09/14/98 LCEC AgP
Page 1 of 1
CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
• LAND CONSERVATION MEETING CONFERENCE ROOM
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 14,1998 7:00 A.M.
I
AGENDA
1. A. Roll Call
Riesen
Svoboda
Bruno
B. Review Agenda
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Land Conservation Committee Meeting Minutes for August 31, 1998 (Att.-#2 draft)
3. REVIEW PACKET
A. Resolution No. 98-025, A Resolution Establishing an Ad Hoc Committee on Land
Conservation (Att.-#3A resolution)
B. Revised Committee Report Outline (Att.-#3B draft)
• C. Draft Committee Report - Introduction, Scope and Methodology Sections (Att.-#3C
draft)
D. Undeveloped Parcels Prioritized - First Draft (Att.-#3D draft)
E. Minnetonka Memo article `Open Space Task Force will seek public input', Green
Sense Articles `November Ballots Ask Voter Approval For Land Funding' and `Tax Credits
for Voluntary Conservation: Back to the Future,' Landlines article `The Economic Value of
Open Space' (Att.-#3E articles)
4. ESTATE PLANNING
Ray Rossini, estate planner.
5. UNDERDEVELOPED LAND INVENTORY
Potential number of lots on underdeveloped land
6. DISCUSSION OF AN OFFER TO SELL LAND - 25720 HIGHWAY 7
7. PARK AND PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS
Park Commission Meeting September 8, 1998; Planning Commission Meeting September 16, 1998;
City Council Special Work Session September 21, 1998
• 8. ADJOURNMENT
SHOREWOOD LAND CONSERVATION COMMITTEE MEETING
MONDAY AUGUST 31, 1998 SHOREWOOD CITY HALL
7:00 A.M. CONFERENCE ROOM
MINUTES
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was convened at 7:10 a.m.
A. Roll Call
Present: Ad Hoc Committee Members: Dean Riesen, Committee
Chair; Frank Svoboda; and Fred Bruno
Also present: Jim Hurm, City Administrator; Brad Nielsen,
Planning Director; Erica (Johnson) Hahn, Planning Intern; and
Jean Coleman, Biko Associates
B. Review Agenda
The fifth agenda item, Underdeveloped Land Inventory, was
moved to the September 14, 1998 Committee Meeting agenda.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Land Conservation Committee Meeting Minutes of August 17,
1998 were approved.
3. REVIEW PACKET
There was no discussion on Minnesota Statute 84C concerning
conservation easements. Committee members thought the
Ecosystem Based Management Workshop seems interesting. No
Committee members plan to attend.
4. CONSERVATION EASEMENTS
Jean Coleman spoke about conservation easements and the role
of city governments as an easement holder. Ms Coleman works
for Biko Associates, a planning and design firm whose focus
is involving citizens in planning.
Ms Coleman described some government programs and
publications dealing with local governments and open space
conservation. Erica Hahn will get a copy of Washington
County's publication "Open Space Design Development: A Guide
for Local Governments". Administrator Hurm asked if the
Green Ways Project was multi-jurisdictional. Ms Coleman
• responded affirmatively and said that Shorewood could be
involved in the project if it developed a bike path through
Shorewood that connects County Parks, for example.
1Z
~Y
money to cover the cost of the purchase. Administrator Hurm
responded positively and added that federal law states that
local governments may not prohibit cellular facilities.
Chair Riesen asked about the status of the nursery business
to the east of the property. Administrator Hurm said that
they are not related. Fred Bruno asked if the City could buy
the land, put an easement on it, and then sell it back to
someone else. Brad Nielsen said that was a possibility.
Frank Svoboda offered the following option: split the
property into two parcels, allow a house to be put on the
second parcel, put easements on both parcels, and then sell
the parcels. Administrator Hurm indicated that there is a
lot of pressure to develop more soccer and ball fields in
Shorewood.
6. COMMITTEE WORK PLAN
It was agreed that Ms Hahn will begin drafting the Committee
report. Administrator Hurm suggested that the Committee look
at the option of the City acting as a land bank. Ms Coleman
suggested that in such a case, the City should develop a
relationship with realtors and developers and perhaps they
would market land with easements. Frank Svoboda indicated
that he knows of someone who has expertise in the
differential analysis of easement valuation. It was agreed
that this person will be on the September 14 agenda.
7. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at
8:20 a.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Erica EJ Hahn
Planning Intern
i
E
•
page 3
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO. 98-025
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING AN AD HOC CONEMITTEE ON LjuNb CONSERVATION
WBIREAS, approximately ninety percent of Shorewood's developable land has been
developed; and
WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood has a deep appreciation for natural resource
conservation and open space; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is aware of the various tools available to local governments
for land conservation purposes; and
WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to establish an ad hoc land conservation comma'tteP
to begin developing a land conservation program; and
WHEREAS, the City Council intends to involve local residents whom have kno ledze in hoc land
related areas such as real estate, accounting, and environmental issues
conservation committee.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED ~y~ the created to operate within tie following
Shorewood that an ad hoc land conservation comma
parameters:
PURPO E
T'ne ad hoc committee is created to investigate all tools available to local government for
to recommend to the City Council
•
land conservation, and draft an implementation program
on land conservation.
