,042. Andover's 2000 population and household counts represent
54% of the build out population and 45% of the household count for Rural Reserve
Area 1 and 52% of the build out population and 43% of the household count for
Rural Reserve Area 2.
. In the event that the City extends the MUSA pursuant to Areas 1 and 2 on Exhibit A,
Park Service Area Map, additional facilities and land will be needed to accommodate . ,
the projected future population.
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
18 of 22
.
.
,- ",
, j
. A minimum of one additional Community Playfield (comparable to the current City
Hall complex) is recommended if the MUSA is expanded. Should Rural Reserve
Area 1 be pursued, two additional Neighborhood Parks will be needed and a total
projected system value of $38,981,593 is anticipated. A park dedication fee of
$2,489 per residential unit would be needed to provide for all of the facilities
(including 2 additional Neighborhood Parks and 1 additional Community Playfield,
comparable to the City Hall complex).
. Should Rural Reserve Area 2 be pursued, three additional Neighborhood Parks will
be needed and a total projected system value of $39,548,683 is anticipated. A park
dedication fee of $2,380 per residential unit would be needed to provide for all of the
facilities (including two additional Neighborhood Parks and one additional
Community Playfield, comparable to the City Hall complex).
. The amount of cashlland dedication required from new development must be
proportional to the need that the project will generate on the park and trail system.
Minnesota Statutes also provide that park dedication may be based upon the value
of land at the time of final plat. As Table 7 indicates, the value of land at the time of
final plat is generally higher than raw land value.
, . It is recommended that the City consider amending its Subdivision Ordinance to
, / change Section 9.07.1 to delete reference to "equivalent amount in cash based upon
the undeveloped land value of that portion of said land that would have otherwise
been required to be dedicated'" and to add "Park cash contributions are to be
calculated and established based on land value at time of final plat."
. The total planned park system is estimated to cost $35,178,322 dollars, based upon
the 2020 Comprehensive Plan, land values, current and projected facility costs.
. While the 2000 Census household count represents 56% of its 2020 build out, the
City has about 63% of its 2020 park system in place. The park system is in place
and has been paid for by existing development through taxes, park dedication,
donations, grants, etc.
. As illustrated in Tables 9, 10, and 11, the City's residential park dedication fees will
depend on the City Council decision on future park improvements and community
growth options.. Table 10 represents the recommended residential park dedication
fee.
. With the exception of additional land that may be needed to accommodate potential
expansion of the MUSA, (Rural Reserve Areas 1 and 2 illustrated on Exhibit A, Park
Service Area Map, the land acquisition for the park system is reasonably expected to
\ be completed by the end of 2006. Provided the planned improvements ($13,009,933
,_/ )
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
19 of 22
.
dollars of infrastructure and equipment) are installed by that time, the system is
reasonably expected to provide for community needs through the year 2020.
. The current policy of the City to charge commercial and industrial developments the
same proportion of park dedication as is charged to residential projects containing
up to 3 units per acre, should be further reviewed by the City Council. If the City
desires to charge park dedication fees for commercial and industrial development, it
is suggested that the fee amount should approximate that charged by other similarly
situated communities and/or that the percentage should be reduced to less than
10%. If the City implements a commercial industrial park dedication fee, then the
residential fee should be reduced to reflect a proportional distribution of costs.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. To maximize the value of cash dedications it is recommended that the City update
its Subdivision Ordinance to incorporate the Minnesota Statute language specifying
that land value (for the purpose of calculating park dedication) will be determined
based upon the value of the land at the time of final plat The following language is
suggested:
Park cash contributions are to be calculated and established at the time of final plat
approval. The City Council may require the payment at the time of final plat
approval or at a later time under terms agreed upon in the development agreement.
Delayed payment may include interest at a rate set by the City.
2. The current park system and plan is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land
Use Plan and as such, the park dedication fee structure for new residential
developments should be based upon the analysis provided for in Table 10. Based
upon this analysis, a park dedication fee of approximately $2,607 dollars per
residential unit should be instituted to cover build out cost of the City's planned park
system and to develop one additional community playfield. Depending on the
selected growth option, the City should amend its Subdivision Ordinance and fee
schedule to incorporate the residential unit charge from Table 10 and discontinue
the practice of utilizing raw land value to determine park dedication. A periodic
review of land values and facility costs should be done to ensure that the park
dedication fee remains current based upon market conditions. Staff recommends
that the Engineering News Record Cost Index (ENR Cost Index) be utilized as the
source to annually update facility values to account for inflationary factors.
