The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCity Council Packet 04-21-2009 SpecialCITY OF PLYMOUTH AGENDA SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 21, 2009, AFTER BOARD OF EQUALIZATION MEDICINE LAKE CONFERENCE ROOM Call to Order. 2. Land acquisition for Northwest Greenway (postponed from March 24) 3. Adjourn. Special Council Meeting 1 of 1 January 13, 2009 MEMO CITY OF PLYMOUTH 3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MN 55447 DATE: April 2, 2009 for Study Session April 21, 2009 TO: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager FROM: Eric J. Blank, Director, Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: Status Update of the Northwest Greenway Acquisition Program ACTION REQUESTED: Review the status of acquisitions of property for the Northwest Greenway and provide direction to staff on how to proceed with the future acquisitions for the Greenway. NORTHWEST GREENWAY: Northwest Greenway was an idea that was born as part of the 2000 Comprehensive Plan Update. The City's Comprehensive Park Plan called for a large city park in each of the four wards. The Northeast Ward's Timbershores Park is the city park on Bass Lake. In southeast Plymouth, East and West Medicine Lake Parks were designated the city parks. In southwest Plymouth, Parkers Lake Park was designated as the city park. In northwest Plymouth, because there are no lakes, the Greenway plan was developed as a substitute. The idea is to use the large wetland basin and Elm Creek as the focal point around which to create a city-wide recreational park area. The Northwest Greenway master plan was adopted by the City Council on February 12, 2002. The latest version of the Greenway has been updated and incorporated in the 2009 Comprehensive Plan. The purpose of the Greenway is to create an approximately 2'/2 mile corridor encompassing the property around Camelot and Pomerleau Lakes on the east end, traversing west to the wetland along Peony Lane across from Wayzata High School. The corridor is estimated to be between 200 and 300 feet in width, trying to preserve as many stands of trees and wetlands as we can. The Greenway envisions an underpass at Cheshire Parkway, an overpass at Vicksburg Lane, and at -grade crossing at Dunkirk. The Greenway as it is currently planned would also connect northerly to a trail coming down from the City of Maple Grove, following Elm Creek. The Greenway will go through the current property we have at Egan Park. STATUS OF ACQUISITIONS: Please refer to the attached spread sheet which depicts the acquisitions that have been made to date. We currently have acquired ten parcels of property for the Greenway. Four of these parcels have been purchased outright with cash, and six of them have come via dedication. We have an agreement with the Hamptons for an additional purchase and another agreement pending with Craig Scherber for a ten -acre parcel just east of Dunkirk. The spread sheet identifies the original property owner of each site. It gives the size of the property, the year it was acquired, the method of acquisition, the appraised value done by the City, the actual purchase price, the cost per acre, and the cost per good acre. In arriving at the cost per good acre on the Nedegard property, you have to subtract the value of the house at approximately $400,000. The same thing is true on the Begin property on Pomerleau Lake - you have to subtract the $20,000 worth of improvements made for the picnic shed, parking area and other improvements. Overall to date, including the Hamptons, we have acquired approximately 138 acres of property for about $3.5 million in cost. The cost per acre is about $45,500 per acre, and the cost per good acre averages out to be just over $144,000 per acre. We had had discussions with three other property owners which I will cover at the work session. We are not pursuing the acquisition of property for the 10th playfield at this time. FINANCIAL STATUS: The attached memo dated March 14, 2006, from Mike Kohn outlined the proposed Capital Improvement Programs for the years 2006 through 2020. This is the report that the Council used as foundation for the November 2006 bond referendum for $9 million for the Greenway and park acquisition. The financial plan at that time estimated that it would take $14 million to acquire the Greenway and the 10th Playfield site. Land was estimated to cost approximately $200,000 per acre. The CIP showed approximately $8 million for the playfield acquisition and $6.1 million for Greenway. We also anticipated that there would be acres of property dedicated through the platting process for the Greenway. As you can see from the actual acquisition chart, substantial property has been acquired through Park