HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.B. Lakeville Approach for Growth
.; ~ .'
. .
. .
. ~~~u~~~
...........~.'...................'<;..
. .. .... .it'J.l:
. . '. ~ ~.
. ...... .'
. . '. ." .
. '.'
", . .......: . ':.... .',.
," ", ....:. ... .',:"
. .
. .
. .
......Growth..M~~~e~:nt....Strateg~es.
. .fortne .......... .
. ......Gity(jfL~ke~ille .... ... ....... ....
. . :." ", ", ,".;
". '. .",
. . "
. ."
. " ~ .' . .
.. . .
.' , .', .... .
. .,.n .",..",
.' .' ,,', ..
". '. . .
.. ;.. :",.. ,'" ,"
. ," ," .
. .. .
.". . ..
.. .
.. ..
.' .
.. '.'
. .. .
. . ..
. . " .
. .
.' . .
.", . .
. ...,.
. . . ".." ..
.' . . '. . ~.
..', .' .'
. '. .
. . "
. .
. .
t .. .'
. . .
Report and Recommendations .
from' the
Strategic Growth Management Task'Force.. .'
May 1992
'. '
BACKGROUND
In July of 1991 the Lakeville City Council passed an interim ordinance temporarily prohibiting
approval of new residential plats and expansion or development of mobile (manufactured) home
parks. This moratorium allowed the City a "time-out" to study the effects of growth and implement
appropriate controls. The Strategic Growth Management Task Force was formed by the Council to
develop recommendations for appropriate growth management controls.
THE CHARGE
The general charge to the task force was to make short or intermediate term recommendations or
suggestions on strategies relating to how the rate, location and kind of residential and
commercial/industrial growth can generate fIscal stability, preserve or enhance the quality of life and
quality of services, while minimizing the impact on City systems and taxpayers.
THE RESPONSE
This report of the task force outlines strategies to address the charge of the Council. The members
of the task force include: t%- ~;/ ~ ~/ ~4 ~
Jon Ahlberg ~~ . David Perron
Mark Beltz ~l-. ~~ Tim Peterson ~~
Robert Berresr~ Rob Reiner
Jeff Bry Richard Schwartz ~
Dale Detjen ~ Thomas Simonsen ~~
Karl Drotning I \ -35j~ Greg Stattman AP'd,~
Carl Forsberg /)../.h;./L-:I~ . Christine Steigerwalt -p L.
Jeff Krapu "'V- Bob Vogel ~
Joan Krejci Carl Wahlstrom 0~d:. ~ ~
Tim Lundahl..utt/'. fI: ~fl~ W.L. Whitehouse
Pat Messinger /~ . Robert Erickson (Ex-Officio)
Task Force Facilitator:
Research Coordinator:
Legal Counsel:
Barbara Lukermann l P~I d/ ~ ~aJ
Jerry Schwinghammer
Roger Knutson
THE PROCESS 1 B - 21#if. ~~
The following process was used by the Lakeville Strategic Growth Management Task Force:
Goal Sessions
Information
Gathering
Scenarios
Recap
Vision
Strategies
Recommendations
These sessions provided an opportunity for people to understand the values
and concerns of other task force members and to identify a preliminary set of
goals for the community to address.
A series of presentations from staff and outside experts was designed to
provide members with information from which to develop strategies and
recommendations. This portion of the process was the most time consuming
in the strategic planning effort. _,j~~~ -' 2."'tcv ~n;~eM~'
~ ~ 'v
A quick addition of possible "alternative futures" served as a summary of
critical external issues to highlight their impact on future growth policies.
The variables of fiscal and infrastructure constraints was an added
intermediate step, because some SignifiCant)unknowns could dramatically
affect the task force recommendations. .;f-}uh:;4..&.- ~ ~ ~
The task force used a SWOT analysis technique. This technique involved
examining the Strengths, Weaknesses, Qpportunities, and Threats regarding
growth management in Lakeville in order to clearly identify the critical
issues.
:i
At this stage the task force developed a consensus on what direction it wants
Lakeville to take and what criteria should be used to judge the various
strategies.
The task force proposed and evaluated strategies in terms of the criteria
established in the vision stage of the process. The strategies were to be both
short and long term.