3. In the event that the City Council chooses to add 2 additional Community Playfields
to the overall system, a residential park dedication fee from Table 11 should be
instituted.
4. The Subdivision Ordinance should be amended to provide an alternative to the
developer to conduct an individualized study for the subdivision to determine park
needs, should there be a question as to the applicability of the residential unit fee. "
The following language is suggested:
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
20 of 22
.
.
/~ "'
, .J
If the applicant or developer does not believe that the estimates contained in the City
fee schedule (pursuant to this park dedication analysis) fairly and accurately
represent the effect of the subdivision on the park or trail system of the City, the
applicant or developer may request that the City prepare an in-depth study of the
effect of the subdivision on the park and trail system and an estimate of that effect in
money and/or land. All costs of said study shall be borne by the developer or
applicant. If the developer or applicant requests the preparation of such a study, no
application for development submitted shall be deemed complete until the study has
been completed and a detennination is made as to the appropriate amount of land
or money necessary to offset the effects of the subdivision.
Based upon the experience of NAC Inc., no developer has requested a special study
to determine individual subdivision impacts to a municipal park system to date. In
the event that a developer requests a special study, all costs of the study would be
paid for by the developer. The study would consist of an analysis of the park system
to define the improvements needed to complete the affected facilities. The analysis
would include a review of the specific impacts the development project would have
on the planned park facilities, current land value, current facility costs and other
pertinent information. The resulting costs of the land and facilities needed to provide
for the development project would be estimated and assigned accordingly to the
, development project. The recommended park dedication fees are based on the
I costs identified in Exhibit D.
'- '
5. The City should consider incorporating park redevelopment infrastructure planning
as part of the 5-year Capital Improvements Plan. Minnesota Statutes specify that
park dedication fees may not be used for maintenance purposes and therefore it is
important for the City to continue to provide a separate budget fund for maintenance.
In conferring with the City Attorney, it is possible to use park dedication fees for new
or replacement of facilities. However, any park improvements above those identified
in Exhibit D will need to be financed outside of the park dedication funds. As the
park system ages, there will be an increased need to retrofit existing facilities, as
they will have aged beyond their useful life in the older parks. Park dedication fees
can be used to replace some facilities and infrastructure however, the City may need
to establish other sources to pay for replacement of the park system facilities in full
developed neighborhoods or park service areas.
6. The City has accepted a number of Mini and Neighborhood Park areas (65 acres or
12% of the total parkland), in the past which are not developable due to topographic
and natural features constraints. To avoid this situation in the future, the City should
consider amending its Subdivision Ordinance to identify the type of land that will be
acceptable for parkland dedication, should the community decide to acquire
additional land. The following language is suggested:
\ To be eligible for park dedication credit, land dedicated is to be located outside of
'- / }
drainage ways, or pond areas. Grades exceeding twelve (12) percent or areas
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
21 of 22
,
.
unsuitable for park development shall not be considered for dedication as defined by .
the City Engineer. Parkland to be dedicated shall be above the ordinary high water
level as approved by the City Engineer.
7. The City should further evaluate its commercial/industrial park dedication standards
to determine the proportional need that said uses place on Andover's park system.
In the event that the City chooses to continue the commercial/industrial park
dedication, the residential dedication fee should be reduced accordingly.
8. In the event that the City is contemplating park improvement upgrades, facility or
equipment replacement in the future that have not been identified in Exhibit D, the
City should include these improvements in the Capital Improvement Plan and budget
for these improvements in the City's general funds. These improvements should not
be funded out of the park dedication fees.
Attachments:
Exhibit A: Park Service Area Map
Exhibit B: Andover Parks Map
Exhibit C: Andover - Park Facilities Chart
Exhibit D: City of Andover 2002 Existing and Future Park Facilities Chart
Exhibit E: Letter from William G. Hawkins and Associates to Mr. Todd Haas, dated .