Dedication. Keep in mind that every acre dedicated through Park Dedication reduces cash that is contributed to the Park Dedication Fund that can be used for other park projects. The good news, as you can see from the spreadsheet, is that the cost that we are paying per acre or the cost per good acre is well below the $200,000 that was estimated when this plan was originally developed. To date, the City has sold approximately $2.8 million of the $9 million bonds approved. Approximately $6.2 million of bonds are remaining to be sold. The 2009-2013 CIP allocates $7 million for the Greenway, with $6 million to come from bonding and 1 million to come from Park Dedication Funds. If we reach agreement on the Scherber parcel, we will need to sell bonds in July of this year for approximately $2 million. This would be commensurate with the original $1.8 million in bonding and it is estimated that the annual debt payment would be approximately $225,000. If we intend to sell bonds, I would attempt to get agreements for one or two more purchases so that we could roll them into a single bond sale to make the administrative costs of selling the bonds more effective. ACQUISITION FACTORS: We secure outside appraisals on all the properties that we attempt to acquire. Some of the current appraisal issues include the lack of sales of property in Plymouth. The appraisers generally look for five comparable sales to determine the value for the appraisal. Lacking the current sales and comparables, they have to go back in time perhaps 18 to 24 months to find comparables. As you know, the economy and the land deals of 18 to 24 months ago are totally different than today. Another factor is that everything we do is public information. The land owners that I deal with talk to each other because they are neighbors. When we have set a price for one piece of property, it is quite well known by the other people we are dealing with. Another issue is that as we are trying to buy property, some of these land owners can and may out -wait us. The net effect is that they can block the completion and development of the Greenway. Keep in mind that the appraisal is the beginning of the negotiation process. As with any transaction, we will not have a deal with participating land owners until we have a willing seller and a willing buyer who agree on a common price. RECOMMENDATION: Staff feels that the acquisition program has been going quite well. The turn -down economy has certainly played to our favor. While we are not seeing plats where we could get dedication of property, we are seeing willing sellers who are willing to negotiate and arrive at a reasonable price for property. I recommend we continue to aggressively try to acquire property while the economic turn -down is still a major factor. I welcome any input and direction the Council may have on this process. EB/ds Attachment t, A cl ,; `'^cmc_; ... /+ Y Lake 49, ,. Camel C 4 it .. .. Lake Pome lerau Gyaq4 tit.- ;t^oE t , •,:. _ _ ' t ,: i +, l .' 296 I AX71 Northwest Greenway Acquisitions As of April 09 ACQUIRED OR ACQUISITION IN PROCESS PROPOSED GREENWAY ACQUISITION Ref: •flit_ 1,000 500 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 r ` - Feet y'r s".°rl tr`fi +rt,'``«els , ; • - - fir. . ^Ar'f:...'. '" ! '_—S'yr -' J 6 a • ° aF Northwest Greenway Land Acquisition Summary Report April 21, 2009 Map Year Method of Appraised Actual Cost Per Cost Per Funding Number Name of Owner Size AC Acquired Acquisition Value Purchase Price Acre Good Acre Source 1 NederQaard 70 AC I Nov. 2007 Cash $2,925,000 1 $2,610,000 $317571 $122,777' 1 2006 Open Space BondsT $400,000 for house & sheds 2 Gustafson 10 AC I Oct. 2001 Cash $205,000 $205,000 $20,500 $205,000 1 Capital Improvement Fund 3 1 Harvest Hills 1 7.39 AC 1 2001 1 Park Dedication I N.A. I N.A. I N.A. I N.A. I Park Dedication 4 1 Taryri Hills t 25 AC 1 2006 1 Park Dedication I N.A. I N.A. I N.A. I N.A. I Park Dedication 5 1 Woodcrest 1 2.37 AC 1 2008 1 Park Dedication I N.A. I N.A. I N.A. I N.A. I Park Dedication 6 Claseman T 1.15 AC Oct. 2008 Cash 1 $69,000 $75,000 $65,217 1 $93,750 Park Dedication 7 1 Trillum Woods 1 2.89 AC 1 2009 1 Park Dedication I N.A. I N.A. I N.A. I N.A. I Park Dedication 8 1 Glacier Vista 1 6.6 AC 1 2001 1 Park Dedication I N.A. I N.A. I N.A. I N.A. I Park Dedication 9 1 Leepers 1 1.3 AC 1 1987 1 Park Dedication N.A. I N.A. I N.A. I N.A. I Park Dedication 10 1 Begin 1 5 AC 1 2005 1 Cash 1 $206,500 1 $210,000 1 $42,000 1 $190,000* 1 Capital Improvement Fund I * $20,000 for improvements 137.7 AC $3,510,000 $45,524 $144,467 Total Total Average Average Park Dedication 11 Hampton Proposed I 6 AC 2009 Cash $239,000 410,000 68,332 110,810 1 (will roll into bond sale) 137.7 AC $3,510,000 $45,524 $144,467 Total Total Average Average I', 1 1 E Capital Improvement Program City of Plymouth, Minnesota Project 4 07 -PIS -003 Project `aloe Land Acquisition 2009 th....2013 Contact Departruent Park Projects Type ImprovcsnentlAcquisitiou Useful Life C:ftte;or)' Unassigned Prioritc Total Project Cust VMU,000 Description The City plans to acquire land in NW Plymouth for future development ns a community playfield, Northwest Greenway Cor'idor, andneihborhoodparks. Sotne of this land will be acquired through dedication but the remainder will need to be purchased. It is anticipated that thegparklandwillnotbedcvetopeduntilthesurroundingareadevelops. I i - Justification Acquisition of land for a 10th playfteld, Northwest Greenway Corridor, and neighborhood parks is anticipated in the Comprehensive Plati and PantFacilitiesPlan. This project will acquire parkland necessary for the completion oftlie park system. Once developed., the Northwest portion of 5 ' Plymouth will have the same quantity and quality of parks as the other developed sections of Plymouth. 31 l i Expenditure 2449 2010 2011 2012 201.3 Total r 7,000,000 Land Acquisition 6,750,000 250,000 Total 6,750,000 250,000 7,000,000 Funding Sources 2009 2014 2011 2012 2013 Total 6,000,000 Bonds 6,000,000 x,000,000 Park Dedication Fund 750,000 250,000 Total 6,750,000 250,000 7,000,000 Operational Imp act/Other The acquisition of parkland will not have an immediate effect on operating costs since it is not expected to be developed for a number of years. Ultimately, when the 10th Playfield is developed, it will likely require the addition of at least 2 FTE's, a mower, groomer, 2 pick-ups, and othermaterialsandsupplies. It i estimated that annual operating costs will be in the $150,000 to $200,000 per year range, depending on the type ofayCorridorwillresultinannualoperatingcostsofapproximately $3,000 per milefacilitiesdeveloped. The development of the Northwest Greenw for each of the 4.5 miles of trail. It costs about $15,000 er ear to maintain a nei hborhood park. Prvdrrced Using the Pian -h Cupilrr! Pla+rni+ag' rQfll e Pape 2 ,4 lo+nlay. f)croher 06. - Agenda Number: U. TO: Dwight Johnson, City Manager FROM: Eric Blank, Director of Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: Northwest Greenway Master Plan DATE: February 7, 20.02, for Council Meeting of February 12 1. ACTION REQUESTED: City Council should adopt the attached resolution approving the master plan for the Northwest Greenway. 2. BACKGROUND: The final draft is a culmination of about six months of work between staff, the community, and our consultants. We have conducted two community open house meetings. It's been through the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission, and two weeks ago, before the Planning Commission. Barry Warner and Ken Grieshaber of SRF Consulting will present a power point presentation to the City Council at the February 12 meeting. If you are comfortable with the results of the study, we are recommending that you approve the draft document, so that it can be printed and made available to the general public. Because we are seeing a fair amount of development activity taking place in the northwest part of Plymouth, we need to have an adopted plan to share with both private landowners and developers, so they know exactly what is going to be set aside for future open space. The draft document calls for two trails to loop around the major wetland on the west end of the Greenway. The lower trail will be a mowed grass trail allowing for horses and walkers to encircle the wetland. It is proposed that the upper trail around this wetland will be crushed limestone. The draft document then calls for a 12 foot wide asphalt trail to be the major east -west link between the wetland near the high school all the way over to Mud Lake Park near 494. The Park and Recreation Advisory Commission in their recommendation (see enclosed minutes) has recommended that, to begin with, this trail portion also be crushed limestone. Their primary reason for this had to do with ground water runoff. Upon further review by staff and the consultant, I am still recommending that the plan should indicate that this east -west corridor remain as an asphalt hard surface. I think the Commission, in their deliberations, were mostly considering their experiences with the Luce Line. trail in southern Plymouth. This trail was built over a very flat railroad road bed in almost a perfectly straight line. The difference in the Greenway is that it is going to traverse some very steep slopes and have to move in and out of many wooded areas. In reviewing this with our maintenance division, we think that we will have extremely high maintenance costs because of the washing effect you get