L AND CONSERV ~T[ON TOOLS
e following and other tools which may be identified should be analyzed during the study
h
T'n
A. Private land conservation. special assessment
B . Assist residents' purchase of land for set aside through spe.
procedures.
C . S pecial programs and designation:
Transfer of development rights
Purchase of development tights
Registry programs
use an
D. Assist a non-profit land conservation group to become
for acct biii h d ontrol
existing non-profit organization to be responsible
and maintenance of land set-aside.
E. Outright purchase.
esolution No. 98-025
Page 3 of 3
SU`iSET: shall cease to
hall be completed and fil 3 the , co 1998mmi, ttee
1 unless the
The mission of the ad hoc committee sCouncil, by December
on.
ttee and its duration-
exist following fmai report to the City Co
uncil, by resolution, expands the mission of the ad hoc commi of Shorewood
Council,
A.ND A)"P`ED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City this 23rd day of March, 1998-
p,:~SSED
yIA
TO M DA1][ BER YOR
AT T:
J
RAT OR
JA _ItNI, CITY ADNIINIST
yIF ~ C. HU
J
Land Conservation Committee Report Page i
DRAFT 9/9/98
• EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
.I
1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................1
1.1 COMMITTEE PURPOSE 1
1.2 SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY
1.2.1 Summary of Committee meetings
:
1.2.2 Parameters used in analysis ....................................................................................................3
1.3 REPORT LIMITATIONS ......4
2 UNDERDEVELOPED LAND INVENTORY ...................................................................................4
3 EVALUATION OF LAND PROTECTION OPTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..............5
3.1 PRIVATE LAND CONSERVATION .........................................................................................................5
3.1.1 Donated conservation easements 5
3.1.2 Registry program .....................................................................................................................6
3.2 ASSIST RESIDENTS' PURCHASE OF LAND FOR SET-ASIDE THROUGH SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
PROCEDURES ...6
3.3 SPECIAL PROGRAMS AND DESIGNATIONS 6
3.3.1 Transfer of development rights 6
3.3.2 Purchase of development rights 6
3.3.3 Registry program .....................................................................................................................7
3.4 ASSIST A NON-PROFIT LAND CONSERVATION GROUP TO BECOME ESTABLISHED OR USE AN EXISTING
NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ACQUISITION, CONTROL AND MAINTENANCE OF LAND
SET-ASIDE ........................................................................................................................................................7
3.5 OUTRIGHT PURCHASE/LAND ACQUISITION THROUGH A BOND REFERENDUM ...................................7
• (3.6 OPTIONS THAT CONFLICT WITH CURRENT CITY POLICY) ....................................................................7
4 ACTION PLAN: LAND CONSERVATION PROGRAM ..............................................................7
4.1 PROGRAM VISION, GOAL, AND OBJECTIVES ........................................................................................8
4.2 GOVERNANCE ....................................................................................................................................9
4.3 PARK AND PLANNING COMMISSIONS' ROLE ......................................................................................9
4.4 CITIZEN INPUT ...................................................................................................................................9
4.5 PROMOTIONAL AND EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES .................................................................................9
4.6 SITE SELECTION .................................................................................................................................9
4.7 TINIELINE .........................................................................................................................................10
(4.8 BUDGET) ..........................................................................................................................................10
5 CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................................10
6 APPENDICES ....................................................................................................................................11
APPENDIX . INFORMATION SOURCES ................................................................................................11
APPENDIX . CRITERIA FOR PRIORITIZING VACANT UNDERDEVELOPED PARCELS 12
APPENDIX . CRITERIA USED TO PRIORITIZE OCCUPIED UNDERDEVELOPED PARCELS.... 13
•
Land Conservation Committee Report Page 3
DRAFT 9/9/98
• of changes to the Comprehensive Plan's Natural Resource Section. The Committee also
reviewed the Parks Commission's purpose and recent activities. The Committee
discussed the results of the Park and Trail Survey completed in 1998. The City of
Woodbury's phone survey regarding open space was reviewed, and potential survey
questions regarding open space and underdeveloped land in Shorewood were discussed.
To gather information about underdeveloped parcels, a worksheet was created for site
visits. The worksheet included information about the natural features of the site as well
as basic information about the parcel, e.g., acreage and zoning. Staff presented
Committee preliminary findings of the inventory. (Inventory results are in the
"Undeveloped Land Inventory" section of this report.)
The Committee discussed conservation easements as a land protection tool in several
meetings. Anne Haines, Land Protection and Chapter Specialist of the Minnesota Land
Trust, discussed land trusts and conservation easements with the Committee. The
Committee also studied a conservation easement agreement between the City of
Plymouth and Carlson Real Estate Company (Appendix ) and a model easement
agreement that were drafted by the Minnesota Land Trust (Appendix Federal
regulations regarding qualified conservation contributions were reviewed (Appendix
Dennis Jabbs, tax accountant and Shorewood resident, discussed conservation easement
valuation with the Committee. The City Attorney was asked to comment on a model
conservation easement agreement assuming the City was the easement holder (Appendix
Jean Coleman, Land-use Planner and Attorney, also discussed with the Committee the
role of the City as a holder of a conservation easement.
The Committee discussed other issues. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources'
Scenic and Natural Areas Grant Program was considered as a potential funding source for
open space acquisition (Appendix ).v The Committee discussed also the offer from
Shirlev and Alvin Wagner's attorney to sell. the Wagner's property to the City.