Final recommendations to the City Council respond to the charge presented
to the task force and represent a consensus agreement on the future
directions for Lakeville.
The remainder of the report details the above process. An appendix under separate cover contains
reference material used by the task force.
2
GOAL SESSIONS
Early in the process guiding goals or objectives were developed by the task force to maintain focus
and provide direction to the process. These goals were refmed throughout the process. The early
goal framework highlighted the task force values listed below:
Overall Objective
LAKEVILLE WILL ACCOMMODATE NEW DEVELOPMENT OF HIGH QUALITY,
WITH FISCAL RESPONSIVENESS, FAIRNESS TO ALL RESIDENTS AND
BUSINESSES AND WILL BUILD A COMMON VISION AND PRIDE IN THE
COMMUNITY
Sub-goals
Quality development is important for the City. The task force defines quality as being physically
attractive; well maintained and inspected; well constructed to maintain value for all types of
development; and environmentally sensitive.
Growth occurring should be fiscally responsive, which means an efficient use of infrastructure; "pay
for use" philosophy for both existing and new development and promotion of commercial/industrial
development as a balance.
Growth should be accommodated with fairness such that policies treat all three school districts
fairly and provide affordable housing for broad mix of households
The common vision for Lakeville includes having pride living in Lakeville; keeping both rural and
urban character for the City; and creating a sense of community while recognizing a diversity of
lifestyle preferences.
INFORMATION GATHERING
Throughout the course of the meetings a number of speakers presented information on areas of
importance to the task force. The speakers included:
Robert Erickson. Lakeville's City Administrator. provided history and context as to why the City
was facing fmandal difficulty and needed to develop growth management measures. His remarks
stressed that actions of the State Legislature put the City in a financial crisis. The City Council
responded to this impending budget crisis by putting a moratorium on residential platting and
expansion or building of mobile (manufactured) home parks and initiated a fiscal impact study and
assembled this task force.
3
Roger Knutson. City Attorney for Lakeville. provided legal perspective on the issues surrounding
growth management. His talle centered on two major topics of moratoriums and growth
management controls.
John Tomlinson from the League of Minnesota Cities spoke about the levy limits and Local
Government Aid. The main emphasis of his comments was that levy limits are likely to lifted. He
also recommended that Lakeville is in a fairly good position as it has relatively little dependence on
Local Government Aid.
Glen Dorfman. Staff Vice-President of Governmental Affairs for the Minnesota Association of
Realtors provided a broader economic context for the task force. His presentation provided
perspective on how the state tax structure and spending practices function and its effect on local
governments. He suggested alternative ways of viewing government service delivery.
";1
p
.....
Robert Pulscher. Chief Executive Officer of S.pringsted IncolJ)orated. s.poke about [manre and the
City's bond rating. He assured the task force that the City of Lakeville has a strong "A" rating. He
explained how the overlapping debt from additional school district building could affect the City's
bond rating.
Dennis Feller. LakeviIle's Finance Director. detailed the financial status and spending discipline of
the City. He discussed the various revenue sources, expenditures, and debt burden for the City.
David Licht and Allan Brixius of Northwest Associated Consultants. the City's planning
consultants. presented information on demographic trends and the City's Landbank policy. Mr.
Licht alerted the task force that there would be constraints in the sewer capacity of Lakeville if
development continued at its current pace.
Dr. William Morris of Decision Resources Ltd. presented his findings on community preferences.
He discussed the residents' opinions in the areas of development, growth, communications, and
services.
Jack Matasosky of APPRO Development spoke about industrial development promotion from his
fourteen years experience with Airlake Industrial Park. He discussed what businesses are looking
for and what they do not want. He pointed out some of Lakeville's assets and how the City could
promote more industrial development.
JoAnne Ellison - IndeJle1ldent School District 196 Demographer. Mark Beltz - ISD 192 Support
Services Manager. and Carl Wahlstrom - Superintendent for ISD 194. spoke about demographics.
finance. and growth issues. The school district representatives discussed how growth can strain their
operations and capital improvement needs and discussed what they felt the City needs to address
from their perspective.