March 3, 1999
Exhibit F: Survey of Park Dedication Fees
"
City of Andover
Park Dedication Report
22 of 22
I ~~~VO~NOO~O~~~~M~~~-~ OO~~M~O~VOO~~
; ~O~VV ~~~_~~~~MM~M~~~~_~~ONOV~~OvM
~U ~N~ ~ON~N~ ~VOO~~NOO~V~VVOV~~MM~-~OOV~
, ~E ~~~_OM~~~N~O~~~~~NO~NM~M~O~~N~M~~~~
""~~ ~_~O~M~N_OO~M N~~vvOOVO~~M~OON ~N ~-~
_ _NM~""" V MNO-N ~OO~~vN-NM M- N
;9. _~ ~ v) M""""
o ~
E-8
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
o 0000 0 0 0 00000000 0 0000 00 000
2 .~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ I I ~ I ~ I ~ ~ g ~ ~ g ~ ~ I gig ~ S; ~ I g ~ t ~ S; g
~~ ~~~M M ~ N MN~~M~~~ ~ ~M~M ~M MON
~.~ ~~~ ~ N ~ ~~~~=M~~ N ~~oo~ ~~ ~=-
;;.....
"""
"il :a
>~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~ ~~~~ 0 0 00 V""" OO~~~~ MOOMV ~v V
o OOI'-'o::t'-C 0\ ...0 co 00 0\ 1,f')I,f')\O\OlI') N\.QI,f')O vv r-
~gf~ 1:::"~N"11,f') I IO"IO..I~,,'~,,1 I~~~r-"~",I~"~~V,,IO\,,~I I~I
0._ O_MN N N \0 M -- NO\ 0 V M- ......
~.E~ ...... M -v" M
t'a x''''::
>"-lC=:
'u
~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~_~V~NOO~O~~N~N~~~~N~~O~-O~Ooooo~~
o ~~OV~_N~~~_N~_~~N~~~_NN_~~~NOO~~O~N
~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~q~~~~~q~~~~~
~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~N~~~N~~
~ -~NN _ - -Nv - _vvOv~ -N N
." . .
~ on M
....l
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~ ooooooo_~o~__ooooooooooO~OOO-OON-OO
o o~~~~~~~~~~vv~~~oo~~~oo~~~~o-oo-~oo
~u ~~~~~~~~~~~~q~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~q~~
u~ _~~~~~~N_~~~V~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-~~
~< -MM~~~~ M N ~~M~~~~M~~~M~~~ ~~ ~~
;;; I
~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~ ..
>= ~~~~M~~~O~vO~~M~M~VO~---~~OM~O~~~-~
O~u ~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
_, _~ MM~~ OMN~O~~_v~NONO~O~~_oO~~OvO_M_
.~~ ~< M M-N
. z.~
'-- -(:=
~.u u U'l
O <II ~ "
~ " ~
>0...: &:<
~ ..
... <II
u~ ~ ~~~~N~~~O~vO~~N~~~VO~ _~~O~~O~~M_~
CU'l ~v~O~~~~M~~~~~~~~N~-~ MV~~O~vO~vNvv
~~ d~~~~dN~~d~~~~~~ciNci~~~~=~dMMd~ci~N~~
~< -
~
0> :z: ~ - 0>
;> ~ -< ~~ z CIl;>
~ ~ ~:; Z~~-5~ZZ~~ iii~ ~~~z
~ ~z~~~~~z~~z<~ ~o>o>-zz~z--zz~,,:~~~~ZZiii
~ z_zzzzz_z -5Z Z;>;>CIl.,,_~ .CIlCIl,,~Z-a~ZZZq~~~
"'0 . en .,.: _ . . . V) .,.: .,.: 0\.,;. . Z Z ~ p::: tI) 0\ iI.i C ~ 5 P::: >- ....J "0 . - . <l:; ._ ~ ~
< ~.5<~jjj.~<<~<g~~~s.gR~~~s~.~<]~j~j~~~~
_"O~u~~"O>"O"O~~o ~ U'l.~._~~U'l~~.~~-~~._~ ~CU'l
U'l ~ -;:; .!;! _ -;:; ~ cd C C N -;:; _ <I) ~ )( U'l cd C _ 0 ~ ~ -;:; cd _ ooJ ::1 -;:; C -;;J ;;;::: _ cd 0
-0. vv~ NNO\~~ ~oo~~~.-oo~~~ _~_~~_oJ_~