(Committee members attended Planning and Park Commission meetings.) Planning and
Parks Commissioners were provided with the Committee's meeting agendas and minutes
(and were invited to Committee meetings to discuss the role of the Commissions in the
protection options developed by the Committee.)
1.2? Parameters used in analysis
The Committee analyzed land protection options available to local governments by
considering Shorewood's specific circumstances. The parameters used in analysis
included the following:
• goals of Shorewood's comprehensive plan;
• the City's potential financial commitments;
• potential tax burden on citizens:
• cost-effectiveness of protection options:
• duration of the protection, i.e., temporary or perpetual;
+ level of protection, i.e.. some or no development allowed on the undeveloped parcel:
Points for Vacant Parcels
% of
Pts possible points assigned to each criteria
points
Acreage # of points % of total points
assigned
1 ac 1 38
5 ac 2 7
10 ac 3 2
possible pts 3 23% tot 47 25%
Covertype(s)
Natural area appears to have
some value in terms of resource 2 33
protection or intact native
community
possible pts 2 15% tot 33 18%
Density
Number of Immediately
Adjacent Residential Units
> 5 residential units 0.5 13.5
>10 residential units 1 7
Zoning
Shoreland - protection of water 0.5 21.5
resources
R-1 C - 0.5 acre lots 0.5 18.5
possible pts 2 15% tot 60.5 32%
Open Space in
0 Neighborhood (does not
include island parcels)
no permanent, public open
space in 1 /2 section - does not 0.5 19
include lakes
immediately adjacent to
natural area or park - includes 0.5 8.5
lakes
> 0.5 mi. to nearest permanent, 0.5 20.5
public open space
> 1 mi. to nearest permanent,
public open space 1 0
t
possible pts 2 15% tot 48 25% z
Market Value undetermined
low price per acre 1
lower price per acre 2
possible pts 2 15% tot
Number of Potential Lots undetermined
>5 lots 1
> 10 lots 2
possible pts 2 15% tot
total possible 13 100% TOTAL 188.5 100%
without "other"
Other
forfeited land 1 2
next to school property 1 1 (J
Owners willing to sell/donate 1 1
explanation of points ibm
Points for Vacant Parcels Page 1 of 1 9/9/98
co
a
S}UTOd to o o tt i Uf U7 Lf) o O o o O O o
Sri Sri Lci
sjo7
;o zagmnN Flluaaod
anFA 4a3lzeW
ands uado
}sazeau o; llu i <
aaeds uado
X X X X
}sazeau o; Tui S•0 <
lied zo eaze
lezn;eu ol;ua:)e(pe X X
p slairlpaluml
U
cn
Q uoi gas Z/i uT azeds
uadoluaueuuad X X X X X
N 'z)Tlgnd ON
O_ o
d O O
.!2 n a)
N » .w a) a)
4 2
(n cu (a
U za ..2 o u
O w w y u O
x a. ,2 C r O m
0)
J) Cn C!1 C!1 d
suTuoZ -4 V Q d
U
s;Tufl
lerluapTSag;uan'MY d, co N 0 (10
M Alaleipaunul
c ;o zagwnN
papaaN ssaazod x x x
3 ^!3 n• `
a d m 3
~ 3 3 a c aj
o v rd ~ to 73 a+ ar a, d ar ar a no z
o= - 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a, 0 0
3 3 w 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
w 4-
saz3d C*4 cc o o i-
t1 lfi l~ c-~ CV d~
N M cV ) ~O 'i
r+ U
p U
Z r+ V~ uy tri e-1 N M M L~ M o n U
to %p tp ~ •O Q
Q G
00
0-
c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a
s;uiod ol
wq ~ ni cri c*7 cfi co cri cn c*i cri c*i cri cri P
a
5401
;o zaqutnN iEi;ua}od
anjeA;a3lJvW
ands uado
;saleau o; !w I <
aJeds uado x X X X X X X
;sazeau o} nu S•0 <