4
SCENARIOS
This was an added intermediate step, because some significant unknowns could dramatically
affect the task force's ability to make specific recommendations. When the major variables were
held constant the issues became clearer. The following represent the possible scenarios the City of
Lakeville could face while the task force was in session:
The frrst possible scenario for the City was that of no outside constraints affecting growth.
This assumes that residential market demand remains relatively strong at 450 units per year for a
population of 38,000 by the year 1998. Levy limits are repealed and remain off for the balance of
the decade, enabling the City to tap into new tax capacity. Landbank acreage and sewer capacity
are increased by 1998 to handle above residential growth rate and absorption of 20 acres of
commercial/industrial per year. With this unlikely but possible scenario the primary directive for
the task force would be to suggest some guiding principles for the new growth coming to Lakeville.
The second possible scenario involved primarily a ftscal crisis with levy limit constraints.
This assumes that: residential market demand remains very strong; levy limits remain in place-
cannot tap into new tax capacity; City will not sacrifice service quality; land bank is increased by
Empire Treatment Plant expansion or interim allocation of unused sewer capacity from neighboring
communities. If this scenario were to become reality the task force would need to address land
development in terms of controlling service provision costs and negative fiscalimpacts. Balancing
the mix of housing would have to be closely investigated, along with means of gaining other revenue
sources such as impact fees.
The third scenario of an infrastructure crisis - sewer constraint. ap-peared most likely to the
task force members. This scenario assumes that: residential market demand remains very strong;
levy limits are repealed and remain off for the balance of the decade enabling the City to tap into
new tax capacity; sewer capacity is not expanded beyond current land bank and remains
constrained. The policy implications of this scenario suggest that the City should give priority to
reserving sewer capacity for commercial industrial development and institutions. This situation
also forces the task force to consider recommending extension of the current moratorium on
residential plats and/or mobile home (manufactured) park expansion/development or some
modification of this moratorium.
The fourth scenario involved a ftscal and infrastructure crisis of levy limits and sewer
constraints. This assumes that: residential market demand remains very strong; levy limits are kept
in place; and sewer capacity is not expanded. This bleak scenario implies that the task force would
have to consider extending the moratorium; suggest areas where the City would reduce service
quality; and possibly suggest seeking additional statutory authority from the legislature for
additional impact fees, franchise fees, etc.
5
~ __ [1 /.7: _/~ ~~
\),-r t-/" 1:5:0c0 ~~/,.I:!:> ,U,~
J42F:Y -./wut~1 ~. 14 ~I~CV/A
RECAP
The task force used a SWOT analysis technique. This technique involved examining the Strengths,
Weaknesses, Qpportunities, and Threats regarding growth management in Lakeville in order to
clearly identify the critical issues.
Threats and Opportunities represent forces external to the City of Lakeville:
State mandates for protection of environment, wetlands & water quality
Growing market demand for trade-up and elderly housing
Market demand for Lakeville's quality environment as a scarce commodity
Federal money for transportation improvements
Change in corporate philosophy that increases interest in business park settings
Support for agricultural protection outside MUSA
Increased accessibility of Lakeville - 1-35 upgrade and new interchanges
Household composition changes are diversifying the housing market
Property owners can capture benefit from growth
Shift in demand created by build-out of Apple Valley and Burnsville
Capture new connection charges, assessments through new development to finance infrastructure
Pursue development of a major attraction
1';,
:'
~
;.
