The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSP May 27, 2003 CITY OF ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N. W. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755-5100 FAX (763) 755-8923. WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US Special City Council Workshop Miscellaneous City Business Items Tuesday, May 27,2003 - 7:00 p.m. Conference Room A & B 1. Call to Order 2. Adopt Agenda 3. Consider Acquisition Arrangement ofSlyzuk Property for Public Works Expansion 4. Consider Ordinance Change to Parking Stall Standards for Institutionally Zoned Property 5. Consider Property Acquisition/I 949 Crosstown Boulevard NW 6. Receive Harstad Companies Response on Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Report Cost Allocation I 7. Discuss 2004 Council Budget Priorities and Approve 2004 Budget Guidelines 8. Capital Campaign Contract Schedule - Saterbak Correspondence 9. Team Building Proposal- The Brimeyer Group 10.Timber River Estates Storm Water System - Verbal Update II.Other Business I2.Adjournment (}) '\ 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD NW. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755-5100 / FAX (763) 755-8923 . WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: John F. Erar, City Administrator SUBJECT: Consider Acquisition Proposal for Slyzuk Property DATE: May 27, 2003 INTRODUCTION Staff has been negotiating acquisition terms and conditions of purchase for property owned by Mr. Slyzuk for the Public Works expansion. Discussions have also included the City's interest in the remaining property owned by Mr. Slyzuk of approximately 14.78 acres. Council may recall that staff was authorized to bring forward an action of eminent domain if an agreement could not be reached with the property owner within certain property appraisal parameters. The proposed acquisition agreement reached with the property owner is reflective of the updated market appraisal completed on March 25, 2003 (attached market appraisal information). J DISCUSSION An updated property appraisal was ordered by the City in response to a request by Mr. Slyzuk to include a recent sale of property on the west side of Nightingale Street to a private developer. Property transaction records indicated that the sale of this comparable property reflected a market price of approximately $50,000 per acre for this land. The appraiser, Mr. Darrell Koehlinger, Senior Vice President of Shenehon Company, felt it was appropriate to include this most recent sale in the updated market appraisal despite the fact that this property is not restricted by the agricultural preserve program. (Council may recall that the Slyzuk property is in the agricultural preserve program, which would require the City to seek an "ag preserve" exemption for public purposes.) In addition, the appraiser has indicated that a 6% price escalator is an appropriate annual market increase factor given rising property values in the Anoka County area. Accordingly, in light of this recent sales transaction, the updated appraisal report indicates that the property of interest to the City has an appraised valuation of $49,350 per acre using a sales comparison methodology. In discussions with the property owner, staff has negotiated a property acquisition schedule calling for the following terms: 1. The City agrees to purchase 15 acres of land in two separate phases; a. Phase One: City would purchase 8 acres at $50,000 per acre by December 31, 2003. If the City does not purchase this property by this date, a 6% J price escalator would be added to the cost of each acre per year beginning January 1,2004 and prorated according to the month of purchase. , b. Phase Two: As the property owner wants to continue to fann the / remaining 7 acres, the City would option the remaining property providing the City with certain legal rights to purchase the remaining 7 acres at a base price of $50,000 per acre with a 6% price escalator per year until 2008. If the City exercises the Option agreement prior to 2008, the City would still pay the 2008 price of $66,911 per acre (see Property Acquisition Schedule). i. The City also agrees to pay $20,000 for the Option on the remaining seven (7) acres at a cost of $2,857.14 per acre. li. The property owner would be allowed to fann any purchased property unneeded by the City after purchase for $1.00 per year at the City's discretion. 2. The property owner agrees to provide the City with a written Right of First Refusal on the remaining 14 +/- acres at a base (2003) rate of $50,000 per acre with a 6% escalator (see Property Acquisition Schedule). a. The City would agree to pay the property owner $20,000 for the written Right of First Refusal. b. This land would not be available for purchase until 2013. c. The remaining private residence (.78 acres) would also be covered under the Right of First Refusal, with the exception that this property would not be subject to the 6% escalator or the base rate of $50,000 per acre. It would be purchased separately using a professional market appraisal at the time of sale. J 3. The City agrees to work with the property owner to structure a purchase agreement to minimize property owner tax liabilities within the legal limits of the internal revenue service code and any applicable federal or state laws. BUDGET IMP ACT Funding for the acquisition would be appropriated from special revenue funds as recommended by the City Finance Director. ACTION REOUIRED Consider the property acquisition proposal as presented. The property owner has indicated that this acquisition proposal is valid until June 1,2003. Respectfully submitted, --it~ John Erar .city Administrator Cc: Mr. Ken Slyzuk, 15211 Nightingale St, 55304 / '" '" )> "'O~"'OYJ""'C.y}lJJ 00 :J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o :J '" '" c: )>"')>"')>'"CD . . !!!. . , QOOOOO'"O '0 m CD a CD a CD a ~' 0" lJI ~8"'08"'OgCD " - g t:!: 0' cr ~. ::!. g :J Oi CD o 0 )> Q CD CD -o:? 0 iil ::l'l:r ~ Dl go ... .... "'CD 0'- ." ." ." ~ iii iil :J 3 ~ .... '" ... 01 0 0'1 <.n CJ'l 0 Dl 0 000000 ::i' .., bbbobb~ :r ro '" <0 3 ~ 88g8g8~ ~Dl 0 .::a. :i' ." ." ." m 5" Q<o CD .... .... '" ... lJI Dl O1J:lo.01-....101I"V Q (.rJrv(.rJ......(;.)~ CD '" oooooo~ lJI "#- 88gggg~ ." ." ." .... '" ... O1CD01U)01"J::.. 0> 0>0>(..)0) tD '" ~~~~~tg "'\J ~ oaoaaoOl 0 ::0 ." ." 0 "'\J '" ... m O1VJ<.n...... CD (.0,) ID (J) ::0 1.n:.....bt'Cn '" -l '" 01......0101 a ~ ..................0) a -< 0 '" ~:r> ." ." -<() '" ... "'~o / <J>cocn.::a. 7"^C www...... ;;:-0- ""....a.:.....:..a.bJ '" ~;JJen '" I\)(")Nc) a ~ .::a..c::...::a......,. a ' 0- 0 .... o,,-l "'m- ." ." ;JJO :<2 <D ... en o>wm(J) cnCJ)Q)m .. () <0:"'" Co 'W 0 :::c '" ...... 01 - ....... 0 "#- ......CD-CO co m . ." 0 C <D r .... <D m a'" (oID '" '" "'''' a ~ '" '" a 0 <D ." ~ 0 .... '" "'''' :..a.<.n '" '" "'... ~ ~ "'~ a 0 ." ~ ~ ....~ <D '" mm '" '" <D <D ~ ~ "'... ~ 0 ." ~ ~ '" '" ...'" ~Cn '" '" .... '" a ~ ...'" '" 0 ." ... N co '" .. CQW ~~ 0 '" ... w ~ .. w . 0 . mGHEST AND BEST USE The highest and best use of the subject real estate as it will be regarded in this report will conform to the following defInition found on Page 305 of The Appraisal of Real Estate, 12th Edition: Highest and best use is the reasonably probable and legal use of vacant land or an improved property, whiCh is physically possible, legally permissible, appropriately supported, fInancially feasible,and that results in the highest value. Highest and Best Use of the Land as Though Vacant Land is generally appraised as though vacant and available for development to its highest and best use. If an appraiser's estimate of the value of the land as though vacant is based on a particular highest and best use, the report should clearly state this fact and specify that the value estimate does not apply unless the future property use is in accordance with the program proposed.. If, for some reason, the property cannot be adapted to its highest and best use, the report should indicate this fact and identify the use that underlies the appraiser's value estimate. The character and amount of data presented and analyzed in this section are dictated by the purpose of the appraisal. Physically, the site is a slightly rolling, rectangular shaped tract with approximately 15.00 acres situated near the northeast comer of Crosstown Boulevard and Nightingale Street Northwest in Andover. The property is situated in a developing area, although there are some older rural / residential uses in nearby neighborhood. The properties to the immediate east are generally municipal and educational in nature, while a newer single-family residential subdivision is found to the north. The subject property is part of a larger 29-acre parcel and is legally accessed through this western parcel. It is assumed that the entire site is free of contamination and that soil conditions are stable. Sewer and water is not currently available to the property. The site does not appear to have been used for any recent purpose, as the southern half is wooded and the northern half is relatively grassy. The site is approximately 600 feet east of Nightingale Street and 300 feet north of Crosstown Boulevard. Legally, the property is zoned under the R-l, Single Family Rural District. The R-l district is intended "to provide a residential atmosphere for those persons desiring to retain a large parcel of land". Among other objectives, the district is "intended to preserve productive land for agricultural use. Permitted R-l uses include agricultural uses, any site which has more than fIve non-domestic animals per acre shall require a special use permit, and single-family residential structures. A variety of permitted accessory and special uses are also allowed. The site