~~~ ~~~Z~~~~~~~~U~~~~UUv~V~~VNVdO~U
oo~~-~oooO\~o~~~g~~:<I)~~v~g~~~;g;~~~~
~o ~V~~ VM::1V~~~O~~~uV~~M~-~~~MVaV~V
v~O~M~~~~ O~~~~~~~~>~~V~V~VV~vO~VMV
_ MMN NN~N MV 0\ ~- -v v -v v~-N
- gp 0
~ ;.a --a
~ ~ ~S -5 ....l
o ~ 0 e o~ 5 ]
u U'l ~ 'it .g ~ ~ 8 Z~ (/) ::s
~ ~ <I) ~ .~ ~ <I) ~ ~ ""d ~ .:.c .:.c "'8 ~ "'8 <I) ~
z a~-g:a ~~><I)::E~"€ ~~.!"O g&l.o..~,!a~ogo g~'O -0
~U~ uo~--a"OOo.:.c 0"0<1)0 Od--.-~~~~?O
3~~t~uuo=oa~Z~3~~~~~~d=g~~~....J::1~-~~ ~~
~ ~o -~<I)_~_~Ooo~~_._~oo"O-o~OO<l) ~ ~
~ ~ U'l .0 'gh ~ ~ ~ B "'8 11) ::0 c. ~,.:=; s :a ..g 0 0 ~ ~ ~ .i: "0 C to "0 ~ "0 t.:;::::: -c:: oS 0 -0
e~eEj"O~o~o=c::=0~~oc~~eb~>.a~::1~B~5t~cdl1) c
._ ~ 0.- 11) 0 ~ ~ ~ cj ::1 ::s.5 -= 0 '<::" td 0 0 _._ ::1'- ~ ~ 0 -cd "<:" ~ """ ca 0 ~ ~ ~ >- ~ ~
CIl~.....E- uuo;>;>>....lE-""O.....~....lZ~~u~<<:""~~O~""~::r:Q~E- :a~ :ala
& &l.o ~&l.o ~~
-- -.... ~ ~.q .€ -g ~ ~
tI) Cd~ o::Jo
'/ ~ Z ::Ezzz Z ::E z zz ;;'; O:O:Z ::E::E ::E::E::E "":a""-5"ili5"
"" ~zzz::E~~~~::E~Z~z~z~~::Euzuu~z::E~z~::E::E~~::E~ ~~,,"iB~~
~ 0 0 0 ~ .- ~ g, ~
~~ O_NM_~~~~~O_NM~~~~~O\O_NMV~ ~~~.5'G~]
&l.o _NMV~~~~~__________NNNNNNNNNNMMMMMM <....J~~Z~~
&l.o &l.o I I ';::l ,
UU....l::Ez~~
c~z;;:::t""nn
I I I "'1;j '"C
C"'Z;;:::Ct""> '" '" '" ~ ~ ~ ~ '" '" '" '" '" '" ... ... ... ... ... ...... ... ... ... w w w w en'" I
5. ~ ~. S' ~ n n '" - 0'" 00 ...., '" '" ... w "'- 0'" 00 ...., '" '" ... W '" - 0'" 00 ...., '" "'. e;
n"O~.....~OO n ,.,.
~ g 0'" "tl 3 a cc cn ;;:::z nz zn ;;:::z ;;:::z ;;:::~ z~ zz zz zz ;;:::;;::: ;;::: '"
0' ;' s: ~ '"tl a 3 '" '" '" e;
"0 - ::r :-; e; c c t"" t"" r. en ,.,.
n c:: 0 :::0\ :;, ::J c: ...,
o.~8. q"Q' t"" '" '<
"'tI"'tI ""d""'O' "0
n
e; e; ;;; e; t""n 0::;: ~ m n..., en..., ~Q :r: ~O :r: - en ::;:;<l Z ;<l tIl Z;<l 1;' Cl n Q
,.,.,.,. :i,"" g a ., 0 "" :r _. :r" s; s; w:r _. n 0 n C o " <l <l
':To 0. n n 3 ., "I 0.0 0. 0 00" - 0. S- o. " S-~ ~ n
n 0.0 0 ~ ~rf 0." o " 0. 0.0 0. - 0. ~~ ,.,. n " S- E-
o: ~ ,.,. _. 0. o n " " ,.,. " :ro 0 "
n n " - "" :Ii " ;; n " " " " >:Ii ~ '"
., 0. :Ii g ~ 0. S;<l nO. in' 8- ::;: ~ ~~ ~ > o' s;
"0 t"" ",0. ~ .." :r", ~ <l n n "" c- o ~ n :Ii ""
S' 0" " _. a e; t"" n <l <l t"" ;;: g g '" 0 :5.::;: ;;: "
~ e; m "" o' X' m Z
"" i!< n" ~,.,. n " ~ " ~ 0. ~ n
0: ~ ,.,. ~ ~ ~ 3
i!< n ,.,.",- o' o 0: " '" ,.,. ""n ,.,. ~ n a
i!< ~ 3 '" m ~ e; en mtIl Z "'::;: ::;: ::;: m:<\
en " ~ "
'" n " 3 e; ~ ,.,. 0 III 0 0 e; " " n ~ ~
~ :r ~ Z S. S- "'- "'- S'
0 0 g ,.,. '" - i!< ,.,.:<\ '" ""
~ Q. S- ~ ~ t"" ...,'" ~
." g l? e;
'" e; 0. S,.,.