Federal and State Government deficits further reducing transfer income to the City
State legislation controlling amount and sources of revenue especially for school districts
Regional control by Metropolitan Council stalls independent action
Movement of industry out of State
Overbuilt office and retail market in Twin Cities
Competition from highly developed retail centers in adjacent communities
Growth outstripping sewer capacity in this part of Dakota County
Transient populations who have no stake in community
Little agricultural protection
Aging population requiririg specialized services
Growing population requiring more services
Cost of transportation i.e. congestion and commuting time
Lack of public transportation to job centers
Unfunded State mandates requiring City expenditures
Escalating tax burdens for new schools and City facilities
Friction caused by conflicting values created by development
R TC control of Airlake Industrial Park Land
6
Strengths and Weakness are internal to the City oflakeville and include the following:
High development standards
Prime land to develop
Wetlands and lakes as a resource attraction for high value properties
Quality parks and schools
Trails, walkways, bikeways, green ways, conservation areas, and wildlife sanctuaries
Rural ambience
High satisfaction with municipal services
Airlake Industrial Park with rail and corporate airport service
Proximity to Interstate 35 and metropolitan employment centers
Active citizen participation in civic affairs
Excellent City management-responsive to citizens, good fiscal controls, and communications with citizens
Has a "downtown" and a sense of place
Phased development with MUSA
Land bank adds flexibility for local growth management
High satisfaction of residents with the City as a place to live
Available skilled and unskilled labor supply for commercial/industrial employers
Public perception that Lakeville is one of the safest cities in the Metro area
Large volunteer/active citizen base
Large number of young people reaching adulthood in next decade
Underdeveloped commercial/industrial uses
Lack of priority and resources allocated to commercial/industrial development
Lack of a common perception on Lakeville's identity
Land bank allows for scattered development and some inefficient use of existing resources
Land bank gives a false sense of development rights
Disproportionate concentration of mobile (manufactured) homes in ISD 192 relative to other districts
Aging or deterioration of existing housing
Lack ofmechanismsforreinvestment in residential property
Lack of housing maintenance code
Growth's impact on responsiveness and timeliness of City services
Lack of enabling legislation to extend impact fees to cover costs of new development
Locational disadvantage for large retail/commercial center
Possible loss of high quality of life under high growth
Older infrastructure in downtown
Lack of urban street sections and storm sewer in AirLake Industrial Park
Lack of a major draw or community focal point
7
STRATEGIC ISSUES
The following strategic issues were developed from the SWOT analysis:
1. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARACTERISTICS
· Location of growth - what policies or principals determine where development takes place?
· Fiscal impact considerations - what is the housing mix to avoid higher property tax burdens?
· Lot sizes, cost, and housing price - how could Lakeville best respond to the housing market?
· Park land to support new population - how should it be secured, developed?
· Preserving the character of the areas neighboring the development - how can conflicts be avoided
between established and emerging residential neighborhoods?
~t
(,
......
2. ATTRACTION OF NEW COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
.. Business retention activities in both public and private sectors - the City's role
· Marketing of Lakeville's assets for new development
3. MAINTAINING ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
· Preservation of environmentally sensitive areas (wetlands, erodible slopes, woodlands) - are current
policies adequate?
.. Protecting municipal water quality - particularly around the well heads.
· Provision of parks, trails, and open space
· Standards for development i.e. aesthetic and engineering
.. Preservation of agriculture as a commercial venture - accommodating low density housing without
constraining farm operations
4. AMOUNT, TIMING, AND LOCATION OF GROWTH
SEWER CONSTRAINTS
.. How to resolve capacity limitations under current rates of growth of +/- 700 units per year
· Allocation to specific uses - who gets priority and what criteria should be used?
FISCAL CONSTRAINTS
· Providing school district programs and facilities without excessive debt burdens
.. How to pay for growth and who should pay for what services
.. Dealing with premature development - approvals without infrastructure in place
· Pacing City resources to monitor and manage the rate of growth
5. CITY ADMINISTRATIVE SYSTEMS AND STAFFING
Staffing to manage growth planning objectives and maintain service quality
Administrative systems to monitor and guide growth
.. Codes and ordinances to maintain quality of existing development
.. Developing management systems to utilize human resources
8
VISION
At this stage the task force developed a consensus on what direction it wants Lakeville to take and what
criteria should be used to judge the various strategies. The criteria included:
" Does the recommendation achieve the goal of keeping property taxes (relatively) stable?
e Is the recommendation legally defensible?
.. Does the recommendation protect or not jeopardize environmental quality?
" Does the recommendation maximize efficiency in government, in the use of scarce resources?
.. Fairness - is the recommendation equitable to both existing and future residents and businesses?
The City should guide growth in such a way that it promotes a healthy coexistence of the multiple lifestyles
found in Lakeville. The City should promote the strengths of each area while seeking ways to link them
together into a coherent whole. Overall, Lakeville's personality should be inviting, have a home-town feel,
a rural appearance, a family orientation, abundant recreational activities, and continue to stress
environmentally sound development. The individual areas should be promoted for their uniqueness.