is intended for agricultural use according to the City of Andover Future Land Use Plan and the area is not slated for sewer expansion until 2005-2010. The site is currently part of the Agricultural Preserve, which prohibits its use for other than agricultural purposes until March 10, 2010. Legally, these restrictions effectively prohibit its use for development for another seven years. J 03061.wpd Shenehon Company 39 Hi2hest and Best Use - Continued , \ Highest and Best Use of the Land as Though Vacant - Continued Economically, the legal prohibitions against development of the land for uses other than agricultural purposes effectively precludes any imminent development of the land. However, the growth of the city in nearby areas in a general northerly and westerly direction ensures that by 2010, when the subject land is no longer in the Agricultural Preserve program and that nearby development should entirely surround the land, its value as a developable parcel should be greatly enhanced. We believe that the city's current designation of the land as "Agricultural" as indicated in their Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use will be less likely to remain as such by 2010 when the parcel is more fully surrounded by typical suburban development. Accordingly, normal growth rates should indicate that a speculative ownership of the land until 2010 when development of the land is more probable is the highest and best use of the subject land. In summary, it is our opinion that the highest and best use of the site is for a seven-year hold of the property until development of the parcel is more legally and economically probable. Its current unimproved use is an interim highest and best use. The reasons for our opinion are as follows: 1. Development patterns within the city of Andover. '\ 2. Suitability of the shape, topography, and location of the site. / 3. The current legal restrictions against immediate development of the land, including its inclusion in the Agricultural Preserve, the city's future land use, the anticipated timeline of the municipal sewer expansion, and current zoning. \ 03061.wpd Shenehon Company 40 INTRODUCTION TO VALUATION I The valuation process contains many facets. A wide variety of data, including the previously discussed Area Description, Property Description and Highest and Best Use analysis, is compiled and utilized to value the property based upon three methods of valuation which are referred to as "approaches". These approaches to value are briefly described as follows: Cost Approach In the cost approach, an estimated reproduction or replacement cost of the. building and land improvements as of the date of valuation is developed together with an estimate of the losses in value that have taken place due to wear and tear, design and plan, or neighborhood influences. To the depreciated building cost estimate, the estimated value of the land is added. The total represents the value indicated by the cost approach. Sales Comparison Approach In the sales comparison approach, the subject property is compared to similar properties that have been sold or for which listing prices or offering figures are known. Data for generally comparable properties is used, and comparisons are made to demonstrate a probable price at which the subject property would be sold if offered on the market. Income Capitalization Approach In the income capitalization approach, the rental income to the property is shown with deductions for vacancy and collection loss and expenses. The prospective net operating income of the property is estimated. To support this estimate, operating statements for previous years and comparable properties may be reviewed, along with available operating cost estimates. An applicable capitalization method and appropriate capitalization rates are developed and used in computations that lead to an indication of value. I 03061.wpd Shenehon Company 41 Introduction to Valuation - Continued , , Inherent within the previous three approaches to value are some basic appraisal principles, which include anticipation, balance, change, externalities, substitution, and also supply and demand. These principles are briefly described below. (These definitions are derived from The Appraisal of Real Estate, 12th Edition, pages 34-43.) - Anticioation: The perception that value is created by the expectation of benefits to be derived in the future. - Balance: The principle that real property value is created and sustained when contrasting, opposing, or interacting elements are in a state of equilibrium. - Change: The result of the cause and effect relationship among the forces that influence real property value. - Externalities: The principle that economies outside a property have a positive effect on its value while diseconomies outside a property have a negative effect upon its value. - Substitution: The appraisal principle that states that when several similar or corrunensurate commodities, goods, or services are available, the one with the lowest price will attract the greatest demand and widest distribution. This is the primary principle upon which the cost and sales comparison approaches are based. " - Suoolv and Demand: In economic theory, the principle that states that the price of a ) commodity, good, or service varies directly, but not necessarily proportionately, with demand, and inversely, but not necessarily proportionately, with supply. In a real estate appraisal context, the principle of supply and demand states that the price of real property varies directly, but not necessarily proportionately, with demand and inversely, but not necessarily proportionately, with supply. Summary An appraisal is composed of a number of integrated, interrelated, and inseparable procedures that have a common objective -- a condensed, reliable estimate of value. Although the three approaches are seldom completely independent, it is important to note that in certain cases, greater emphasis is placed on a particular approach. The reasons for this are as varied as the properties themselves, and each appraisal must be addressed individually. In this case, the subject property is a parcel of unimproved land located in Andover, Minnesota. As discussed in the previous area, community and neighborhood descriptions, the area surrounding the subject property is well developed and exhibits a stable economic base. After reviewing the available information within our office, and having various discussions with other real estate experts, we have completed a sales comparison approach to value in our analysis of the subject property. The comparable information and our fmdings are further detailed and reconciled in the following sections. / ." 03061.wpd Shenehon Company 42 SALES COMPARISON APPROACH TO VALUE The sales comparison approach to value is defmed as: A set of procedures in which a value indication is derived by comparing the property being appraised to similar properties that have been sold recently, then applying appropriate units of comparison and making adjustments to the sale prices of the comparables based on the elements of comparison. The sales comparison approach may be used to value improved properties, vacant land, or land being considered as though vacant; it is the most common and preferred method of land valuation when an adequate supply of comparable sales are available. (The Dictionarv of Real Estate Aooraisal, Fourth Edition, Page 255.) The major premise within this approach is that the market value of the subject property is directly related to the prices of comparable, competitive properties. Furthermore, this valuation method not only assumes that both buyer and seller are fully informed about the property, but also that both have general knowledge of the market for that type of property and that the property has been exposed in the open market for a reasonable time. Based upon the previously discussed highest and best use analysis of the subject property, comparable property sales with similar highest and best uses were gathered and analyzed from the northwest suburban area. We believe these comparable sales best represent the subject property with respect to intended use, location, size, and other major characteristics. The comparable market data which is submitted in this report, in our opinion, suggests that the best unit of comparison for the subject real estate should be sale price per acre of land area. The application of this unit of comparison produces an estimate of value for a property by comparing it with similar properties of the same type which have sold recently in the same or competing areas. The analytical processes utilized in determining the degree of comparability between two properties involves judgment as to their similarity with respect to many value factors such as location, date of sale, physical characteristics, and terms of sale. The sale price of those properties deemed most comparable tends to set the value range for the subject property. Further consideration of the comparative data indicates a figure representing the value of the subject property, that is, the probable price at which it could be sold by a willing seller to a willing buyer as of the date of the appraisal. The data involved in the application of this process concerns these comparable properties as well as the subject property, and this data will vary with the type of property. Four categories of data, however, are basic and apply regardless of the type of property. They are: 1. Sale prices of comparable properties. 2. Conditions influencing each sale. 3. Location of each property. 4. Description each comparable property. 