xzed io van,
N iezn;eu o;;uaJefpe X X X X X X
0 Ala;etpatuW1
U
cn
> not;Jas Z/i uT aJeds
U uado;uaueuuad X X X X X
N 'Jtignd ON
Ja V o v
U o
cc
R Q; o v
(7 0. m C N
W w
O
2
V) Cn (n V) Cl) cn m cn m (n (n Q
O Q~ U < d Q U U U U C)
$uIUOZ -4 1-4 e-1 -4 IV s;iu
Iet;uappau ;uaJefpd
~ ~fia;etpauiuci ch Ln Ln c+) N 00
;o zaquinN
U papaaN ssaJJd x x x
^a
(s)adf4jaeo:) a m v o° aqi 3 d
a°Ji d a o a~i d o d
~.0 3 y a 3 3 0
0
V V 2 d (V d 0 v d d v
0o 0 }w O y O O 0 0 0 0 0 O
0 0 0 0 0 o d o 0 0 0 0 o o o
3~ 3 3~ 3~ 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ~
N 00 n 00 m er m a` 00
Sa2Jv d fn L~ O N ~ M IO o0 c7 O C
4 tV N ~O ~O cV r- N O O C)
U
c C O N
U
Z a7 N t0 O c7% M ~z 00 r-I N M
R ~O i C~ 6~ N M m M Lo ~O ~O ~O 'O Q
C,4 m
a Q U
00
o
s;ulod U? Un Ln 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N N N N N N N N N N N CV N CV CV ol
SIO'I
;o zaquinN Ieflualod
Li anleA }aiFEW
aJedsuado
Isaiuau o} Ttu I <
aJeds uado X X
Isaiuau o} iui Sc•p < X X X X
)ped io ean,
Iein4uu of ;uaJe Ipu X X X X
O ~fla}uipaunul
U
cn
Q U01 :)as Z/I ui aJUds
uadoluaueuuad X X X X X X X
N 'Jtlgnd ON
.o 0
G ° °2
U ~n w o u u G U p
w O w co
u
Q
U U (n Cn c Q U Q U V U U U U
N 2utuoz Q
-0
SITUfl
_0 Iriluapisau luaJe(pd
V+
Ln M d4 N It \0 -4 -4 Ln N t', U)
Ia uipaiutuI
;o iaquinN
U papaaN ssaJJd x x x x
d
cn >
~ ~ m m tL p
s~ c. O, ca C
73
N O G d 0 d v v
Ts R -o -o •o -o e~e V 'C
o o R o 0 0 0 0 v o
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 a 3
E
N c~ c0 CS CSC O N cn t1 N ::r cn d~ 11 c~
SaIJ~ C*~ C~ co O d+ CS O N O M O GO n
-4 CD U
U
o > U
Z ON O M M ~.O a, Coo M r, ON O rM n O
tD l~ h N N N M er er eM M M 1~0
O Q
Q ~
co
o`
01
s}utocl
fV cV N (V cV N e r 'a r + r e-+ O`
S}O
;o IaquinN IPt}ua}od
i
amen }a3IJrW
ands uado
}saleau o} tux I <
aJeds uado
X X X X X X X X
}saleau o} !Iu To <
lied Io Pair
O Irin}eu o} }uaJe(pe X X X X
p sla}rtpauxuxl
U
cn
not}Jas Z/I ut ands
uado}uauruuad x X X X X
'JTlgnd ON
- o
.O n
~ X ~ y n•
iC V _
U Iatl}p ~ v 0 v o., ~ ~ O
~ c
0 a. 3 0 0
N c U
2uluoz
N s}tUrl
IPt}uapisag }uan'(pd
a}ei `r Ir co rn ~ N t, N L[) m t~ ~o \-o \10 00
i PauxuxI
c ;o IaguxnN
O
papaaN SsaJJd x x x x x x x
a~
m
on ~
a c
(s)adA}IaeoJ 3 w
0
-0 ~ •d -d 3 .a ~ ~ -o Ts -o
w w d a~ o w a~ N o d ax
Its n
0 0 0 0 c o o c o 0
0 0 0 o v o 0 o v o o d c
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ~ 3 3 3 3 ~
.Q
d+ n N N r+ O tc) O 00 N n cn t~ ~O N }
SaIJd N O a,\ d+ d\ t!) ON r4 O N d\ M
I-q O O O - cV O O O O O r- (V r~ Cn O r- O
U
O N
o U
Z ~M co N M to N ep ri M to C)
t- r-I N py ~--I N N M M cn
Q.
Q ~
co
U
slulod U~ Uf U, Lf) In 1~ -n tfi l1~ U~ to In to In to
1-4 ,--1 -4 r~ r-4 r-i r-4 r-+ 1.4 1'4 ri 1-4
sl0-I
;o zaqulnN IYpua;Od
amen Ia3l L'W
ands uado
Isaleau of tul j <
ands uado X
X X X
X X X X X X X
Isazeau of !w S•0 <
ilaed zo ease
N Iein}eu ol;uaJe[pe
O Slalulpaulull
U
cn
uOtlJas z/i ut aJeds
uadoluaueuuad X X X X X X X X
N 'Jtlgnd ON
a y W
.2 t:
(D xaqlo 0.
U O U M O W C` Cuj
v O
Q Cn to to (n Cn Cn Cfi Cn Cn Cn Cn d
O U U Q Q r-I 11 r4 -4 m
N U
~u?IIOZ ra r~ r-i ri r-r r~
rn~ PI
sl6ufl
-p Ietluaptsag }uaJe(pV
~
c a ei co Ln ~ .!:p cY) N N M c7 ',~M M Lf) 00 (~o m Lf)
II patuulI
c ;o iaqulnN
U papaaN ssaJJV x x x x x x x
Q
>
cl.