DEFINING THE VISION...
Commercial and industrial retention and expansion have become a City priority. The types of businesses
are compatible with environmental and community values. The 1-35 strip area has more convenience
shopping; Airlake Industrial Park has been promoted for light industrial uses; and Fairfield Business
Campus has developed with high quality officellight industrial structures in a well landscaped setting.
The downtown area is a focal gathering point for the community with its small scale, pedestrian accessible,
commercial center having additional restaurants and stores. Cultural and art functions are promoted as
well as historical preservation. More housing for seniors is planned for the downtown area to
accommodate future increases in the percentage of elderly populations. Also, the mix of age groups and
housing types at higher densities has made downtown more pedestrian oriented. The bike path system of
Lakeville links downtown with other neighborhoods.
Housing maintenance in the areas with aged housing is being assured by a housing code and vigorous
promotion of a loan and grant program. The new residential development in the rolling and wooded parts
of the City is occurring on larger lots and offering developers incentives to preserve the natural vegetation
and wetlands. Owner-occupied housing has a larger share of the market, but includes more design options
to accommodate lifestyle preferences of households without children, such as high value town homes.
The City has secured the development of a major community focal point, such as: corporate headquarters,
cultural, environmental, governmental, recreational, or religious facility.
Commercial agriculture continues to be a vital part of the Lakeville economic base, with the City
encouraging more clustered development to accommodate farming operations.
9
RECOMMENDATIONS
The task force makes the following recommendations to the City Council to fulfIll its charge. The
recommendations are summarized under six headings:
A. Resolving the anticipated sewer constraint
B. Setting a higher priority for attracting new business and industrial development
C. Expanding the role of the City in business development
D. Guiding the amount, type, location, and quality of residential development
E. Protecting environmental quality while accommodating growth
F. Maintaining the City's management capacity to deliver services
(1
L
A. RESOLVING THE ANTICIPATED SEWER CONSTRAINT
The current rate of new housing construction in Lakeville leads us to conclude that the City will run out of
sewer capacity before the end of the decade unless there is action to either secure additional capacity or
constrain access. The task force views this as a high priority issue and makes the following
recommendations:
1. Immediate action to accelerate the year 2003 CIP plan of the Metropolitan Waste Control
Commission to 1998.
Negotiation with the MWCC would focus on securing additional treatment capacity at the Empire Plant
ahead of schedule.
In the interim, and during these negotiations, we recommend that the City develop other strategies to cope
with various contingencies:
2. Pursue o-n!)ortunities for Lakeville to receive additional capacity from the Empire Plant.
An opportunity may exist for unused sewer capacity in the service area to be reallocated on an interim
basis.
3. Adopt policies and mechanisms to guidy new growth into infill areas where infrastructure is in place
and to fit with the school districts' facility plans to provide additional school capacity.
The five-year lot inventory under the current moratorium provides an opportunity to use existing and
planned public infrastructure efficiently and still meet market demands. We are concerned that the City
not put itself at risk by permitting development and then not being in a position to provide services.
Allocating priority for sewer capacity to existing preliminary platted areas minimizes that risk.
10
4. Sewer capacity should be reserved at the time of any future preliminary plat approval But. any land
that is not final platted within 24 months would lose the sewer allocation.
This procedure would assure a desired pace of growth.
5. Extend the moratorium on new residential platting for nine months in order to give sufficient time to
adopt official controls consistent with task force recommendations.
Though the task force wishes to have the moratorium removed in the shortest time frame and not
jeopardize developer's plans for platting in the spring, we have realistically appraised the time needed to
gain approval from the Metropolitan Council and the Metropolitan Waste Control Conunission. Fast
tracking this approval is a high priority.
This recommendation gives the City time to pursue expanded sewer capacity and develop appropriate
controls while not jeopardizing developers' plans for their anticipated platting next spring.
In the event of constrained sewer capacity between 1992 and 1998 the task force recommends the following:
6. Adopt a rolling five-year supply set-aside program for new commercial and industrial development
and also for anticipated institutional uses.
This policy will allow sufficient time for businesses to make their development decisions and secure
fmancing. The policy would also meet the City's goals of securing additional tax base, generating
employment opportunities and thus stabilizing the City's and school districts' property tax level.