03061. wpd Shenehon Company 43 Sales Comoarison Approach to Value - Continued '\ In the valuation of land, one must consider that the supply of land is relatively stable. In addition, land has value because it has a specific use and is in demand. Appraisal principles which are inherent in the valuation of land and land value include anticipation, supply and demand, substitution, and balance. These principles basically indicate that a prudent investor when pUrchasing a site considers not only the site itself, but also the existing market, competition and potential uses for the future. There are six different methods for the appraiser to analyze the value of a site, including sales comparison, allocation, extraction, subdivision development, land residual, and ground rent capitalization. Depending upon the type of land to be appraised and the existing market conditions, one or more of these methods may be applicable for the valuation process. For this appraisal, we have utilized the sales comparison method, which is dermed as follows: Sales of similar, vacant parcels are analyzed, compared, and adjusted to provide a value indication for the land being appraised. Typically, the most reliable way to estimate land value is by sales comparison. However, when few sales are available, or when the value indications produced through sales comparison need substantiation, other procedures may be used to value land. , , / , , 03061.wpd Shenehon Company 44 Sales ComDarison ADproach to Value - Continued We have conducted a survey of land sales which are comparable to the subject property and, as a result, have formed an opinion of market value for the site. In our opinion, the market value for the subject land is estimated to be $670,000, which equals about $44,666 per acre of total land area of approXimately 15 acres or 653,400 square feet. This market value estimate includes the cost of legal and physical access to the land. This land value estimate assumes that a potential buyer would incur the cost of all levied and pending special assessments against the subject land following the date of valuation. Comparable real estate transactions which were useful in estimating this land value are individually described below. Details on these sales are provided in the Addenda of this report. . COMPARABLE LAND SALES FACT CHART' Sale Sale Intended Sale Area Price! No. Location Use Date (Acres) Acre 1. Near SWC of 1615t Street and SFR 1/01 29.10 $29,553 Burlington Northern Railroad Andover, MN 2. 14722 Crosstown Boulevard NW SFR 9/00 50.65 $37,162 Andover, MN 3. 16034 - 161st Street SFR 2/03 35.76 $23,154 Andover, MN Pending 4. Various Parcels Between Nightingale SFR Unexecuted 270.00 $39,588 Street and Round Lake Boulevard Purchase Andover, MN Agreement 5. North of 151st Avenue, West of SFR 5/02 41.55 $50,000 Nightingale Street MN These sales have been adjusted for items of difference, including variances for time of sale, size, access/traffic exposure, general location, etc. A description of the adjustments made to the comparable sales and a chart demonstrating our analysis in the adjustment process are provided on the following pages. 03061.wpd Shenehon Company 45 Sales Comparison Aooroach to Value - Continued Adiustments / 1. Real Property Rights Conveved - Fee simple estate was conveyed in each of the comparable sales, therefore no adjustments were necessary under this category. 2. Financing - is considered within the adjustment process in order to reflect only the value of the real estate, and not the value of any favorable/unfavorable financing which is not directly related to the value of the real estate itself. 3. Conditions of Sale - Various types of extenuating circumstances such as buyer and seller relationships, motivations or opinions at the time of sale may impacted a sale price. Sale #2 was conducted during the condemnation process and was adjusted downwards. Sale #4 is an unexecuted purchase agreement and we have adjusted this sale downward to reflect potential problems or delays in closing the sale. The two other sales were felt to represent arms length transactions and no adjustments were necessary. ~ 4. Time - is included within the adjustment process for the purposes of considering any changes within the market (either positive, negative or stable) due to the passage of time, and differences in buyers'/sellers' attitudes toward the real estate market, in general. We have utilized a rate of 6 % per year to reflect the steady development in Andover. 5. Location - This adjustment reflects differences between the locations of the comparable sales , and the subject site. Factors which were considered include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Ease of access to the site, types of traffic patterns within the area, visibility/identity and proximity to major thoroughfares, surrounding land uses, and similar characteristics and comparability to the subject neighborhood. Sales #1 and #3 were thought to have inferior locations and not as close to all of the municipal and school buildings recently constructed. Consequently, we adjusted these two sales upward, and made no adjustments to Sales #2, #4, and #5. 4. Zoning: - Potential land uses and performance requirements are often dictated by local zoning codes and are legal limitations on development opportunities. We have compared the zoning of the comparable sales to that of the subject property. Each of the comparable sales has either B-P or 1-2 zoning. The subject property 1-2 zoning is less restrictive in allowing industrial type uses than the B-P zoning. We have adjusted the B-P sales downward for their more restrictive uses. 5. Size - This adjustment accounts for the general tendency of larger parcels to sell for a lower unit price than smaller parcels. Normally, there is an inverse relationship between unit value and size. However, this relationship is most often observed in suburban and outlying land parcels. Inner city land parcels are less susceptible to displaying this relationship, depending on type of property and location. Since all of the land sales, as well as the subject parcel, are located within suburban areas, we have made adjustments for size. All of / , the comparable sales, particularly Sale #4, were adjusted upward for reasons of size. 03061.wpd Shenehon Company 46 .. Sales Comoarison Aooroach to Value - Continued / Adjustments - Continued 6. Shape - This adjustment accounts for the general tendency for irregular-shaped parcels to sell for a lower unit price than rectangular parcels. The market tends to prefer rectangular parcels because they offer maximum development potential for the placement of improvements. No adjustments were considered necessary to any of the comparable sales. 7. Topographv/Soils - adjusts for differences between the topography of the subject site in comparison to the comparable sales. Large fluctuations in terrain and heavily-wooded sites can pose challenges for planning and placement of potential improvements and require more extensive site preparation. Sale #3 was adjusted upward for what appeared to be slightly more wetlands than normal. Sale #4 was adjusted downward for the uncertainty regarding the amount of developable land since no wetlands studies had been completed on the property . 8. Utilities - Availability of common utilities such as water, sewer, electricity, natural gas, and communications cable impacts the price a buyer will pay for land. Parcels lacking one of these services will typically be discounted to compensate for attaining the service or a suitable replacement. Sales #1, #2, and #5 have utilities available to the site and were adjusted downwards. No adjustments were felt necessary for the other two sales. " ~ 9. Other - This adjustment reflects any other factors which the appraiser believes may influence value. The subject parcel is in the Agricultural Preserve program for another seven years. ~ Accordingly, while land values may increase at a 6 % annual appreciation rate, this gain will be mitigated by holding a minimum rate of return requirement. Accordingly, if the required rate of return is 7 % annually, the present value of land increasing at 6 % for seven years is 0.623 times 1.504 or 0.937. Accordingly, we have deducted 6% from Sales #1, #2, #3, and #5 for the fact that the subject land is in the Agricultural Preserve program. We have deducted a lesser amount for Sale #4 because some of that land is also subject to the same program. 03061.wpd Shenehon Company 47 ~73RO LF. II~I ~(- - "--- ... Lau , ;~~ DLANW ./ '-' 1- . ~~~A~ 1I~~72toAv", ~ ~ - -; ....n./ 17JRDA~ ~W r;ii ~mRD!i;! AVE NE ! \ ~ (59,UI! 3E '\.1w ~ CD <<ANDOVER c ~t;J<~'\'l."'~~ "E In 15 17r t" In g. ~3E v~' \)-:~ ~'" g lFWltlGODR I: ,ill" ~l~tm! a:. 8 Z Leeman ~ ""'~ <. v.'<- ffi ,UEAllOWLA, " all "ii~ I- go, CI) :\'p~ N"'" 3MAPlETOHDR ill i69THLANW ~ .~NW ~ ~ 55304 tzm;H:rNWI~6'S>M-=~ \1\),j ~ ~ !~M l! ;;:: ~ n -''11 .'/1 VE ...6lIEIE.!!E.ii. 7EllGEWOODDR " , J~ il'il~ ~ :3 gi:: )ft "/11 ~~''A:.'" ~.. - In ~I~ '" w:ill!;; 18 A~I4"* .:r.:l . ! ~ I,~ ti; 161111 AVE NW 167TH VE tiW >0;; .~~ . ..; 167TH LA~E ~ 166Ttl,LANE . tJ) N ~ :J ~- ;z ce.3 ~~~z S~ IS6THA 6'rnIAVENW I~~VENW ~, ~. -"1~!;; ~iCl;>: ~ I ANDOVER J Cl 16500 ~ ol~ ~ ~ENE ~ >- . i'i'iZ a: ~ . ~ 8 ~ en .:!tJ) U ' ~!;; 0 ::: ~ ~tJ)!Ii ~ g 59 553041 ~?5>~ [2 ~ Cc . ~ . ~ tJ) v.# ,8 ~ CONSTANCE BLVD~ ... . c.. !if~ / AVE lnCONSTANCE BLVD ~ ~Oj Rl./ ~ ~ ~ ~ I~ I '_ 161ST AVE 20 ---r..: CONSTANCE BLVD NW'~ c ... ... 1:;2 r' '" . - IU 'Iz?l ""'~ a: IV >- . Z z 16000 '0, ~. l!:l ~~59TH 'I~ ';>: !;; Ui~"118 \<:,~'\~~ 8 g;l" & :i 1571li~tm z Z l!!il i\ ,"7 ~ a: ~,,~"" ~ ""r,7T.1t LA~NW I~ ~ A-k~t; ~ ~~VEN~~~~ => ~ !i,~ ... ~ N~ 8THAVENW-u.u,,~ g.- --f--Lz ~~ - ~Iti (I) ~ 0 a: ;I ~ 15500 ::: ~56THAVt NW CD ~ ~ ..: @151111156T1: AVE NW J !;; 157TH AVE NE ~ul 155 LANW ~ z lsrniLArmln! ~ LAm ~AVENW S !lJ z _ (1j O''ib' A.