e; ,.,. S' --
;;lO en "'" > :;:::; tIl- ",m :r: "'''' '" "'tIl w _ '" w
C " C w "'Ill s; '" '" '" "'c ...., w ...., ... ... :;~ :;;: :;;: '" '"
- ~ s: 0. "'''' " '" '" ... 0 0" - '" '" 0 0 00 0 :;;: '"
., -. '" 00 ,.,.w 00 _ 0. _ 0 0 "',.,. '" "" ... '" w '" '" '"
-"" 0 0
"" "'0 n '" tIlO " -tIl tIl _" tIl'" - '" '" '" 00 ....,
en "'.. ~ ~ '" c ..... " ~~ en
'< >- -tIl " :r: n Wc c c tIl ... Z n -<:;<l ;<l I ... 0
"'- :r: ~ e; t""o "'" " " - 0 00' ~ ~~ [;l '" C
n 0. ~"O ~g ;;: s-~ "'" ,.,.c S- " 5'
3 g. 00' g. c' ,,~ ~ " n :r " 0.
t: ~ n >~ > " ~ c- t"" n g " n
n 2. :r >3 "'" t""" ::;. n ~ 0 t"" >
~~ ~" ~ "" t"" t"" "" ;<l ? " ~ en en 0. ? 0 0.
o ~ en ~ ~ Z~ " . 0. ., 0. "" ~~ 0
~a " i<>Z " ~ ,.,. Z. ","en Z " Z Z ~ Z " ~
:r n ::;:i<> " ,. ::;: 0 ::;: n
0 m::;: ~O i<> ::;:~ ~ ~Z ::;: ::;: n ~
:;;. Q. Cl ~ Z <l ~
n ~ . " - Z::;: ::;:
..., 0 n
"" n ... Z Z 0: Z ,.,.
" 0 0 S- ::;: ::;: ~ ::;: ::;: ~
" ..... 0
~ Cl " ~
W Q. Q
0 0.
::R 0. en
r- f- <:.. n n
'" W >~
'" '" - " ~.
'" 0 '" ...., 0"'" !-' ...., ...., 0 '" !-' 00 '" W ...,'" !-' !-' '" 0'" ~
n
00 '" '-' '" '" c,.,o 00 '" '-' '" w :..., '-' '" w w v. '" a..~ 00 '" '-' a..N ~ S"
'" ... '" 0 ...., o 00 W '" 0 '" '" '" '" 0 ... '" ...., ... W ...., ... '" '" '" - "" ..., (j
1- "' ::J
...
>"" ~ ><:
~ a "'l 0
"'
~ ;;: C. "'l.
~ >
>..., ;;. 2
'" W '" 0
'" '" !:l 0
'" 0 '" ...., 0 ...., '" ...., ...., 0 '" !-' 00 '" W W '" !-' !-' '" 0'" [ (j 0
00 '" '-' '" '" '" '" 00 '" '-' '" w :..., '-' '" w w v. '" '" :". '" '-' a..t..J n
00 ~ ::r -<
'" ... '" 0 ...., 0 00 W '" 0 '" '" '" '" 0 ... '" ...., ... W ...., ... '" '" '" -
1- "' t"'l
...