A set-aside for institutional use is recommended to reserve sewer capacity for the possibility of new
schools, expansion of existing schools, fire station, ice arena, police station, park facilities, and churches.
These support facilities must be provided concurrently with increases in population.
B. SETTING A HIGHER PRIORITY FOR ATTRACTING OF NEW BUSINESS AND
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
The task force believes there are many waysJor the City to be a partner with the business community. We
recognize some of the locationallimitations for certain types of non-residential uses, but also see many
opportunities as the fully urbanized area moves more swiftly into Lakeville. Our recommendations include
the following:
7. Facilitate earlier completion of new highway access. particularly the County Road 46 and 70
interchanges with 1-35
11
These roadway improvements are vital to the development of commercial land along the freeway and
for increasing the accessibility to Airlake Industrial Park. The City could take a strong proactive
position with the County and State in implementing these improvements. The new federal
transportation bill allocates more dollars to transportation and these dollars should be tapped to
facilitate commercial and industrial development.
Highway improvements should be a high priority investment with the City's capital improvement
program and be timed to match the federal/state investments.
The City should explore opportunities to locate and expand park and ride locations and investigate
intra-city transit options to link activity centers. ""
p
g Consider additional "front ending" of infrastructure improvements for new commercial and industrial
development.
The City's general policy of requiring developers to fInance their own public improvements is endorsed,
but we see some windows of opportunity where this policy could be modified without negatively
impacting the property tax burden. The City could act as a catalyst to speed up the pace of development
and influence the quality if a feasibility study demonstrated a positive fmancial impact for the City over
a five-year period.
As a general policy, the City should support and encourage these land uses for areas where the
transportation infrastructure is already in place.
9. Facilitate the timely transfer of control of Resolution Trust C011l0ration (R TC) land in Airlake
Industrial Park to the private sector.
This property represents a huge resource for the community and we are concerned that it not be lost.
Public acquisition involves risk, however, and thus the terms under which the transfer of ownership is
pursued are critically important. If sewer capacity can be assured for developers and some of the
infrastructure ~n be front-ended, the likelihood of earlier development and increases to the tax base are
much greater.
Public support for an industrial incubator in the Airlake Industrial Park and Fairfield Business Park is
also recommended.
We also see possibilities for developing new market strategies to promote the assets of Lakeville to a larger
Midwest market. Our recommendations to add staff capability to work with the private sector are
described in a later section.
12
C. EXPANDING THE ROLE OF THE CITY IN BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT
Along with promotion of new businesses and industries, the task force recommends improving efforts to
help in areas of expansion and retention. We recommend that:
10. The City should facilitate development. expansion. and retention of businesses and make the process
smoother and more effective.
It may be useful to promote a standing committee with broad representation (similar to task force) in
order to keep information channels open in addition to adding a staff person to focus on economic
development activities.
D. GUIDING THE AMOUNT, TYPE, LOCATION, AND QUALITY OF RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT
The task force recognizes that a reasonable level of growth is healthy for the community. Too much growth
overburdens the systems' ability to expand and too little growth creates problems with debt service. In
order to better guide residential development the task force recommends the following:
11. Develop growth control mechanisms which set a residential development target of 450 to 550 units
per year.
The task force is of the opinion that the City should carry a lot inventory of two to three years supply.
This pace matches the ability of the City to maintain stable property taxes. Also, a steady pace of
growth fits with the Independent School District 194's facilities expansion plan based on 400 units a year
through the 1990's.
12. Shift away from the land banks' first come-first served a;Rproach if at all possible as it tends to create
(or allows for) a land rush for development.
This recommendation is designed to stabilize debt burdens and achieve greater efficiency.
The City should seek inf1l1 patterns within the MUSA which are logical and reasonably contiguous.
The City should direct residential growth based on an approved capital improvements plan.
The City should seek to discourage premature subdivision development; ie. in areas that lack
infrastructure such as schools, sewers, and roads.
13
;>. pr::le )oW~ d~sity in rW~tial dis~i in 9rder to in~ie~ open space ~d pro~l
nviro entally en i 'v; areas (wetlands. wooded areas. stee.,p slopes). This would encourage higher
~alue homes and larg:er lot sizes which would help gain a fiscal balance.