~ WlssoriEE l: ,;:= ~ :: g o 1 z ((J)" @-' 1i: 155fFlAilENW~ i~.!j. ~!<t'" a: . ~ CWl'V1EV~~~7':>:~"O 1511l1LANW~' In ~ ~\~ ~.... WJ& it~ ~""'" . ,153RDLANW 12;. '53AO ;?>~~<;5..~ is ~ ~ '" <p:\? '54TH ~v" ~ W ~ I54TH A.~ ! ; z , .~v ~!Ii Z ~ a ' Nif-' i 109 I' ~ "'~ ~ ~ ~~ ~EN" '\ ;r=r= MAP. ~i!. ""'" LA ~"'~... ..... ' .o{J>' '" ~ ~''''; ,'>1.... SEE MAP 286~ :c: I 2 \S~~;::- ." )VER; lfsJi,<lil! ~ .e Q18 ANDOVliRt': m'''''' 'il~ ~I 15000 '?o 1<;/lTH' I W ~ ~ , 'i.iCKAY ~ 1Il AllEt;:;.... ~!iLEAI. !J~ ~:'!iT ~ ~'~ \'i ffi I=! W . 1.~1H 'Z~ve~ 148THLANW "';~.l:, ~.;i t;", \\ ~-<,. 5 ~ !i1. t5 . ~ . ~ 148TH A I" ~ '" W z i!i tJ) tJ) !! 0 ~ I ~ NW!i48~LA N ~~~. gj 14lTH lA MAl ~ l!1~ ~TIiLANE,. 91~ z_ :.. , ~I&1ll:I...~lt~I'~.....OJ:' t;~<:!,;>: . 'B ~!::;~ z ~ ~g ! i5304. '_. S7~!;>: ~tit;~.1 : !1""nAVElM'r 'Ilt-"--- ~~~ ~! z ,~ ill ~~~veNE '18TH;~~ i tIt;;lcfri:.H" ' _N~ tJ)tJ) lti.....--;:;w. . 14"nLANE -. _,_ _..~ , s ~ LANW :1"'" .~:.~ I 12'.)- Nw .,.I.46TRLAIW 46THLANE 00 145TJ AveMf~", () f ffil~ .'I~ " 11i;~ ~"t; ;.~,~ANDOVER c.-.145TH~LANE W ::t:ltlE. .,/J lEEK OR s~ ~I ',4.. J ~9O;"" >-- .... 'Q". U' !i! = ~ '<...'17 16'.. 52_. ~~:; ...,~~~ ~ i ..ANDOVER BLVD NW ~I ANOOVERIli> N :. Y "I), a:~ ~l, x LA ... 0 zl: I - -Iz '. l~~ IPARTRIDGESTNW -2 Iii ~I {:"l" ~ ~'" w3E . i:!!1; ! 'I;; ''''~=~~<l! ~;,u4~DLANW ClI~- t "'I;!d/;;;;;;;,;... . t;~",:;..!<" ~""-'- .;;!;.. 1421\10 '. ~ 0 ::; ~;:,j ".. ~ ~4NORWAYCT ' ~ AVEN ~. i~:f' :::: .,.~ CD 140THf !AJ"'~r~ ,-#. K"'lA"ll~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ I I.!Alll ~14~ ~. ~~'lI"" z~. __I~!L. 14000 ~~~!L~LANW \~~ ~~ ~ 41STlAN ~~(~ >:"'~~'~ g,,~ ~ ~ al" '~, 1lI~/~ = J ~)l.U~14011iLA E E .J.~ . ~>-~ ~ ~ ~"'''''.'' :._~ ~! ~ L\';~!l ,'-1 '" ~~~ n:;i\~ '!!f, ~ f": ~,(<.~. Mag,'emc O{JJ ~ <fI' 0 fit;i ~-!;'.;' ~1. ~ = '''''', rn.,f'I~Y" I ~~j~~~'r 1 \~v. ""~ Country . ~ 13mt in... 0 MIM ~ l~ "". 1 LA_: u~ Club ~:..~ ~l ~~A~NW 1'\J..347HLAI>NI 10'" ~6.j/"\...::r~' ")~ !~ .,_~,uo ~~ "I' n ~I 616) '-f~AllEJUJ",,"':" "),- ~~1'\116 1377H NW ".. ~~. ~ 387H1:'NE "-- ~.. BUNKER $ lAKE BLVD NW ~ I377HLAIInNW IOl; ~.~ 'O~. i<>1KE oBLVD l!i NW "'I 138THAV N ...... I.:::,.i!! '" ~ COM.t ~ ~ fl~ ~ 1 ~. "B..b,'W... g SO! I' BU,NIlli1 LAKE 15 W BLVD \N ~LA ... =1;;.. ~ -. ti. "l'i " ,.'.., f.l;. ll! ~: ~ z .. '!!~~ ,nt,CANWl3500:€:4L BLVD -MAti" . '13500"';.-~ . j \:4 ~ 8:. ffi~ ,.,,~ CO~ARABLELANDSALES~ ~ '\ 03061.wpd She""hon Company 48 Sales Comparison Aooroach to Value - Continued Adjustments - Continued ...... .... ... COMPARABLE LAND SALES ADJUSTMENT CHART ... . .... Sale #1 Sale #2 Sale #3 Sale #4 Sale #5 Sale Price Per Acre $29,553 $37,162 $23,154 $39,588 $50,000 Property Rights Conveyed Adjustment 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Adjusted Price per Acre $29.553 $37.162 $23,154 $39,588 $50,000 Financing Terms Adjustment 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Adjusted Price per Acre $29,553 $37,162 $23,154 $39,588 $50,000 Conditions of Sale Adjustment 0% -5% 0% -10% 0% Adjusted Price per Acre $29,553 $35,304 $23,154 $35,629 $50.000 Date of Sale Adjustment 11% 13% 0% 0% 5% Adjusted Price per Acre $32,804 $39,893 $23,154 $35,629 $52,500 Location and Physical Location 10% 0% 10% 0% 0% Zoning -5% 0% -5% 0% 0% Size 5% 5% 5% 10% 5% Shape 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Topography/Soils 0% 0% 10% -5% 0% Utilities -5% -5% 0% 0% -5% Other -6% -6% -6% -3% -6% Adjustment -1% -6% 14% 2% -6% Adiusted Price per Acre $32,476 $37.500 $26,396 $36,342 $49,350 Indicated Subject Value Acre $32,476 $37,500 $26,396 $36,342 $49,350 Indicated Acre Value Range $26,396 to $49,350 Indicated Mean Value Per Acre $36.413 03061.wpd Shenehon Company 49 Sales Comparison Approach to Value - Continued Adiustments - Continued Before adjustments for differences, the aforementioned sales indicate a range of $23,154 per acre to $50,000 per acre for the subject land. The wide range of prices represents the ""ide disparity in the marketplace, considering the developing nature of the nearby Andover market. When we look at these sales, the most relevant is the one transaction most closest, Sale #5, which was transacted in May 2002 and is located several hundred yards to the west across Nightingale Street. After adjustments, these sales indicate a range of $26,396 per acre to $49,350 per acre, with an average of $36,413 per acre. We are relying most directly on comparable sale #5, given its proximity and recency. After reconciling the adjustment process, it is the adjusted price of Sale #5 that best represents the market value of the subject. 15 acres @ $49,350/acre $740,250 This concluded market value must further be adjusted for the current lack of access to the subject's property, as its only legal access is from the property to the west. To make the concluded market value of the subject property truly comparable to the sales analyzed, we must make a further adjustment for both the cost of legal and physical access. According to the city engineering department, city roadways require approximately 33 feet of width and a physical cost of $83,41 per lineal foot ofroadway. The costs to measure the legal and physical access to the site are as follows for a 33-foot wide strip whose length is 588 feet from the property to the west: Legal Access: 588 lineal feet x 33 lineal feet = 19,404 square feet, or 0.4455 acre 0.4455 acre x $49,350/acre = $21,983 Physical Access: 588 lineal feet x $83,4l1lineal foot = $49,046 The cost of obtaining both legal and physical access to the subject property should be deducted from the indicated market value as follows: Indicated Value: $740,250 Less: Legal Access ($21,983) Physical Access ($49.046) Estimated Market Value via Sales Comparison Approach $669,221 Rounded to: $670,000* * This land value estimate assumes that a potential buyer would incur the cost of all levied and pending special assessments against the subject land following the date of valuation. It is our opinion that it would take approximately nine to 12 months to effect a sale of the subject property . 03061.wpd Shenehon Company 50 QUALIFICATIONS OF DARRELL KOEHLINGER BIOGRAPHICAL DATA AND EDUCATION Born in Rochester, New York. Graduated from Penfield Senior High School in suburban Rochester. Bachelor of Arts Bucknell University in Lewisburg, PelUlsylvania in History and Economics. Master of Science program University of Wisconsin - Madison in Real Estate and Investment Analysis Completed the following real estate appraisal courses offered by the Appraisal Institute: Real Estate Appraisal Principles Capitalization Theory B Basic Valuation Procedures Standards of Professional Practice Capitalization Theory A Case Studies in Real Estate Valuation Valuation Analysis & Report Writing Easement Valuation Advanced Income Capitalization Advanced Sales Comparison and Cost Approaches PROFESSIONAL OUALIFICATIONS OR ASSOCIATIONS MAl Candidate - The Appraisal Institute (MAl) University of Wisconsin Real Estate Alumni Association Certified General Real Property Appraiser Licensed Appraiser - State of Minnesota. License #4000652, Expires August 31, 2003 Licensed Appraiser - State of Wisconsin, License #1062-010. Expires December 31, 2003 Licensed Real Estate Salesperson - State of Minnesota. License #RA-20290732, Expires June 30, 2003 PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Shenehon Company. Minneapolis, Minnesota Senior Vice President - Director of Real Estate since September 2002; Shareholder Vice President - Director of Real Estate 1997-2002 Senior Appraiser since June 1992 American Appraisal Associates. Minneapolis, Minnesota Senior/Staff Appraiser from March 1988 to June 1992 Towle Real Estate. Minneapolis. Minnesota Senior Finance Analyst from March 1986 to January 1988 Duties and Responsibilities: Prepare professional valuations and market analysis of real estate and intangible property rights. / Appraisal assignments have involved numerous types of commercial, multiple family. industrial, and special purpose properties. These assignments have included highest and best use studies, mortgage financing, condemnation, tax abatement proceedings, feasibility analysis, investment counseling. potential sales and purchases, lease and rental analyses. bankruptcy proceedings. charitable donations, internal management decisions, special assessment appeals. allocation of purchase price, and insurance indemnification. Has testified before SEC. FBI and district court regarding valuation issues. AUTHOR/CO-AUTHOR OF: 'Business Relocation: Part One - An Overview of the Relevant Law", Valuation Viewpoint, Spring 2002 "The Analytical Foundation for Tax Increment Financing," Valuation Viewpoint, Summer 2000 "Fundamentals of Special Assessments in Appraisal," Valuation Viewpoint, Spring 1999 "Issues in Appraising High Prof1le Commercial Properties. " Valuation Viewpoint, Summer 1998 "A Perspective on Subdivision Appraisal." Valuation Viewpoint, Winter 1997 "How Residential Properties are Inspected by Adjacent Commercial Users." Valuation Viewpoint, Summer 1997 "Rates of Return: Direct Capitalization Versus Discounting - What's the Difference?" Valuation Viewpoint, Fall 1996 "Timing Can Be Everything - A Perspective on the Suburban Office Market." Valuation Viewpoint, Fall 1995 PARTIAL CLIENf LIST Anthony Ostlund & Baer City of Fridley Hennepin County Opus Corporation Associated Bank City of Minnetonka Henson & Efron PricewaterhouseCoopers BancOne City of Richfield Hinshaw & Culbertson Robins. Kaplan. Miller & Ciresi Best Buy Corporation City of Roseville Internal Revenue Service St. Paul Properties Briggs & Morgan Connecticut Mutual J.P. Morgan Steams Bank Burger King CSM Leonard Street & Deinard TOLD Development Cargill, Inc. DakOla County Lindquist & Vennwn Towle Financial Catlson Companies Dorsey & Whitney Lutheran Brotherhood U.S. Bancorp Century Bank Fabyanske. Westra & Hart M&I Bank U.S. Fish & Wildlife Citicorp Faegre & Benson Metropolitan Airports Commission U.S. Post Office City of Blaine First N ationa! Bank of Omaha Northland Financial Union Labor Life Insurance City of Edina Fredrikson & Byron Oppenheimer Wolff & Donnelly United Properties 51 CITY OF ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N. W. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755-5100 FAX (763) 755-8923. WWW.Cl.ANDOVERMN.US Public Works Expansion August 12, 2002 2002 Council Goal #3: CONSIDER PURCHASING ADDITIONAL LAND FOR FUTURE PUBLIC WORKS EXPANSION. CONSIDER AND DISCUSS: I. Does Council concur with the future expansion needs of the Public Works facility? 2. Does Council concur with the future expansion site location for the Public Works location? , 3. Should staff begin the process of identifying the number of additional acreage needed , and begin preliminary discussions with the property owner? CITY OF ANDOVER Public Works Future Expansion Current TuY, TaxYr Est. Matket Es~ Matket Taxable PIN Address Owner Acres Value Value Value *> 22 32 24 42 0001 15211 Nlghtirgale St WI SIyzuk, Kennlh & Mary 0.78 S 202,200 S 158,300 S 158,300 *> 22 32 24 42 0002 15211 Nightingale 51 WI SIyzuk, Kennlh & Mary 29.00 1,115,200 254,500 254,500 22 32 24 420003 1613 Crosstown Blvd NW City of Andover 2.28 87,500 52,000 43,900 22 32 24 42 0004 1831 Crosstown Blvd NW Louden, Steven 1.11 131,400 92,400 92,400 22 32 24 42 0006 1929 Crosstown Blvd WI Barllll, LOITOfl & Shena 1.00 141,000 104,500 104,500 22 32.24 42 0007 1949 Crosstown Blvd NW Thorson, Steven & Deanna 1.99 167,000 124,300 124,300 22 32 24 42 0008 1901 Cross1own Blvd WI Ostrowski, Frederick 2.56 140,100 93,900 93,900 22 32 24 42 0011 1853 Crosstown Blvd WI Ctick, Michael 1.15 153,100 113600 113,600 39.87 S 2,137,500 S 993,500 S 985,400 I (!) , 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755-5100 FAX (763) 755-8923. WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US TO: Mayor and City Council CC: John Erar, City Administrator gt r Will Neumeister, Community Development Director L()V FROM: Jon Sevald, Planning Intern-P SUBJECT: Consider Ordinance Change to Parking Stall Standards for Institutionally Zoned Property -Planning DATE: May 27, 2003 BACKGROUND City Administration requested a survey of area suburbs and their parking requirements. The primary concern that the survey seeks to address is to provide a comparative analysis of the City's ten-foot parking requirement for institutional uses. The ten-foot stall requirement may have a detrimental impact on costs associated with the required amount of parking for the proposed Community Center site. PARKING STALL SIZES Fourteen out of fifteen cities surveyed have less restrictive size requirements than Andover in regards to the width of a 90 degree parking stall for non-retail uses. The most commonly used stall is nine feet in width. When discussed at the May 13,2003 ARC meeting, it was ARC's recommendation to decrease the stall width to nine feet for all uses with the exception of retail, which will remain at ten feet. The table of information on stall sizes is attached. DEMONSTRATED PARKING There is one other possibility that could be considered. Some cities allow an approach called "demonstrated parking". This means that only 90 percent of the required amount is constructed with a reserve area that would allow the remaining 10 percent to be constructed should parking needs demonstrate that it is required. This could be accomplished if the zoning ordinance is amended with a "demonstrated parking" provision. This may be prudent to consider, since it would reduce the amount of impervious surface costs and storm water run-off and leave more usable open space if the parking is not needed. In addition, using a nine foot requirement would allow more parking spaces in a similar sized parking area. / The Construction Manager has estimated that the City could save about $60,000 by reducing the parking stall size to nine feet. This was calculated by estimating it would save about $30,000 in 1 actual paving costs and about $30,000 in less storm sewer and storm water ponding improvements. / The YMCA's position is that nine foot parking stalls are standard in all their other operations and that width would be sufficient for their needs. Questions regarding the necessity of expanding budgetary resources on parking stall requirements as opposed to other needed project items has been the topic of considerable technical debate. Attachments Parking Survey Parking Stall Calculations for Community Center Respectfully, ~~J& Jon Sevald 2 PARKING SURVEY >; >; .' .. .. :r :r Q) 0 c ~ .e. J: J: I-- I-- 0 0 J: ~ ~ W J: I-- ...J I-- t? w w t? 0 Z ...J ...J :;; ;z;: w ~ (Jl ...J <i !Andover 90 10 18 24 60 10 18 20 45 10 18 20 Anoka 90 8.5 20 Anoka: Parking stall size differs for compact spaces. 60 8.5 20 45 8.5 20 Apple Vallev ALL 9 20 Blaine 90 9 20 24 Blaine: Length may decrease to 18' if parking stall is 60 9 23 15 adjacent to a curb or landscaping so that the vehicle may 45 9 27 12 protrude beyond the stall. Bloominoton Bloomington: Does not regulate the size of parking Brooklyn Park 90 9 18 20 25 stalls. 60 10'4" 21 18 25 Brooklyn Park: Includes non-retail uses only. 45 12'7" 19'8" 15 25 Requirements differ for Retail. Centerville ALL 9 18 Champlin 90 8'7" 18'6" 25 60 10 18 17'6" 45 12 16 13' Coon Rapids 90 9 20 14 24 Coon Rapids: Stall length may be reduced by the amount 60 9 20 14 24 the curb overhang up to a maximum of2'. 45 9 20 14 24 Edina 90 8'6" 18 24 Edina: Parking stall size differs for compact spaces. 60 9 18 18 Length may be decreased to 16.5 feet if parking stall is 45 9 18 12 adjacent to a curb or landscaping so that the vehicle may protrude beyond the stall. Fridley 90 10 20 18 25 Fridley: Length may decrease to 18' if parking stall is 60 10 20 18 25 adjacent to a curb or landscaping so that the vehicle may 45 10 20 18 25 protrude beyond the stall. Medtronic received an SUP for Maple Grove 90 8'7" 18'6" 25 9' X 20' stalls. Totino Grace received an SUP for 8.5' X 20' stalls. 60 10 18 17'6" 45 12 16 13 Minnetonka 90 8'6" 18 26 Minnetonka: Aisle widths may be decreased for "low 60 8'6" 18 18'6" turnover" parking structures. 45 8'6" 18 13'6" Ramsey 90 9 18 24 60 9 17 17 45 9 19 11 ~oodbury 90 9 20 25 Woodbury: Length may decrease to 18' if parking stall is 60 9 20 25 adjacent to a curb or landscaping so that the vehicle may / protrude beyond the stall. 45 9 20 25 3 , Option 1 Facility Space Program Parking Ratio Description Cateaorv Parkina Ratio S.F .lCapacity Stalls Various Office (excludina ice rink) Office Soace 1 stall/250 sf 1,800 s.f. 7 10+ 1 stall/250 sf Evervthina Else Communitv Center after 1 st 2,000 51,875 s.f. 209 Fitness Component Health Club 1 stall/150 sf 10,550 s.f. 70 Ice Rink Ice Rink 1 stall/3 seats 800 seats 267 5 Existina Ballfields Demand Based 30 stalls/field NA 150 Citv Hall Parkina Lot Demand Based 50 stalls NA 50 Total Stalls 753 Area Needed (300 sJ.lstalll 5.19 acres o tion 2 Facility Space Program Parking Ratio Descri tion Cate 0 Parkin Ratio S.F.lCa acit Stalls Various Office Office S ace 1 stall/250 sf 1,800 s.f. 7 10+1stall/250 sf Else Communit Center after 1st 2,000 44,800 s.f. 181 Ice Rink Ice Rink 1 stall/3 seats 800 seats 267 5 Existin Ballfields Demand Based 30 stalls/field NA 150 Demand Based 50 stalls NA 50 Total Stalls 655 Area Needed (300 Notes: s.f./stall 4.51 acres 1. Assumes one ballfield is eliminated (minimum). 2. Storage, mechanical, lobby, restrooms are excluded from square footage figures. 3. Field house square footage figures exclude locker rooms to avoid duplication. 4. Ice rink parking calculated separately based on seating capacity. 5. Parking stall totals assume all facilties at full capacity, some reduction possible based on potential overflow parking locations. / 4 @ CITY OF ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304. (763) 755-5100 FAX (763) 755-8923 . WWW.CI.ANDOVERMN.US TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: John F. Erar, City Administrator SUBJECT: Consider Property Acquisition/1949 Crosstown Boulevard NW DATE: May 27, 2003 INTRODUCTION Council is requested to consider the acquisition of property located at 1949 Crosstown Boulevard. N.W. An aerial map and property site details are attached. The purpose of this staff report is to receive further Council direction regarding the possible acquisition of this property. For ease of identifying future site acquisitions in this general land area, with Council permission staff will refer to this area as City Campus Commons West. DISCUSSION During discussions regarding site acquisition for Public Works expansion, Council expressed interest in acquiring property abutting Crosstown Boulevard traveling west to Nightingale Street, referred to in the report as the southerly boundary of City Campus Commons West. Staff has been informed by the property owners residing at 1949 Crosstown Boulevard of their interest in potentially selling their home in the near future. As Council has discussed an interest in acquiring the entire 40 acres, this would be a excellent opportunity to consider this particular purchase. BUDGET IMPACT Funding for this property acquisition would be available through special revenue funding sources. If Council is interested in pursuing this acquisition, staff would provide Council with more precise financing details at that time. ACTION REQUIRED Affirm previous direction regarding interest in acquiring additional property to expand the City Campus Commons West site to Nightingale Street. Respectfully submitted, l:tq{ ?"