when you deal with crushed rock on sloping PRAC Minutes/January 2002 Page 2 asked for bonfire volunteers from PRAC. At this point, it appears that Fire & Ice may have to be moved to the playfields on the north side of County Road 6, due to the uncertainty over the thickness of the ice, because of the mild winter we've been experiencing. The Yard & Garden Expo will be in the dome in March. Musliner asked about the New Years Eve event. Blank said 120 attended the family event, but the teen event got cancelled. Blank said we will reevaluate the program and concentrate more on the -family night. This may start later, around 6:15 p.m., and run for three hours. We have not seen great success with teen events so far. Some of the programs do okay, but the special events are not doing so well. We have been following a Burnsville teen center called The Garage. Our teen council has been monitoring their progress. c. Others. There were no other presentations. 4. PAST COUNCIL ACTION a. The Council adopted the 2001-06 CIP. They removed the funding for the Arts in the Park program, but they are open to ideas on a case by case basis for art programs. Blank said we will go back to the Council in two weeks for 2002 project- approval. The big item will be the Mud Lake Neighborhood Park. The tentative scheduleis to have neighborhood meetings. in February, refine plans in March, bid the project in April, award contracts in May, and begin construction in late May/early June. PRAC's role will be to listen to citizens at the neighborhood meetings to determine what they would like ina neighborhood park. Weir asked what the neighborhood meetings consist of. Blank explained the process. He said it usually takes two informal meetings with residents, then residents attend- a PRAC meeting and give their feedback.on the proposed master plan. Following that PRAC approves plan and forwards it to the City Council. b. Park dedication ordinance fees for 2002 were set at $2,300 per unit and $6,400 per acre. Our fees will be the same as Eden Prairie. These are reviewed annually, Blank explained. FINISHED BUSINESS a. orthwest Greenway.master plan. Singer e-malled some questions and omments to Blank ho forwarded them to the consultant. She found the census data information somewhat confusing and wanted clarification on the number of households being estimated for that area. Her other comments dealt mostly with rephrasing some sentences to make their meaning more clear, and correcting typos, etc. In regard to Singer's comments about the census information, the consultant, in a written memo, stated that sentences have been simplified to only show forecasted population growth in the City The consultant will be making changes to the plan based on PRAC's comments and will then make a presentation to the Planning Commission next Wednesday. Blank wants to know how PRAC feels about the bigger concepts of the plan. He said that staff PRAC Minutes/January 2002 Page 3 is comfortable with the plan and is recommending approval. We need adoption of the plan by the Council no later than February. Meyer is opposed to paved trails. She stated they will create a lot of run off. Limestone does not require a lot of maintenance. The lower portion of the west end looping trail will be mowed grass, while the upper is crushed limestone around the Elm Creek Basin. The east/west corridor is proposed for paving and would tie into the City's local trail system. Fiemann is an inline skater- and looks forward to having paved trails. Meyer suggested that maybe it could be paved later, but not in this first phase. The beauty of having two trails is that you can run on the grassy surface or the limestone surface. Equestrian use is also planned for the grassy surface. Fiemann would like to see pavement at some point, so that we accommodate all potential users. Blank hasn't looked into the cost differences, but he said $10 a running foot is the approximate cost to pave. Rezabek stated that he has used the Paul Bunyan trail. They have a paved portion and a limestone portion. He suggested paving the trails later, and using the savings to help purchase land: Baker Park has a fully paved trail. Asphalt will eventually crack, and there are maintenance issues with paving. Blank said our maintenance crews prefer pavement to limestone. It's easier to keep clean in the winter. Singer doesn't want a yellow line down the middle of any paved path. She feels that once you do that, people think they can drive a motorized vehicle on it. Rezabek thinks trees, should be further away from. trails' edge than four feet, which is how it appears in the proposed master plan. Blank stated that when we purchase the 200 foot—wide corridor, we will stake the trail in a way that