o
N, M M M Q
73 g
(s)ad iliano, Q)
3 3 3 3 3 ~
a 3 3 3 ^r3 -o • w~
o 0 o a, d a~ a, w a v
0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 a, (V 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3° ~
M (7~ CM cn cf) t\ n d~ N N N ',O ce) }
SaSJ~7 O ~O In a, N CN Q\ 00 00 ~M CO 00 a\ a\ ~ C
~M O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O r~ CO O O O - C)
U
~ N
Z In In M t-. r" er N ~Q t, ON O r-4 N M eM In ~O
CL. " Ln ~o ~o t` t, 00 00 00 00 00 = 00 Q
~ Q ~
00
o,
s}utod o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 ~n
-4 -4 rl -4 O O U
S}O'j
;o sagwnN Iet}ua}Od
vz~
amen }axzeW
Lena
aJedsuado
}saseau o} im i <
aJeds uado
x X X X X
}saseau o} iuT To <
xsed so ease
O Iesn}eu o} }uaJefpe X
O Sla}etpauniq
U
cn
> uoi}Jas Z/ T. ui aaeds
O uado}uaueuuad x X X X X X X
'JTlgnd ON
U_ tpO w O `o v O
O w w D
v ~ ~
W
r O U r1 r,
O e~- e~ ~d+ M Q V-i U ~-1
SuTUOZ UN -
'n 'n
N S}TUfl
'a Im uapisag }uaJefpv a}eT auI -It
Sri Tn L[i Lxi l~ d+ t1) N N to N \O \C 'd'
c .1 I p uI
C ;o saqutnN
O
U papaaN ssaJJV x x x x
c 3 3 3 3 IZ
a 0 w o 0 0
_`a v ^a 'a
(s)a ano' c
01 0) m 0
3 3 3 -a 'a °A d -a Ti •o
W y Q) -3 ° w 0 0
O O
'tt y v y v
-rj "a "a 7~ Ila -0 10
"o 'ICI "a 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
w v °o v o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a~ a,
~ 3 3 ~ 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ~ E
-0
~0 N N N M O N M tf) N d~ a\ N N e-~ N M 00 }
a\ d1 a, a\ W cn Lo a1 a` a, Lo C\ C\ M a\ rn
SasJd
O O O O O N O O N O O O O M O O O O O
U
Q (D
d U
Z O tG OD L~ O N er \D 00 i- N O N N n N
eM er t1') tf~ GO 00 00 e-i N Q.
M ap D1 N e-+ r1 N N M M
O _
R
2 QC)
00
of
o`
S}lIiOd in U~ U~ Vn U o r o
O O O O O O N O U')
A ol
In E E c
;o zagucnN jet}ua}od U E E
C .X N
d.s7 d C E
J
antes }a3lJvW Q
U-
O
W
ands uado Q
}sazeau o} iui i < c
w
>
ands uado Q
;saiuau o} nu g•0 <
xzud .to eaie
N lezn}uu o} }ua:)elpu
O Ala}etpaunul
U
uoc}aas z/L ut ands
uado}uaueuuad X
N ':)ilgnd ON
O.. n. u
N ~ f6 ~
U zatl}o
W
CL
Q
o u u u N
¢ Q¢
BuiuoZ
94T.ufl CN
let}uapcsaH }uaau[pd
Ala}eipau[utl
c ;o iaguinN
U papaaN ssaaa x x x
O
n•
3
(s)adkVano'
R
a
c
v v o (J
o °o °o m a c
3 3> 0 E E E
CV "q g n
lo: U? co
saiav .rno ~w rn ~ 1 O cl) O
O O O O O O
Q
• o > U
a. M M
a
~ Q ~
i
Points for Occupied Parcels
wqw
% of
possible
Pts points points assigned to each criteria
% of total
Acreage # of points points assigned
5 ac 1 10
l Oac 2 1
possible pts 2 17% tot 11 9%
Covertype(s)
Natural area appears to have
some value in terms of
resource protection or intact
native community 2 36
possible pts 2 17% tot 36 29%
Density
Number of Immediately
Adjacent Residential Units
>5 residential units 0.5 9.5
>10 residential units 1 3
Zoning
Shoreland - protection of
water resources 0.5 14.5
R-1 C - 0.5 acre lots 0.5 11
possible pts 2 17% tot 38 31%
Open Space in
Neighborhood (does not
include island parcels)
no permanent, public open
space in 1 /2 section - does
not include lakes 0.5 10
immediately adjacent to
natural area or park - includes
lakes 0.5 8
> 0.5 mi. to nearest
permanent, public open
space 0.5 4
> 1 mi. to nearest permanent,
public open space 1 16
possible pts 2 17% tot 38 31%
Market Value undetermined
low price per acre 1
lower price per acre 2
possible pts 2 17% tot
Number of Potential Lots undetermined
>5 lots 1
>1 0 lots 2
possible pts 2 17% tot
total possible 12 100% TOTAL 123 100%
without 'other'
Other
forfeited land 1
0 next to school property 1
owners willing to sell/donate 1
explanation of points ibm
Points for Occupied Parcels Page 1 of 1 9/9/98
co
o•
o•
•
► ~n o 0 0 0 0 0 Ln Ln Un V~ ol
o 0
s;ucod v v v Q r~ cYi Cl) c c~ ri
s;o I
;o Jag tai 194ualod
anleA WP
ands uado
;saieau o} lui j< X X X X X X X X X
ands uado
;saieau o} !ut ST < X
xied so ease