-~ Jo n Erar 'I ! V " CITY OF ANDOVER i 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N,W, . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304. (763) 755-5100 FAX (763) 755-8923. WWW.Cl.ANDOVER.MN.US Public Works Expansion August 12, 2002 2002 Council Goal #3: CONSIDER PURCHASING ADDITIONAL LAND FOR FUTURE PUBLIC WORKS EXPANSION. CONSIDER AND DISCUSS: 1. Does Council concur with the future expansion needs of the Public Works facility? 2. Does Council concur with the future expansion site location for the Public Works location? 3. Should staff begin the process of identifying the number of additional acreage needed , and begin preliminary discussions with the property owner? CITY OF ANDOVER Public Works Future Expansion Current TaxYr TaxYr Est Market Est. Market Taxable PIN Address Own.r Ac.... Value Value Value 22 32 24 42 0001 15211 Nightingale St MN Styzuk, Kennth & Mary 0.78 $ 202,200 $ 158,300 $ 158,300 22 32 24 42 0002 15211 Nightingale St MN Styzuk, Kennth & Mary 29.00 1,115,200 254,500 254,500 22 32 2442 0003 1813 Crosstown Blvd MN City of Andover 2.28 87,500 52,000 43,900 ~(:;t,ftY 22 32 24 42 0004 1831 Crosstown Blvd N\N Louden, Steven 1.11 131,400 92,400 92,400 l ,J(;r I~ ~t,~A' ~ 22 32 24 42 0006 1929 Crosstown Blvd NW Barett, Lorren & Sheila 1.00 141,000 104,500 104,500 .prO ~ 22 32. 24 42 0007 1949 Crosstown Blvd NW Thorson, Steven & Deanne 1.99 167,000 124,300 124,300 22 32 24 42 0008 1901 Crosstown Blvd NW Ostrowski, Frederick. 2.56 140,100 93,900 93,900 22 32 24 42 0011 1853 Crosstown Blvd NW Click, Midlael 1.15 153100 113600 113600 39_87 $2,137,500 $ 993,500 $ 985,400 1 4. In terms of site acquisition financing, should staff begin the process of identifying funding sources? , " 5. Should staff develop a space needs analysis study on future capacity requirements for department operations, including vehicles, equipment and staffing? Public Wurks (IS acrcs) Dumping Station 30' X 50' Building Salt Storage 3 acres Recycling Area 150' X 300' Building Material Storagc Rockl Misc. Storage 4 acres Street Swceping 2.5 acres Street Access on Nightingale Street Parks & Rccreation SoccerlFootball Combination Fields 210' X 150' & 360' X 330' (each field) 25 Parking Spaces p1ficld Refrcshments/Vending Facility 10'X20' ShcrilJ's Dcpartment Building 15,000 - 18,000 sq. ft. 40 - 50 Parking Spaces City nail Addition 10,000 - 12,000 sq. ft. Garagc (4 bays) 24' X48' SoccerfFootball fields should be laid out in a manner that Public Works may annex land as necessary. , 6. Does Council concur with the proposed relocation of the street sweeping dumpsite? . .; '. " 2 / l~t~~". , ' . _~C. s, - ~~,... : .--._-~ ,t~iuwL \. <i/; :--'-~-...~ .,.......... - ~-~.~-_... ~.:--- ......--, ~ i' . ,-- ,~ . - , '(. ,. ' I ' . ~ (~' .~ ' , :.,,' .,. .J~" . I , . '.' . ._'.' ....,.i ..J "..... =' .', ..< " ' ".' o;;;-tf' [ r' '". i " ,,,:';,., ''6:' "... ,.' .. '.' I I .' .' · ~_. , '1'" " __ :.(: '. .i .<L -., .... 'J ,'.. ...,-_. ,~_ ". · ,. ...., . T. . ,'. I ,. ., ,. . ." or' ~ il~1)b I. r.:~r...",f1 . ." ~ r "", ,<' ..... .. " . .. '. ,... '., ~ . ",- .' .' . , . ,''', \ ,.itf ".t. · "., . . . I _. ~ _' H"I .~.. ;'ill"'" . I" ' I. I ~ 11";-' ,.j 1. ~!,,,.. .... ; r - I 'or .,. "",' ., .), ".., . I,r -". I ,~~' ,,'. .,.."" ~...~~;.. "d"'!J,f.jj,""" ". "... 'J l ., 'C /1'"' .,'...... ..". ,...J<.... .."'" i ./ " .. .".,.. " .,," U./"'/' " · <-. . <>'<"'-" .." ,...'''''''''' ., .... .. . ,r.' . ~ .'. . ,. ...~~~:.",\),. ,... .-, ' . " ,>J:' :.,.. ,~!,,~ ,'~.~... .;>,,' ~..' i " ,.. ....,,'1....... _,.... .. ,,'Of' . .,' , ," l('{'" ,.... . .,' '. ~, .' .... ' .' ..' ,",'~' ,.' . .., .r ' " .' t" . .' '.~: ".: ....r ~,. .. ' '.' . :, ' , . '.' ' ... " .,. . ,..,. ., " ,~, ,,_'" . , . . ~ y' ..;.,~. .... '. 't',.1 -"/1--'" · . .... -, .' " ,-- . ,. ." , '" . . .. . . . " ... ",' ' " "...,.. ' .. I' ,.' ' " '.' ",,' i . . ,,' , '" ) ", ~ i . ". ' . .. , , .. ,. . .. , .,. . l' . -. ('.... . . . \ '~f . ""J~ r-" "'r . ..... ~'r~ . " · . . " .. . . .. ' ' ' , . ,. . .. ..' . ,. ....., .\ 'I"'.' · ":'- '. i . ..,/ -.. \;( , '- ,.' , '." . .' ,.' ,. ,,~ "v" .-- . u .. ..... ...,. ., . .. . - -- ,,- .... _. .. .... .. ..... .--- - " -'I'. .."jI. ~. ,-: '...--...... /_".J~_'::;'" '.... ., .--- -., ;. '" . . I ~ , '9'11 CilOSS tfJtvfl !3 Iud. . .. ..-.,- . -" / , '''--/ @ CENTER SEC. 22 t\I .....-...-r. ....---------..._-- ~! , , '\ I .1t /. ~ , , , . '/Ld' , / , -, , , I .....i , , ( ~ , , / I ... I~- ~i ........-- / :~' I I ;U.f." (,t) (i) " ~ "f'.tWA/,,../ ./. 5"LYzv~ .2!1.,N A("; "",JlII - - .2#..1 I c/r? ,r. /. ;r;:r~~;"~ '~8 .f. A' .A-... I;~I~ >>, - ,qt.? /~? .....44K'./s.l...- \\4'\ 1"\21 \'0\ 1573 \S ?I\ I'O\~ (7) (t,) (a) (II) f+) M '" I.Ir~ ~/<;" ~ w A' ~(L :I ~E.t.\\ ~t- -(\1-Eo \\ ?l)J-(>\; \'I<..~v..~\)01J ~ HZ -------- , ISl I - I I , 1*', ,-,_____ ,-, I " ... \ " " I JJ:.'..... ,- \.', ~ I I , '... \ \ -) I , \ J ',....___J \__~.;...~ '--~ /--- -... ,.. , , ~ ' , I I , S'\NDbVE~ ~~ 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755-5100 FAX (763) 755-8923 . WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US TO: Mayor and Councilmembers CC: John Erar, City Administrator 0C FROM: Will Neumeister, Director of Community Development Will David Berkowitz, City Engineer D8 SUBJECT: Receive Harstad Companies Response on Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Report Cost Allocations-Planning & Engineering DATE: May 27, 2003 INTRODUCTION The City reported to the Harstad Companies the recommendation of the City Council that they agree to pay for fifty percent of the costs to study the potential to extend the sanitary I sewer (and watermain) up Crosstown Boulevard to serve their property. They have indicated that they feel that it is unfair and inequitable to require them to pay that amount up front. Harstad Companies indicated that if the study costs were fairly apportioned to the affected property owners as part of the study costs they would be interested in moving ahead with the study, but not if they were required to pay upfront costs of fifty percent. DISCUSSION The indication from the City Council at the May 6, 2003 meeting was that this sewer study was at the request of the developer and therefore they should pay half the cost. This was explained to Paul Harstad and he said that his father was not willing to move ahead with the study if that was the Council's final decision. He felt it was not fair and equitable, to require an upfront contribution. The extent of the sewer study will be much broader than just a simple calculation for size and depth to serve one or two properties. The study would re-examine the current sanitary sewer rates as defined in the 1999 sanitary sewer rate study and examine if it is feasible to extend a sanitary sewer trunk line up Crosstown Boulevard. Also, it would have studied the potential area to be served by a new trunk sanitary sewer line, pipe sizing requirements, and pipe depths. BUDGET IMP ACT As you will recall, staff recommended that the study costs be allocated in proportion to J the areas potentially served by the possible sewer extension. Without the study, there is a current sanitary sewer plan that shows a trunk alignment that is dependent upon the willingness of property owned by Winslow Holasek to develop. If he does not decide to move ahead with development, then a significant portion of future staged growth areas in Andover will have to wait until a day and time that he does want to develop. At this time, there appears to be a very limited amount of other property that could be developed into a residential development in the rest of Andover. If the City proceeds with the study without a partial payment for the study from the Harstad Companies, and the study shows that the sanitary sewer trunk line up Crosstown is not feasible (i.e. trunk source and storage charges are higher than the developers are willing to be assessed) the cost for the study would not be recovered through assessments and the City would need to absorb the cost of the study utilizing the Trunk Sanitary Sewer Fund. ACTION REQUESTED The City Council is asked to receive the staff report on Harstad's reaction to the requirements of the fifty percent of the costs of the study. Respectfully submitted, / Will Neumeister f1)/J David Berkowitz 05 Community Development Director City Engineer Attachment Location Map Cc: Paul Harstad, Harstad Companies, 2195 Silver Lake Road, New Brighton, MN 55112 @) CITY OF ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 . (763) 755-5100 FAX (763) 755-8923. WWW.CLANDOVER.MN.US TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: John Erar, City Administrator SUBJECT: Adopt 2004 Budget Development Policies DATE: May 27,2002 INTRODUCTION Council is requested to consider the 2004 Budget Development Policies that will establish guidelines for the preparation of the 2004 Annual Operating Budget. In addition, Council members are asked to consider their 2004 Budget priorities for discussion at this workshop. DISCUSSION The following 2004 Budget Development Policies are presented for Council consideration. , 1) A commitment to restrain any increase in the local tax capacity rate to a percentage level no greater than an annual cost-of-living factor of 3%, while providing for the cost-effective delivery of public services to a rapidly growing service population. I 2) A fiscal goal that works toward establishing the General Fund balance for working capital at no less than 30% of planned 2004 General Fund expenditures. 