does the least amount of damage to the trees, as well as. locate the trail as far from the trees as possible. Rezabek asked if we are able to require that developers place trails in specific locations. Blank said once the Greenway is adopted in the official City comprehensive plan, developers will have to conform to our master plan. FIEMANN MOVED & REZABEK SECONDED A MOTION TO APPROVE NORTHWEST GREENWAY MASTER PLAN AS DOCUMENTED BY SRF, WITH CHANGES RECOMMENDED BY SINGER, AND FURTHER, THAT TRAILS INITIALLY IDENTIFIED AS ASPHALT BE CRUSHED LIMESTONE WITH THE OPTION TO CHANGE THEM LATER TO ASPHALT. Motion carried with all ayes. Fiemann asked about negotiations for Begin property. Blank stated that we sent them a letter outlining four different scenarios for acquiring their land, but Mr. Begin has gone south for the winter. No headway on this is expected now until May or June. This is a sensitive issue for the family. Regarding the future of Hampton Hills golf course, the land has not been reguided, Blank said. Comprehensive pian was just adopted 18 months ago, and this is labeled public/semi—public in the comp plan. Reguiding this would be a mammoth undertaking. A developer has made offers to buy many pieces of property. It would effect transportation plans, sewer and water plans, etc. We are monitoring all three golf courses closely at this time. Fiemann asked if the City could be sued over denying development. It could eventually end up in court, Blank said. I grades. The crushed rock limestone would also tend to prohibit inline skating on this section of trail and make it just a little more difficult for people with disabilities, baby strollers, etc. One option the Council might consider on this issue is to simply indicate that this portion of trail could be either crushed rock or pavement. A decision will be made at the time of construction. 3. BUDGET IMPACT: Funding is allocated in the adopted capital improvement budget for acquisition of property. 4. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council adopt the Northwest Greenway master plan as presented or amended by the Council. EB/np CITY OF PLYMOUTH RESOLUTION 2002 - ADOPTING NORTHWEST GREENWAY MASTER PLAN WHEREAS, the City of Plymouth comprehensive plan calls for the development of a Northwest Greenway, and WHEREAS, the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission, city staff, and park consultant have developed and presented a proposed Northwest Greenway master plan, and WHEREAS, two public meetings have been held to review this plan, and WHEREAS, the Parks Commission and Planning Commission have reviewed said plan, and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and is in concurrence with the proposed master plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLYMOUTH CITY COUNCIL that the Northwest Greenway master plan as presented to the Council on February 12, 2002, is hereby adopted. Adopted by the City Council on Agenda Number: TO: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager FROM: Mike Kohn, Financial Analyst and Eric Blank, Park & Recreation Director SUBJECT: Potential Park System Projects and Financing DATE: March S, 2006 for City Council Meeting of March 14, 2006 1. ACTION REQUESTED: Evaluate this report and place the issue of fdwre park systern projects and financing on a future City Council study session agenda for further consideration. 2. BACKGROUND: The Park and Recreation department has prepared a list of projects that they would like to accomplish to finish off the park system for the City of Plymouth (see Attachment. I). Some of these items may change, be added to, or be eliminated as part of the Comprehensive Plan process. However, they currently represent the best menu of potential projects available. In addition, the Park and Recreation and Administrative Services departments have attempted to estimate revenues that may be available to pay for these projects (see Attachment II). Once again, these revenue estimates may change significantly based on decisions made in the Comprehensive Plan process. These projections can be compared in total to see if the list of projects is reasonable in total. These projections must also be compared fi•om a timing perspective to see if the projects can be adequately cashflowed. The figures developed for this report rely heavily on a great number of assumptions regarding land costs, land donation vs. fee collection, park dedication fee amounts, inflation, ultimate land use, community needs and others. In general we feel the report is fairly accurate with the tuzderstanding that the margin of error is potentially in the $1,000,000 plus .range. 