O IL'IngLu o} juaJEfpr X y( X
N Ala;eipaunul x
(s) uopas Z/iui aaed
uado;uaueuuad x X X X X X X X
} 'ailgnd oN
O
d
U a0
O
0 U U O
Q U U U U U U Q 1.4 _ a
N
s;lufl
_0 lepuapisag lua:)efpv
t~ m rn N N N LO ~M r~+ N
a eI C14
I paumq
;o iaguinN
O
.Q
papaaN MXT x x x x x
U
U
O
v, m
a°Ji y O G 0 C C
m
(s)adf4JaAOZ) W w M
10 It > M ;Z
o m o a, o o o o ro 0 0 0 0
o d d ea O O d 0 d 0 O d p t~ 3 3 0. 114
-0 can, E
00 o rn m rn o m
saz~d d\ 0~
to Lf) to (V c+ U') O m m co N
Z O N
o fl
a~
co
' ol
of
¢ o,
. s}ulod o 0 0 0 0 0 Un Ln Ln Iq
c+) c'7 crj ch c+j CV) N N N N
S}O'i
;o zaquinN irT}ua}Od
antrA 4a3llL'W
aardsuado x x X
}sazeau o} pn i <
aardsuado
}sazeau o} Tui g•p < X X X X
xzed zo raze
a) irzn}ru o}}uaarfpe x X X X X
O
~U Aja}rTpaUTUii
Q (S) UOT}acs Z/IuT cards
uado}uaueuuad x X X
} 'aIlgnd ON
O
N
N zalpo
U C: ~f
C) u 0
> N
Cn Cn U) Cn
O SUTUOZ < N Q u N Q < u u d
j
O
S}TUri
irT}uap!sag }uaarfpv o
c Lo
D Ala}rlpammi rn in t~ N d+ oo
io zaquinN
N
Q
papaaN ssaaad x x
U
U ~
O' •v O d
vi O a 'C r O
y p 0 eC
m 'C rn
C ,O w d n ~C
07 rr C'. nz O
y O O v1 o U) ri) eA 'o o O
C, 0
3 a o o d d ^o v a o a o a
rs a, ~ ~ Ts o ~ 3 -o ~ •o rs •c o
3 o ° o ° 3 .n 3 ~ 3
ooq C~ 00
sazav
N ~ ~O r+ tf) 10 N
.Q
Z w > x x U u'
O O
Q 0
00
Q`
P
o
.
S}IITOd Un Un o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N N N N N N N N N N N N
S}O'j
;o iaquinN iepua}Od
ands uado
}sazeau o} !w j < X X
ands undo
X
}saleau o} !w 5•0 <
xied so Van
O iean}eu o}}ua:)e(pe X X X X
O
cn Ala}etpauTTul
Q (s) uou,as z/-Eui ands
uado }uauuuuad X X X X
N
} lailgnd ON
O
d
N
(D zaq}o
O
Cl)
V) U) m m N
O dutuoZ ~ Q a
N
O s+!Ufl
JET}uapisau }ua:)u[pd
TUTI U') `o 00 m 01, It m It
eta}eTpau rn
;o iagtunN
O
papaaN ssaaad x x x
U
U
n• M
fA fA ~ fC r+
o a, ° `0 °
o 0 3
0 0
o 0 3 3 e°
3 y a v a o a, v
°o °o °0 °0 °o o v o m a °o °o
3 a° 3 3 30
3 3 3 a 3 3 3
m Tn - oo m N m N o cv
SaIJv 00 - m n Ln ~ ~ Q
N Lo et N t*, N Tn N cV m 14 a)
Q
• z a. a~ d en U N
o ~
~ U
-c ~
O Q :DO
OD
o,
o
Ruiod o 0 0 0 Ln Un Ln LO o o LO IQ UD Ln UD
N N N N O CV O 'Ct N
610.1 xx
;o iaqucnN lei;ua;od E
O O
Q E
1
amen;al"N v
g
O
a3eds uad w
;saSeau o; iut T. < X X c
w
aaedsuado Q
lsaieau 01 nu g•p < X X
3ISed So ease
O lean;eu o;;uaae[pe x X
cn Ala;etpaunul
.Q (s) uopaas Z/iui ands
uadoluaueuuad x X X X X
'ailgnd ON
D O
d > m ~
O
cn cn U Q U U Q U U 0
sutuoZ u 1.4 > 04 ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ cll d
>
O
61Iufi
Iei;uaplsag }uaDe[p
Gila;etpaunul N t~ m ~o m m -o
O ;o SaqumN
a)
.Q
U papaaN ssaaad x x x x x
L)
U
U)
~ d d
Ts ~ r 3 3
d J (u
O ~
a, v o o a a+ o v o _O
0 0 0 cc ~ o -o om o o ns O D D x
0 0 a, a, o o d o o a, O O
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 51010 E E E
fl- r~ N L~ O N N t~ Cr to CT Q CT CO co co
saSJv C)~ O O d u7 d u7 00 N co x N r~ O ~
CV cV m cV cV r N
Q
t.
O
Q Q
•
V), iniiinnet &.&a
A Newsletter from the City ofMinnetonka
memo tember 1998
S Plan to vote Sept.
15
celeoratav
Duesday, E STATE PRIMARY Election will be Absentee voting "
September 15. Polls will be If you wish to vote absentee, you may: = lllCIO* f
`
open from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. Minnetonka's • Vote absentee in person at Minnetonka ;kg bke.+ur eNn/ aovut or the
primary will call for votes in federal, state
City Hall during regular business hours
executive, legislative, county and judicial y" M E" 1
J (8 am.-4:30 p.m.), Monday through Cit~w_tde:1ou~se?oira~dayr
offices. There are no local races. The Friday. Extended absentee voting hours xO to ei ` +~i eek Y
purpose of the primary is to determine the will also be available on Sat., Sept. 12 ' ceTelnatton
wt~be even. clal
candidates who will advance to the from 1 .m. "`'°mQr sp 1
p to 3 p.m. and on Mon.. Sept becaase the:famous.Summez"Eesttval .