3) A commitment to maintain the 2004 debt levy at no more than 25% of the total levy. 4) A comprehensive review of the condition of capital equipment to ensure that the most cost- effective replacement schedule is followed subiect to budgetarv limitations. I During the 2003-04 Council Goal-Setting Workshop, Council discussed limiting any increase in the tax rate to no more than the annual cost-of-living. In light of the fact that the City's 2004 Budget process will begin with a net loss of over $630,000 in state aids, staff is proposing that a cost-of-living factor be utilized as opposed to the consumer price index. Even with a cost-of-living factor applied, and any changes in proposed state law allowing cities to recover up to 80% of state aid reductions (Senate Tax Bill), this would still translate into a net 2003 revenue base loss position of 20%, and no inflationary increase in City revenues. Other economic factors are also expected to negatively affect the City's 2004 non-tax levy source revenue projections such as interest earnings, building pennit revenues, grants and other misc. income sources. 5) A team approach that encourages strategic planning to meet immediate and long-term operational, staffing, infrastructure and facility needs. 6) A management philosophy that actively supports the implementation of Council policies and goals within available City resources, and recognizes the need to be responsive to changing community conditions and concerns subiect to City budget limitations. ACTION REQUIRED Council approval of the proposed Budget Development Policies as presented and discussed at the 2004 Council Budget Workshop. These policies will establish the framework for developing the 2004 Annual Operating Budget Respectfully submitted, 7!if +eA<~ J Erar , (ff) , , CITY OF ANDOVER , / 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD NW. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304. [163) 755-5100 FAX [163) 755-8923. WWW.CI.ANDOVERMN.US TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: John F. Erar, City Administrator SUBJECT: Capital Campaign Contract Schedule - Saterbak Correspondence DATE: May 27, 2003 INTRODUCTION My office has been notified by Mr. Assmuss, the City's Capital Campaign consultant, that he is requesting an opportunity to speak with the Council regarding the restructuring of their consultant agreement as it pertains to fundraising goal benchmarks. DISCUSSION Correspondence from Saterbak and Associates is attached and explains in detail the reasons for their '\ request. Briefly, Mr. Assmuss has indicated that due to delays in certain project decisions, the / campaign fundraising schedule as originally conceived will need to be modified. Consequendy, Saterbak and Associates is requesting that certain items within their contract be renegotiated. Mr. Assmus has on several occasions indicated that delays in certain project decisions is affecting the ability for certain campaign task forces to complete their work as originally scheduled. Staff has met with Mr. Assmus regarding this request and had preliminary discussions with him in terms of how this is affecting the campaign schedule. He will be in attendance at the May 27, 2003 Council workshop to personally present these issues. BUDGET IMPACT Pursuant to discussions with Mr. Assmus, it does not appear that changes to the Saterbak consulting agreement will result in any additional costs to the City. ACTION REQUIRED Mr. Assmus will be in attendance at the workshop to update the Council. Saterbak & Associates /'\ May 16,2003 Serving those who serve others. ,,~ Mr. John Erar City Administrator The City of Andover 1685 Crosstown Blvd NW Andover, MN 55303 Dear John: I have had discussions with the other members of our company about the campaign here in Andover. As you know, we have been ahead of our timeline up until now, but we are beginning to fall behind in the last couple of weeks. This time lag is not due to the campaign process, but is caused by the campail:,'ll having to wait for the Council to make some rather sil:,'llificant decisions. 1. We cannot finalize the recruitment ofthe campaign chair until the Council makes a decision about the funding vehicle they will use. 2. The case process is also in suspense until the Council determines how they will fund the facility and finalizes the YMCA's share of paying for the facility. 3. Until the case is substantially complete, the Communications Task Force is limited in what they can do. ~) 4. The Prospect Task Force has stated that they see no pressing need to meet until after the Council finalizes decisions on June 4. I am concerned about the momentum that a campaign requires. We are starting to lose the momentum that the volunteers built as we started. I am also concerned about the effect of this delay on the contract that we have agreed to. The payment of the escrowed money is very time conditioned. Through no fault of ours, the campail:,'ll is going to fall behind on that time line. I've enclosed some important benchmarks and the necessary elements to achieve the benchmarks. I would request that we consider altering the dates on which the escrow is to be paid. It appears to me that some key decisions the campaign needs won't be made until June 4. Given that fact, I would suggest that all the escrow payment dates in the contract be moved back. This still holds us to our time schedule for the completion ofthe campaign, but does not penalize us for delays caused by the Council's decision process. I look forward to resolving this issue at your earliest convemence. Sincerely, ~rrA~ Dave Assmus / " Partner ,,-~ Enclosure Consultants in Philanthropy' 917 South 4th, Suite 103 . La Crosse, WI 54601 . 608.782.5988 . fax 608.782.5989 . al@saterbakassoccom .... n :31 ;:0 / " ro OJ .... ro , () rr Vl () '-- / o _0 ,...,. .... 3 ::l 0. r:: 3 ~ .... ;::;: OJ 3 roo. ...., ::l ro ,...,. ro 0. 00 0 ::l ...., ,...,. A """0. n 0 o ro ro OJ ...., '< nVl Vl 0 rr ;::;:0 ro ro ro '<::l 0. ::l ::l nn 0 ro n o OJ n .... ::r r:: 3 r:: OJ 3 ::l'O 3 n OJ 00 OJ ro OJ .... _ciQO ::l 3 ,.,.. ,...,. Vl ::l n '0 c1tl 0 ~o 0 3 c1tl -'l OJ '0 ::l ::r ,...,. ro n ro 0 ,...,. ::r :E ro OJ 0. r:: ro .... ::l ro ro ,.,.. n'"O 0.'"0 0.'"0 I'-J 0 ::r.... ro .... ro .... , ...., OJ .90 ,...,.0 ,...,.0 0- $: ro_o ro-' :::;0 ro .... ro .... ro g OJ .... n 3 ~ 3 ~ '< ro ,...,. n n SO n SO n ~ n .... 0 ro 0 ro 0 rr I'-J OJ r:: Vl o.Vl o.Vl Z ro I :3 ~r-t ,...,. ,...,. ro ,...,. ~ '0 ro OJ OJ OJ n ::r 0- o.::l ::l ::l ro ro OJ 0. 0. 0. Vl I'-J ViO O'tl 0 ...., ...., Vl 0 ,...,. r:: r:: OJ s- ::r :::J / \ ro ::l ::l .... ro , ::l '< OJ , / ro e:- o. ro :E ~ (!) .... ::l ::l ro ro -:J :::J OJ c1tl c1tl ro s- - 3 ,.,.. () n < < 0 :;: :::J"" ro ro ro OJ ::r ::r ::l ...., ([) :3 3 ,...,. n ro n n Vl OJ ,.,.. OJ '0 ro ro 3 0 ..... OJ "'" ciQO '0 ...., (fJ ::l OJ n ciQO OJ 3 ::l '0 OJ OJ n ,...,. c1tl ~ ~ ~ <0 ::l (f)n ;::;: OJ '< n ro ro ro n OJ ,...,. ,.,.. ,.,.. ,.,.. ::r3 <0 ~ ~ ~ ro'O ~ -:J ~ ~ 0. OJ r:: _0 -c1tl ro ::l / '\ '....J Andover Capital Campaign Preparatory Phase - Time line ,Weekof Campaign Case Validation Prospect Leadership Communications Cabinet Task Force Development Development Task Force Task Force Task Force 1/20/03 Recruit & train Interim Chair 1/27/03 Recruit Cabinet Members 2/3/03 Train Cabinet Members 2/10/03 Ofl:~;l'ni7:ttional Recruit Chair Recruit Chair Meeting 2/17/02 Prmrress Reoort Recruit Chair Recruit Chair Recruit Chair Recruit Chair 2/24/03 Prol!J'ess Reoort Train Chair Recruit Chair Train Chair Recruit Chair 3/3/03 PrOl!J'ess Reoort Recruit Task Force Train Chair Recruit Task Force Train Chair 3/10/03 Prol!J'ess Reoort Recruit Task Force Recruit Task Force Recruit Task Force Recruit Task Force 3/17/03 Prol!J'ess Reoort Recruit Task Force Recruit Task Force Recruit Task Force Recruit Task Force 3/24/03 Progress Report Orellfli7:thonal Recruit Task Force Organizational Recruit Task Force Meeting Meeting 3/31/03 Progress Report Brainstorming Organizational Adopt Job Organizational Meeting I Meeting Descriotion Meeting 4n103 Progress Report Brainstorming Advance Gift Develop Candidate IdentifY Meeting IT Prospects List communication natterns 4/14/03 Progress Report Write First Draft Advance Gift Prioritize IdentifY of Case Prospects Candidate List communication patterns 4/21/03 Progress Report Review First Draft Advance Gift Prioritize IdentifY Prospects Candidate List communication vehicles 4/28/03 Progress Report Second Draft of Leadership Gift Develop Identify Case Prospects Recruitment communication strategies vehicles 515/03 Progress Report Review Second Leadership Gift Recruit General Present Draft Draft Prospects Chair Communication Plan 5/12/03 Progress Report Third Draft of Leadership Gift Recruit General Revise Plan Case ProsPects Chair? 5/19/03 Progress Report First Validation Leadership Gift Recruit General Revise Plan Prosoects Chair? 5/26/03 Progress Report First Validation Pattern Gift Recruit General Develop Campaign ProsPects Chair? Logos 6/2/03 Progress Report Validation Review Pattern Gift Task Force Develop Public ProsPects Complete Presentation 6/9/03 Progress Report Second Validation Pattern Gift Develop Public PrOsPects Presentation 6116/03 Progress Report Second Validation Pattern Gift Recruit Speakers ProsPects Bureau 6/23/03 Progress Report Validation Review Special Gift Recruit Speakers Prospects Bureau 6/30/03 Progress Report Special Gift Arrange PrOsPects Presentations 7n 103 Progress Report Task Force Task Force Arrange Comnlete Comolete Presentations - - - - - ~I ~I :.E N - - - - 0 0 0 - -0 -0 -0 00 00 -.J -> -.J 0> 0> " -- N N -- -- -- - -- -- -- 0 -- -- -- -0 -0 -- -- W -- -- -> -- -- " - -- -- N - - -- N N ::= 0;- N N - -- -- - - N - -- W N ::::- V> 00 .l:>- -> 0 Co> -> 0 '2 t-> V> 00 00 ~ CO ~ ... -> 0 W " -- 23 -- -- -- 23 23 23 -- 23 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 23 23 23 -- -- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ..., W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W < "" "" ;;;:: "" "" ;;:l ;;:l ;;:l "" n;;;:: ;;:l ~I ;;:l ;;:l "" ;;:l ;;:l "" ;;:l ;:0 ;:0 ;;:l "" ;:0 ;;:l 0' r2 r2 r2 (1) r2 r2 r2 r2 " ., (1) r2 (1) -2 (1) -2 " (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) -2 .g n -= -= 3"8 -= -= -= -= -= -= -= -= -= ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ., :4 :4 :4 :4 :4 :4 :4 :4 :4 rg:4 :4 :4 :4 :4 :4 :4 :4 :4 ~ :4 :4 :4 :4 :4 :4 ::> ~I .; '7 '7 ::;:: '7 '7 ::;::1::;:: <" ::;:: !;E'::;:: ::;:: ::;:: ::;:: ::;:: ::;:: ::;:: ::;:: ::;:: <" ::;:: ::;:: ::;:: ::;:: ::;:: '7 n - - - '" [! " - ~ (1) " '" '" (1) " '" (1) = ~ " '" '" '" '" " " &.1 " " '" '" '" " ~. -'" '" " :l :l ~~ " " '" '" '" '" (1) " :l :l :l :l '" '" '" (1) ~ ~ ~.I ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0" g. ~" S" ~' ~'~' ~.I S" ,.., -, ~. ~' S' S" S' S. S' cFcl ,g'1 S' S' S. 5" S" S" ~ -. ::> n a uc 00 1">00 00 10 00 10 00 00 00 00 uc JG 0 ;J:" ., 0' . g: ::> " :::j ~ ." <: n ." n t:I C/J C/J C/J C/J C/J C/J nC/J nC/J >-lC/J n"" n"" >-l "" 0' '" '" 0 :::- 8- 8- 8- 8- 8- 8- :TO :TO ; !2.. :T'" :T" ~ " ~ a.