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ~ :;::l
<
'" '" '" '" '" W '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" W >E!-
" c
...., ...., ...., ...., ...., ...., ...., ...., ...., '" ...., ...., ...., ...., ...., .00 ...., ...., ...., ...., ...., ...., ...., ...., ...., ...., ...., ~ "
..... ..... ..... ..... ..... '\0 ..... ..... ..... '\0 ..... ..... .", ..... ..... ..... .", ..... '" ..... '" ..... ..... '" 'V. '\0 n ."
0 0 0 0 0 '" 0 0 0 '" 0 0 0 0 0 :;; 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ow ~
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0'"
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ... ""
t""
"
'" '" "
0.
a- .", 00 ... '" - ... .", - - -... '" '" '" W - - '" -<
'00 '00 '" - '" 0 W '" '" W - - '" '" '" ...., '" '00 '" ... - 0 '" '" '" '00 ...., W 00
'00 ... '" '" ... 00 '" .00 '00 0 '" ... ...., '" 0 0 '00 '00 ... W 0 .... ...., ..., .,
.... -... 00 '\0 '" '" '" a- ....., .0 a- ....., :.. 'W 'W '" '"0 'W '" '"0 'W ....., ....., 'W '\0 WOO C
'" '" 0 '" 0 '" 0 00 '" '" 0 '" 0 0 '" ...., 0 0 '" '" '" 0 '" ...., 0 '" ...., ...., W "
'" '" 0 0 0 ~ 0 '" ~ 0 0 ~ 0 0 '" '" 0 0 '" 0 ~ 0 '" '" 0 0 '" '" ~
"" W ... "" "" "" "" "" ... "" "" "" ... "" ... "" "" "" ... "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""
0 ~
;t. a::~~
'" ...
.", 'W W '" '" ;;:: o ..... -
Vl ~ C
'" W '" 0 '" ...., '" ...., '" - '" '" '00 W ... '" ... '" '" N S' ~
'00 0 '" ...., ... ...., ... "'0 ... ...., '00 ...., 00 '" '" W 0 w",
'" '" '\0 , , , .... ....., '\0 .", '00 , ....., a- u, "LJ"- , U, , .... , 00 '" .00 ....., v,w , o(JQ >-;
...., ;; '00 '" ... '00 '00 ...., '" ...., ...., '" '" '00 '" ...., W ...., W '00 '" 0
..., 0 0 ...., ...., ...., '" '" '" '" W _ 0 ...., ... '00 0 ... W "'- b
-
"" W "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ... "" "" "" '" "" "" "" "" ... ... ... "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "'<
0
::R e; E!-
o ","c
0 _00 - "" "
u, :.. '" :;;: - - - "'- ., 0
" .....
...., W 0'00 '00 '" 0 '" '" - 00 W '00 '" ... '00 '" ...., ...., ...., 0 - ...., '" ...'" =':"Tj
0 0 00 00 '" '" '" 00 ...., 0 "'00 '" 00 W _ 00 '" '" 00 ...., ... - 00 - ...., ;::;: c
'"0 .00 "0'"0 '" '"0 :.. '"0 '" '"0 '"0 ':...J':...J '"0 '" ..... au.. , '"0 .0 '" '" ....., '"0 '"0 '"0 "0 V. o' e-
o.. ;;:: 00 0 0 '" 0 0 0 0 '" '" 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 '" '" 0 0 0 00 ~ ~
- 00 0 0 '" 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 n
"" "" """" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ... "" "" ""
n...,
W W o 0 >.
'" !'" '" ~[
.00 ~ '" ;:! - '" ... '" .... :: - '" '" ...., ;;:: 00 W '" '" '" '" '" '"
'00 '" 0- ... '" '" ...., '" '00 W '00 ...., ... '00 00 ... 00 00 ...., ...., '00 0 ... 000 ., '" I
0 '" 0'" 00 0 ... 00 ...., W ...., ...., ...., '" ... '" .... '" 0 W ...., 00 0 .00 '00 00 W _ ~~
....., -... '0\0 'W '\0 '\0 '\0 ....., a- '"0 00 00 a- .... .", 'W a- '"0 '\0 '" .... 00 .00 ....., a- ....., ':....1't...l
'00 00 0'00 0 '" '" ... - W '" '00 '" '" '" ...., '00 '00 '" 0 '" '" 00 0 '" '" ...., 00 '" '" W
'" ...., 00 0 0 '" '" ...., W '" '" '" '" '" '" 00 '" 0 0 '" 0 '00 0 ... '" ... W ...., '" '"
1