Consider substituting minimum lot size control with an overall density control inside and outside
MUSA. The technique of "clustering" homes should be investigated.
14. ~ :Ill :~ an :met m~~emand. III ])llI1iclI!il!. there lIl'JlOars tQ be a sho~1l" Qf lDisl-
price_ ownh e in th $110 0 $1 K range. For example. some areas currently zoned 8-4 could be
;o;;nti-;lly rez~ned to accommodate the housing and protect the wetlands along with attaining an
overall mix of housing which provides a fiscal balance in types of housing.
~N
.'
i'
~5 ~ =:0 of ~'llIDg mQbile (manllfa~) borne !",ks or dev~9])1llf1lt of new mobile
,m:;;~",;;;' h""';'d;"ks ;m;uld be done Wllh B j;On1mun1ly land Im,,1 m 9rder to prpmQte long term
affi r i1i nd resi nt-own r inves1ment. The City may wish to be involved in developing this land
trust with public streets and parks. (If it is the wish of the Council, the task force recommends extending
the portion of the moratorium dealing with development or expansion of mobile (manufactured) parks
up to the full 18 months in order to allow adequate time for staff to explore this possibility.)
We, as task force members, recommend the following for improvement and protection of aged housing:
}6. Promote housing for senior citizens in the downtown area as it is fiscally positive and cmndutilize
the existing senior center. Also. the downtown provides convenient pedestrian access for those seniors
no longer able to drive.
E. PROTECTING ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY WHILE ACCOMMODATING GROWTH
Protecting and preserving the environment is a strong concern of the community well demonstrated by the
fmdings in Decision Resources Ltd resident survey. The task force recommends the following additions to
current environmental protection measures:
18. Pursue preservation of agriculture as a commercial venture in Lakeville by utilizing Agriculture
Preserves. Green Acres. and other possible programs such as mver Grove Heights' "Commercial Crop
Land Preserve Land" ordinance.
19. Water Quality management plans should be implemented to ensure that land use controls protect
both ground and surface water quality.
14
Well-head areas need to be protected from polluting uses. Also, wells in contaminated areas should be
phased out.
Encouraging alternatives to using chemicals on lawns is another means of reducing water
contamination.
20. Overlay districts should be utilized to enhance protection of environmentally sensitive areas ~rosion.
wetland, tree preservation) thus moving. in part. to performance strategies.
Environmental protection measures should be packaged to prevent impeding the development process.
21. The City should determine the appropriate amount or percent of area to be landscaped rather than
counting trees or bushes and species An approximate 15% requirement for landsca,pin& would be in
accord with neighboring community standards.
22. Consider adjusting current policies for siting neighborhood parks.
The siting of parks should take into account the location and availability of neighborhood amenities. In
some areas a 1/2 mile rather than 3/4 mile radius may be appropriate.
F. MAINTAINING THE CITY'S MANAGEMENT CAPACITY TO DELIVER SERVICES
The task force recognizes the commitment of City government to fiscally conservative management
practices. We were pleased to note the relatively low per-capita property tax ratio vis-a-vi other cities. In
light of this fact we make the following recommendations to enhance overall efficiency of City government:
23. Develop a contingency plan for future levy limits or loss ofLGA to ameliorate future fiscal crises.
24. Develop a stronger human resources staffing plan in order to more effectively use staff and be able to
coordinate and expand volunteer efforts.
25. Hire staff to work specifically on commercial/industrial development. (The rationale was discussed
in the business retention section of this report.)
26. The City should institute a continual review system for enhancing various functions of government
operations in order to maximize efficiency.
27. Implement a Geographic Information System or Management Information System to improve
handling of information loads. Such systems could be a valuable component in City's growth
management efforts and in evaluating alternative strategies.
15
28. The City should continue and protect the current incentive ,plan for personnel to encourage high
levels of service.
'}.9. Encourage the current fiscally conservative management approach to continue - and possibly set a
goal to continue to be one of the lowest per~capita expenditure cities.
~o. co;",unicutiOn with business owners is very important. A public relations j){oifam sbould be
evelo ed to facilitate communication between the City. business community. and residents.
p
~' j
!
16