3. DISCUSSION: Expenditures The list of potential projects (Attachment I) includes items already contained in the CIP (bold) as well as items which were omitted from the CIP due to timing or cost considerations. The items contained in the CIP are projected to cost approximately $5,150,000 and it is projected that these items can be adequately financed with funds on hand; plus projected park dedication fees received in the next five year period. The other projects on the list include: development costs for six neighborhood parks (the assumption is that the land — approximately 40 acres - will be donated); additional cost for acquisition of the 10` h playfield due to rising land prices; possible acquisition of an additional 20 acres for the l 0ih playfield; development of 15 miles of trails; acquisition of approximately 23 acres of land for the Northwest Greenway Corridor (it is assumed that about 30 acres of trail corridor will be donated); development of the Northwest Greenway Corridor; 10"' playfield development; West Med Park building; Parker's Lake pavilion upgrade; Zachary Park program building; skate park; and tennis dome. In total, this list represents projects with a cumulative total cost of $38 million, with. the Park Dedication Fund potentially responsible for over $35 million. Revenues Attachment H, which projects park dedication fee revenues, consists of three separate tables illustrating three separate scenarios. The first scenario is based on the Metropolitan Council's estimates on household growth for the City of Plymouth. The Met Council projects that Plymouth will add 6,000 households between 2005 and 2030 with specific targets in 2010 and 2020. Based on this information, a computation of land donation vs. fee revenues, and a projection of fee increases, the first scenario estimates revenues of $5.3 million by 2010, $22.5 million by 2020 and $45.6 million by 2030. If this scenario is correct the City would receive more than enough revenue from the Park Dedication Fund to eventually pay for all the items in the Potential Parks Projects list. The second scenario reflects what could potentially happen if the City of Plymouth chooses to develop at a lower density than desired by the Met Council. This scenario projects a total of 5,000 new households by 2030. Based on this information, the second scenario estimates revenues of $3.3 million by 2010, $17.8 million by 2020, and $36.8 million by 2030. If this scenario is correct the City would receive just about enough revenue from the Park Dedication Fund to pay for all the items in the Potential Park Projects list. The third scenario reflects what could happen if the City of Plymouth chooses to develop at an even lower density. This scenario projects a total of 4,000 new households by 2030. Based on this information, the third scenario estimates revenues of $2.3 million by 2010, $14 million by 2020, and $25.4 million' by 2030. If this scenario is correct, the City would not receive enough arl PedicatiorEu to pay for all the items on the Potential Park PrQiects list All of these scenarios are greatly affected by a number of assumptions. One of the primary assumptions is the park dedication fee. Currently, the fee is $4,000 per unit for residential property. Several other cominunities have fees that are considerably higher than $4,000. In addition, a model based on land costs of $150,000 per acre and 6,000 new units suggests that a fee of up to $5,400 could be justified. When the model is run based on land costs of $200,000 per acre and 4,000 new units it suggests that a fee of up to $9,300 could be justified. The Council may wish to become more aggressive in raising park dedication fees which would r greatly impact the amount of revenues that would be received, / Cashflows For the most part, development costs are assumed to increase at the rate of inflation (3%). Land costs are quite another matter. Raw land prices in Plymouth have increased dramatically over the years. The attached table (Attachment III) shows the escalation of land prices since 1969. From 1969 to 2005 land prices have gone up an average of 13% per year. However, there has been a recent spike in land prices both inside and outside the MUSA area, and in adjacent areas such as Maple Grove. Land speculation by developers who believe that development will be allowed in NW Plymouth, as a result of Comprehensive Plan modifications, is well underway. Any actual change in the Comprehensive Plan may cause land values to shoot even higher. To provide sone perspective, land is currently going for over $300,000 per acre in Maple Grove for property that is served by sewer and water. Other areas of Plymouth are seeing % acre gst served by streets and utilities going for nearly $500,000. Given the rapidly increasing price of land, it is clear that land