= p:I =: ~ :-: '" n e.o '" ." ~ '" " ;;;' 5: 0' 0' g: 0' g: -, 0 -'0 S' n: ::;';:l S' 2 0' ;:+' ;:+" ;:+' .., -, .., -, ~ .-' .. $l. ~ '" ~ '" ~ ..~ CIl s.. CIl =. '" - 0 ;:+' c- E' S. ::> "C '" '" '" '" '" .. .. '" (J 0<: n ::> (J .., ~ (3 .., .., ~ '" '" "':T .. .. 0> n '" n 0 0 0 0 0 '" '" o '" '" '" :T -... 1} n 0 0 '" ~ '" ~ '" '" 0 0 ." -. '" '" ::;' '" <: = e;- 3 ~ -= -= u -= -= ." ." . ~ 0 0 ::;" ~:~ " " " '" " " ;;:;' ;;:;' D, ." ~ '" -0 co $l. 0 co $l. ." n ~. ; 9- a ::> 1r ~ ~ ~ - <> <> :T a :l '" '" '" '" '" '" g" g " " a, " " ::;.> ~ '" '" <: n n n t:I C/J C/J C/J C/J C/J C/J C/J C/J nC/J (JC/J >-lC/J n?:l (J?:l >-l "" 0' ~ '" 0 <' 8- 8- 8- 8- 8- 8- 8- 8- :TO :TO ; Q.. :T" :T" ~ " ~ 0. ;:: ;.> =-: ,::o~ '" ." '" n '" n t"' ~ '" " ;;;. g: g: 0: 0: 0: 0: B: B: -'." -'." S' 5: ::;'2 ::;'2 S' 2 .., -' ~ ::+" " ." 0' - - - - - - '" - ..- '" -, '" -, .. '" - ~ ~ n ~ g' S' ::> '" '" "C "C "C '" '" '" ;;;- .. '" n :T o~ > n ::> (J .., .., .., .., .., .., .., ~ '" '" :T .. .. '" n '" ." 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" '" o '" '" '" ::;' :T -.... = e;- n 0 0 '" -2 -2 '" ~ '" ~ '" 0 0 n -, '" '" a, <: '" Q. 3 3 .." .." .." .." ." . .., 0 0 -. - e;- ." '" - 0- " a '" '" " " '" " ~: ;;:;' (J ." ." .., c'oS' 0 .., .. .." -= $l. $l. $l. $l. $l. ." ." a" el" n< a ::> e;- e;- - - ct :T ::> '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" " 9- = ~ 0' 6 - - a, " " '" '" .., a ., I ?- '" ::;.> '" "Cln = = _."Cl ~ ::+ <: n nn t:l C/J C/J C/J C/J C/J C/J C/J C/J C/J >-lC/J ~ '" '" >-lC/J n", n", >-l ~ "':l = = si." .. e: 0 s: 8- 8- 8- 8- 8- 8- 8- 8- 8- ag. '" ~ ~2.. :T~ :T'" ... .. ",- ~ 0.= ." ." .. ." .. ." .. =-n ~ '" '" '" 5: B: g: 0' 0' 0' 0' 0: B: S' 5: 2 2 5, :3" 5: !;'2 ::;'2 S' 5, .. '" = = ." 0' - - - - - - - - n- ..- '" -' '" -, ... .. .. ;:+' - .. - .. n .. ::> '" a 19' Er i:l '" "C '" '" '" "C "C n n ~;;;- n n n ",n .. .. =- n ~"Cl n ::> n a ... ... ... .., .., ... .. s '" =- .. ~ '" ." 0 0 0 0 0 0 .." .. '" s '" .. g a, '" '" ::;' =- = g: n 0 0 S2 ~ ~ '" '" -2 -2 - s'~ .." .." '" '" .. $ e;- El @. .." .." .. .. 0; - . ... g 0 ::;' _. '" '" '" '" '" '" '" 5' 5' .. .. n n .. ~ i! .. .." $l. ." n $l. $l. $l. $l. "'n 5' E'r 5' ;;:;' EO' = ::> 1r - - '" '" [ 0 ~ '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" ~ ~ 0' 6 ::r '" '" :or '" '" .. .., ?- ::;' '" 0;;' '" o' ::> <: n U'l U'l U'l U'l U'l U'l U'l U'l U'l U'l C/J >-lU'l ~ ~ "" >-lU'l n", n", n", >-l ~ ~ 0' ~ 2- 8- 8- 8- 8- 8- 8- 8- 8- 8- 8- ... 0 '" ;2.. =-'" =-'" =-'" .., ..- n ." ." .. n .. n .. n .. n . ... ~ n: ~: 0' 0' 0' 0' 0' 0' n: 5: n: S' n: 2 5, 2 5" 5: ::;'2 ::;'2 ::;'2 5' 2 I"> - - - - ;:+. - - - - - - n- ..- '" -' '" -' '" -' e: .. ;:+. - ;:+. - - .. n .. E' ." ." '" '" ." '" ." n n n .. ~~ '" n =- n ::> .., .., ... ... .., .., .., .. ~ ~ '" n n n '" :T .. .. .. .. n ~ (1) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .." '" ~ .. ~ ~ ~, '" '" '" ::;. =- S e;- n 2 2 '" ~ 2 2 2 - 0; e, 0 el,g .." '" '" '" .. e;- .." .. r> e. e. e. 0 0 0 ::;. 0- '" '" '" '" '" '" '" ::r 5' =>, ." n ." .. .., .. $l. ." ." ." n ." $l. ::> "'n n ~. ~. ;;:;. 0 a ::I .. .. .. .. .. '" '" '" n ::I ::> i:l :T eS" g '" '" '" '" '" '" '" =- =- '" '" '" a' '" '" <> :;:. .. '" .., 0;;' ::I ::;. ::;' '" '" '" a' ::I < n n (J n '" '" '" (J"C ~~~o~8O~~~~S~oS~~~ "C ." o' ~ 0 0 0 0;- [ ;;; '" - (3 ~ ~ ~ g. ~ E; ~ ~ :(l @ a (3 8 -' el '" :r [ [ ~ ::> i:l ::> ::I ::> o~ n 0. 0. 0. "C '" '" g"<: g ~. "" '" @ @ '" -. g '" 0..." f2. p;- n 0 7:: ~ " c: c: c: n (") = ~ (') ~.c ~ R C .. ~ . @ C" s>> r+ ..... e?. 0. ..... PJ' (") _. fI) CY 0 (JQ >-33 q'9' n ." ." =- =- =- .. -' o' .. .. .. 0 0 0 -." .::> a 0" <: -'::r' n '" - '" uc' ... ~ ::r ." e; 3 n -. - OQ ~ n'~!!. f;l> ~ _:::-...(/1 r.n::J e.:n 0 p;- 7 ::> '" '" '" ::> ::> ::> o 0 oo.~r.n-~-o~o8n_'(/l~CC '" a .. a . ::::-= g: n ::r ::r S - ::>.:< ~0.-~~8~"''''::> 8~-""a- 0 0 ~ :. " 0 0 S ::r =- _ ~ o' c.. _ 0 ~.. f,Il.::s 0:1. - ....... ~ ~ i! g ::> ::> i:l 0 0 ~-~o~~o~~~~~3g~~~ ~ [T] " " .. .. .. ::> ::> ::> ~ a ET ET ET G-~~--~-~-~e _~_~ <: 0' .a g""E.. g:.;: 25""" o,p... ~ n (IQ' e ~ VJ c$"-O '" '" ... -. 0 0 0 a a " ?- i:l i:l ::> $!I) (1) - ::s _. ~ fA ::s -. ::3 =:s G = =' cP _. l:3 ~ 0 (1) ::1. '" '" p ~ 0 '" P- (!J) CITY OF ANDOVER j 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. . ANDOVER. MINNESOTA 55304. (763) 755-5100 FAX (763) 755-8923 . W\VW.CI.ANDOVERMN.US TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: John F. Erar, City Administrator SUBJECT: Team Building Proposal- The Brimeyer Group DATE: May 27, 2003 INTRODUCTION The attached item was briefly discussed by Council at the May 20, 2003 meeting. Council requested that the Brimeyer Group proposal be added to the Council workshop agenda. DISCUSSION See atached information. / BUDGET IMPACT Funding for this proposal would need to be appropriated from the City's General Fund contingency account. ACTION REQUIRED For Council discussion. hn Erar City Administrator May,20.2003 9:37AM THE BRIMEYER GROUP No.4450 P, 2 . The Brimeyer Group, Inc. EXECUTIVE SEARCH CONSULTANTS , , " / Fifty South Ninth Avenue, Suite #101 Hopkins, MN 55343 Proposal City of Andover Aligning Expectations Objectives: . Build acceptable trust level among City Council, City Administrator and Staff . Align expectations per guidelines established by City Council, City Administrator and Staff . Improve communications utilizing city preferred governance model and preferred practices '\ , / Methodology Identify the issues and concerns. Conduct session - share concerns and issues Conduct session - establish expectations and ascertain level of alignment. Determine support systems needed to achieve higher level of alignment. \ / , , (952) 945-0246 . fax (952) 945-0102 May. 20. 2003 9:37AM THE BRIMEYER GROUP No.4450 p. 3 ; , , ....--/ Phase 1- 10 to 15 hours Interview Councilmembel:S, City Administrator and Senior Staff . identify pmblems and causes - individual effectiveness - positive environment - negative environment - suggestions for improvement/changes . desired oub:omes Phase II - 2 to 4 hours Session with Council, Administrator, Staff - share summary information - assess, evaluate current situation - deteanine level of motivation to alter cunent situation "- Exercise , assess level of :alignment among governing board and staff " / - Phase III (options) - Governance issues (Council) - Alignment (Council, City Administrator, Staff) - Team meetings (Council, Sraft) - Individual Coaching (all, some, none) - Periodic evaluation \ " ; . . , ' Estimate of costs \ , $140 I hour for Phase I and II (estimate of 12 -19 hours needed) $70 I hour for office work (estimate of 4 - 9 hours needed) Phase III (cost undetermined) Low 12 hours Phase I and II = $1680 Office work 4 hours at $70 = $ 280 Total: $1960 High 19 hours Phase I and II = $2660 Office work 9 hours at $70 = $ 630 Total: $3290 Remember these are estimates and do not include Phase III. '. '- / \ i CITY OF ANDOVER 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W.. ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304. (763) 755-5100 FAX (763) 755-8923. WWW.cJ.ANDOVER.MN.US May 23,2003 Mr. Chris Scheiber 3026 16151 Avenue NW Andover, MN 55304 Re: Pole Barn Building Permit Application Dear Mr. Scheiber: We have done research at Anoka County Recorder's Office and find that you do not meet the requirement that requires your property to be oyer five acres to entitle you to the large pole barn that you have made building permit application for.. The records show that Anoka County had previously acquired a portion of the property for 16151 A venue by fee title. Based on what we have found in legal research on the road in front of your property at 302616151 Avenue, you will not be allowed to build the 40' x 80' pole building. Your property does not exceed 5 acres, therefore your property does not meet the intent of the ordinance. There are only two options that you can consider at this point: 1. Apply for a variance to the ordinance section requiring that your parcel be five acres or larger to entitle you to have the large pole barn. This is not recommended because there are findings that must be made in order to grant the variance and we do not believe that you can prove that you have a hardship and that is paramount to getting Council approval on a vanance. 2. Purchase additional land from a neighboring property owner to bring it up to the larger than 5 acre required. If you have any questions regarding this information or would like to discuss this item further, please feel free to call either of us at (763) 755-5100. k;)); A/~- ()~~ Will Neumeister Dave Almgren Director of Community Development Building Official Attachment Application materials for a variance. \ I (!c?: e-Pr ~Ctl