General Election on November 3. Voters'
14 until ? p.m. Absentee voting closes fireworks display; concerted urJune-
should be aware that crossing party lines in on Sept. 14 at 7 p.m. _ be6a 6 o€the~weathei w take place:
the primary election is not allowed. • Voters can also vote absentee downtown at the close o€open hOus& festi~vitLes
Polling locations at the Hennepin County Government r Eae open House will be held fromar
e
Please refer to the accompanying map to Center in Minneapolis during the hours -5,g-m 'ta8rnFaeworks.vbegrr
determine your polling location. listed above. BganuThls eveattxiQialFanda
off(erWark
Election continued on page 4 TIz
a.na,R ~n t~tQlEI .8II Q .
Minnetonka Wards 2C1ttt:
d Precincts
a
13A 7-
treaty foX ev loos. .
Ward Precinct [ ' •2D
Boundary Lines ' 2B yeaT'S C1tIe~Wee
II
Legislative Precinct y 1 • OCEO 0 COnt31
2A LD
District Numbers 4A; 45a 2E com~iete defa~s _
Boundary • w e
Polling ~ 38
Locations E
Polling Locations 3E ' • • Open Space Task
i
to Glen Lake Elementary a( 3C ° 1E ' N Force well seek
School - r 1
4801 Woodridge Rd. 3D• _ • P IR: 1~ e
18 Old Apostolic publicinput
Lutheran
Church ! 1 1438 t
HE OPEN SPACE Preservation Task
5617 Rowland Rd., qC ? f'-rte T
Force, a fifteen-member citizen
1C Cross of Glory
Baptist Church yy advisory committee, was recently
4600 Shady Oak Rd. x R ; •~s established b the Minnetonka City Council
10 St Paul's Lutheran 41A • LD 4a by
48 i Church ' ' • it; a g to study a process for open space preser-
13207 Lake St Exr vation in the community. Next month the
1E Fairview Lutheran task force will be seeking input from the
Church °1M"~~" ERER RR.IRIE
4215 Fairview Ave. community. More information will be
2E Lindbergh Activity 3C Minnetonka Comm. 40 Scenic Heights included in the October Minnetonka
4 2A Minnetonka Comm. Center Center Elementary School
Church 2400 Lindbergh Dr. 14600 Minnetonka Blvd. 5650 Scenic Memo. ❑
13215 Minnetonka Or.
2F Lindbergh Activity 30 Minnetonka Baptist Heights Dr.
28 Lindbergh Activity Center Church 4C Woodland Hills Bible
Center 2400 Lindbergh Dr. 4420 State Hwy. 101 Church
2400 Lindbergh Dr. I 3A Minnetonka Fire 3E Minnetonka 16031 Woodland Curve
2C Oa
hutch k Knoll Lutheran Station No. 5 Lutheran Church 40 All Saints Lutheran
00 Hopkins Crossroad 15155 Wayzata Blvd. 16023 Minnetonka Blvd. Church Water resource planning r
38 SL Luke Presbyterian 4A Clear Springs 15915 Excelsior Blvd.
Hennepin County Ser- Church Elementary 4E Glen Lake Activity
R
vice Center (2nd floor) 3121 Groveland School Center '
12601 Ridgedale Dr. School Rd. 5701 State Hwy. 101 14350 Excelsior Blvd. Photo contest
F
Consult the map above to determine your correct polling location. Questions? Call 939-8200. t-
NS_
-I; NCrN'G PARKS AND CONSERVATION
1?u fished:b . -ie Trust for Public Land Fall 1994 Vol. I, No. 1
Novemhe'Ba~otsAsk Voter
r•
A~ proval For=anaTund•ng
,~\4~ ••(j~-~1 ice- .
VOTERS WILL FIND PARR-'_*:- .r_= pots of money
Funding proposals in varied sizes on • include a chunk of funds for fixing up
November 8 ballots. The outcome looks e.,:isting parks
good, supporters say. Though • involve the community- in open plan r
Californians firmly rejected a massive ning to set priorities
S 1.9 billion park bond earlier this year, • build coalitions that reflect conserva-
modest state and local iniciatives have bon's broad community benefits.
:net with success'elsewhere: %,oters con-
A GREE\SENSE surn•ey identified
time to be cautious about spending
these
growth pressures are picking parks and open space
n referenda on November ballots.
e lessons of success so far
Two constitutional amendments:
• craft a compelL'ng conservation vision
Arkansas. A Keep Arkansas
that appeals to tax-averse voters
Beautiful constitutional amendment
• do not look for a single green finance
would dedicate an 1/8 cent sales tax
fornula_ voters have approved bonds,
' increase to raise about S30 million annu-
tax set-asides, special district financing,
ally for parks, fish and game, historic
and ocher approaches
preservation, and litter cleanup.
• consider small sales and property tax
--an. A constitutional amend-
t~~].C.hl,
increases and one-time surpluses or
ment would restore S20 million to the
Michigan Natural Resources Trust Fund.