acquisition should be a priority, if the City does desire to add a 10th Playfield and create a Northwest Greenway Corridor. On the bottom of Attachment T there is a breakout entitled "Select Land Acquisition". This breaks out the cost of land acquisition for the l 0th Playfield (40 acres only) plus the Northwest Greenway. The cost per acre for the 10th Playfield has been held at $200,000 per acre since negotiations are currently underway. The cost of land for the Northwest Greenway has been inflated from the current price of $200,000 per acre by 15% per year and is projected to be acquired in 2007, 2008, and 2009. In total, it is estimated that it will cost approximately $14,000,000 to acquire the 10 dand Northwest Greenway. Of this 4,000,000 is already progranuned into the CIP and is funded by monies currently in the Capital Improvement Improvement Fund, and Park Dedication Fund, as well as park ded hopefully be received over the next 5 years. This leaves a shortfall of approximately_ 10,000,000 if only land, and the other items contained in the CTP, are done in the 2006-2(10 timeframe. Alternatives To solve this cashflow issue the City has only a few alternatives. Most available reserves have already been spoken for which leads to the conclusion that some form of debt must be utilized. There are two reasonable debt alternatives for the acquisition of the l Ota' Playfield and Northwest Greenway: 1) General Obligation debt backed by a tax levy on the taxable market value of the City (requires referendum), and 2) Annual Appropriation Lease Revenue Bonds backed by future park dedication fees (does not require a referendum). The single most important consideration when evaluating these two alternatives is to answer the question of who should be paying to support the debt service (and ultimately the land purchase). There are several items to consider including: who will use the facilities, historical precedents, and the purpose of fees being collected. When evaluating the 1 Oth Playfield we would argue that this facility is primarily required to serve the new residents who will be moving into NW Plymouth as it develops. Consequently, it would seem reasonable that the new residents should pay for that facility with the park dedication fees that they generate vs. usage of a general tax levy paid for by all residents, including those who have aiready paid for playfields located in other areas of the community. Park dedication fees are authorized for the acquisition, development and expansion of park facilities necessary to serve new development. Therefore, use of these fees to acquire the Ioth Play -field would seem to be a good fit. When evaluating the NW Greenway we would argue that this is primarily open space that benefits the community as a whole. Consequently, the acquisition of this property should be paid for by the City as a whole. This has been the City's past practice. The last time the City acquired open space it was paid for by $2,235,000 of GO bonds issued in 1995. When making the decision to issue debt, the City must remain cognizant that this will likely not be the only debt that will be issued by the City in the not to distant future. It is likely that the City may have to issue some debt for fixture street reconstruction projects, a fourth fire station, and reconstruction/expansion of streets such as Vicksburg Lane, CR 47, and possibly others. Surnmary If the Cit}, desires to acquire land for a 10"' Playfield and NW Greenway in the near future it may make sense to issue two separate bond issues. The first would be an Annual Appropriation Lease Revenue Bond for the 10th Mayfield. This would enable the City to use future park dedication fees to pay for the purchase of the property. If a portion of the fluids currently earmarked for use in the purchase of the 10th playfield were used the bond issue could be bought down to approximately $6,000,000. The remainder 'of the proceeds could be transferred into the Park Dedication Fund to cashflow debt service and other park dedication funded projects. Two examples of cashflows are attached (see Attachment IV). If this option is acceptable it could be done fairly quickly without waiting for a referendum in November of this year. This could result in more favorable sales terms. The second bond issue would be a General Obligation bond issue for purchase of the portion of the NW Greenway not likely to be acquired through land dedication. It has been the City's past practice to purchase open space with GO issues which results in the spreading of the cost on all taxable market value in the City. If a GO bond is pursued, it would require that the item be placed on the ballot as a referendum question at either the November, 2006 or 2007 general elections. The date for notification of the Couurty for intent to place an item on the ballot is September 15 of each year. If a GO bond were issued for the approximately $6,000,000 cost of acquiring the NW Greenway Corridor, it would result in an annual levy of $23.14 for an average valued home of $356,200 see Attachment V). This would be at least partially offset by the maturity of the current open space bond which matures in 2010. This maturity will free up approximately $10.77 of levy from the average valued home for other uses (which may not be parks related). 4. BUDGET IMPACT: Any action taken to increase the authorized costs or change fiulding sources for acquisition of the 101h Playfield and NW Greenway will require an amendment to the 2006-2010 CIP. 5. RECOMMENDATION: The scope and funding of future park system projects is a complex issue with potential long-term ramifications. Due to market conditions, and deadlines for submission of ballot referendum questions, it is important that staff receive some timely direction on which course(s) of action to pursue to ensure the future that the City Council desires. Consequently, staff would recommend that the City Council place the issue of fixture park projects and financing on a future study session agenda for more detailed analysis and consideration. i Attachment Potential Park Projects - 2006 to 2020 Inllation - Land 15,00% Inflation Development 3.00% Item Funding Source 2006 2017 2005` - 2009 2010 2411 2012 2013 2014 2015 2D16 20 17 2018 2019 2020 Total Sub -Total NSN. r enway_-Acgulsition ..- - -- Capita -t kn ovement _ 350.000 tUh_2IsyfLL-Acquisition _ . _..... Commuriityment _ImproVe 750 094 540 ODO' X750 *0 Sp,0p0 10th P_J 1yfield - Acquisition Coital lm rovement 250 .000 2-50,e0q- - Current CIP - Other Funds 10th-Playfi00 _Acquisition New TralIs Transfer to Park Replacement Fund Current CIP - Park Dedication Fund Neighborhood Park- Development (1) Neighborhood Park - Development (2) Neighborhood Park - Development (3) Neighborhood Park - Development (4) Neighborhood Park - Development (5) Neighborhood Park - Development (6) Cost Increase - 101h PlayFreld _AcquisifionJ5200,000 per acre) 10th Playfeld =Acgulsition, Extra 20 acres {$200,400 per Additional Trails - Development5Total1 Miles) ($100,000 mile) NW Greenway_-_Acqulsitlon (23.acres -majority donated) NW Greenway - Development (2 miles paved) (underpasses -Vicksburg & Cheshire) 10th Piayfield Development (estimated current cost $6,000,000) West Med Park Building (estimated current cost $2,000,000) Parker's Lake Pavilion Upgrade (estimated current cost $500,000) Zachary Park Program Building (estimated current cast 31,000,000) Skate Park (estimated current cost $350,040) Tennis Dome (estimated current cost $750,000) (Could potentially pay itself back) Total Cumulative Total Park Dedication Total Cumulative Park Dedication Total Select Land Acquisition 10th Play field - Acquisition - 40 Acres-M09,00.0per acre) NW Greenway -Acquisition (23 acres - majority donated) Items Included in Park Dedication Cashflow Projection Park Dedication 750x000 25Q QD0 250 D•- Q¢- Park Dedication 060.. 250,000-- 25;00;1700 4 ron Park Dedication Sp,0p0 50,000 60 ODO -' 100 040 ]OS -000= 2,850,000 1,5Q0.QQQ..- - 435,000 358,000 2,293,000 Park Dedication25;000 325,000 Park Dedication 3.4.4;79.3_: 344,793 Park Dedication 365Z30 365,790 Park Dedication 388;057 388,067 Park Dedication 4:1:1;700 411,700 Park Dedication 1. 436;77:3= 436,773 Park Dedication r 1-000 OiTO _ _,tlai7 000 1,OA0 000 1 006-ppA`._..... 41700,000 Park Dedication 2,645,000 3,041,750 5,686,7.50 Park Dedication 179;891 179;1.0.8 184;401 19q,ff16 1:95;716 - 201,587 207;6.35 213 864 220;280 .226 -,BBB 1,993,467 Park Dedication 1L763 333 w2, 0271833 2,332,008 fi 123,174 Park Dedication 874,503 874,503 Park Dedication 3,477,822 3,562,157 7,059,979 Park Dedication 2,251,016 2,251,018 Park Dedication 597,026 597,026 Park Dedication 1,229,874 1,229,674 Park Dedication 371,315 371,315 Loan 869,456 869,456 2,975,000 4,213,333 7,169,148 7,418,550 3,343,521 41886,959 4,358,291 1,602,422 190,016 607,416 201,587 644,408 213,864 220,280 226,888 38,471,684 7,188,333 14,357,481 21,776,031 25,119,552 30,006,511 34,364,802 36,167,224 36,357,240 36,964,656 37,166,243 37,810,651 38,024,515 38,2.44,795 38,471,684 1,875,000 3,463,333 6,419,148 7,168,550 3,343,521 4,886,959 4,356,291 1,802,422 19D,016 607,416 201,587 644,408 213,864 220,280 226,888 35,621,684 5,338,333 11,757,481 18,926,031 22,269,552 27,156,511 31,514,802 33,317,224 33,507,240 34,114,655 34,316,243 34,960,651 35,174,515 35,394,795 35,621,664 2500,0(10 ,1750000 2250,0001,500,000 1,763,333 2,027,833 2,332,008 fi.123.1Z4_ _ 14,123,174 Already Funded - CIP -4,000,000 10,123,174