INSIDE «~ile the trust generates about SSO miI-
j'QRjvjA'z'jQl\j: lion for land acquisition and recreation
M3 imInde~ Support ; from oil and gas drilling on state lands,
For. Conger vanon ; • r%vo-thirds has been diverted to economic
;:Hi?h ~ttiong State development. Half of the restored
Office Holders
But., urno%,er.Loon'is~: funds would create a new maintenance
endowment.
;Trans ortatton Several general obligation bonds:
Portland, Oregon. A 558.8 million
Paiks and Trails ..:J::::::
_ r- parks bond, supported by general fiinds,
Y
CtunetConcerns? t would restore facilities and build recre-
` RPCrezciori Fuadi r ' g " ation centers. AS] 35 million regional K _
.7: n5 RN-21-01,.~"2'. ~X ""r :t• A';~ ~,`•'s~}~-';~"=_~~~'"~-^r
'l~N•
`^T~Y.!' - •1' ' ~1 ~~t. Cit ~c•l:i~~ f. C'}\nr~. =.~.!'^rst~f-$..^y ~.5, fir' ~r.4.. ~•n f
.,iJ~ •v --`R ~y~ti.)~tiY ~ 7Y~ ~ _I.i~r'•_r ~,~<~v ~„~7 'e. ~ ~r~"~` t 19` ~ t,'t
~ ~ _ C. .7.,.?4~~is'~--•jr .Y'3".--x'`t••ivT~; ~•~4. ~a,S"r.'~j~ -1. - ? Z _ ~ ~i ~ .W~~.
, • rE : ac~'-.~~'~is':t~ .F c~ r;^ f; '?'~c-x. ~ir~'r,' y. r.' `-+s'ci.-~.'S.. ~'+~3,•~.,~.i-~._.~
+ - -r.`J \ _L__ql~ ; ~,:_~4.'~s^ra+,,r. ~-r'a•,T. ,:y~M~,Y ~ .~srY~yt t..'r.~..-r~~;,~,ri~ ` _..v.... uf• -e
- Y+ ! w' '~Y L.: J Lr "L~2'...iG ytYu .t
` ~
,ly a~K1yyG~~ -✓3r._r•%~ ra .r - .r".,4 '~?"'r.`atW z~s~;,.,,. ._G +
Tter, ..r~+~+~ a'~ .:.Yr, l~1 }~J`•.'i;..~ ,'Y•:.. >w ii-... ~,y Ye.!yc~Y.6,
't"~,~''~ ~ '^~..r,'dP Yn;-+ .Y~"'~ ^+r. rr%S, a..: -f s~ y«•lr~- -.C.. C~ ~"y 9cti ,,~sJ~~rftli'~Y `+rl~w' L3•s ie~~
'i-. -~_C. `;^3.~1G ,i~c'2. .~Gi. ,s•.c'- .~iE.7 - s cF`!'' '...44,' 4 +_:'±4.. ;:.~.,,R- - ia+~vzL C. •~','"`7.
'~rd yi" i r~ r ro,+ _ ne?t L .rcr~+- „ 7t~% -•r-, a...Aa
.'~t"}Y ! ;4 - ^~Ce. ?„L -:i - '•r5:.ci: ~..ac' r1S w ~.?,.-F:,--•C`~_. -
~ ~ . ~ r ' , ! < Z' Y , < ~ KA > ~ • >r. ~ vL• ...w•' w4~T-1..~1y.,? ♦ Y. Y~ ~r> c _
:•~t^}' f s .t F-c ._t a•,`~ e'-y..-•c~-rre .nx. "s~'~'«:'``-rTr~_-~l,.iw•T rY.~ ~•2;..s
F ARKS-.AI~T D~ C O IBS E RAT I ON~7 r Y~
v~ :-:.T,- +~'i:' •i:~''~'-;i.~~~^'` ,s r ~ _ r. ~r• ,r f'. >Y.:.^:~~},~yF'^•- - .+~'•~~.a. ..i ~~t~. y1~ _
_ j = - rT ♦ .c Otis _ Yr.,,A Y„1' _ .;x.S Y- r
W! i
ty r twenty t-arsrs,. unto f ^
Tax CCedits`foVo untar , adrnrri,stiatrvccosts 994•..~ T tl
_ T
.1c U- c;
Conservation:.B k to the Future G -7SZa Y
z f~ ` r t _ C IC ua- Srru ccr-Qona &_?.~c
r G l!Oluntary prrvaLe^ " . WaIG 'oC-trays; G fish ands f7 aath,°rued n --adoPca~ ; Inside -i>•
J _
ro taxtrcd1tCoun'ry Iofonriation
landreonservinon daces wu) a fii or a r-tplsh other ' P PertY
rv , + Y* a
t~back'ac least to the Old : spifet3-nse_r Crept purposes The ~propcri'yca`x s ui Mar+IanT r 4'
Tesrameric, tax sv cetcnersYare gvinQ= ` p e mEisl 6' d- aced to sta'ce or account most oEan`owner's ~ -
cliffs do good" approach fresappeal Iocal a vein r r a "nonprofit ; Pr°PeiTY bbl) , "j:° Financie ideas
tiff todays'tax averse clirnace qu.lrfied to" receive such donaaons t Montgomery Codrily ts'che r w N t
s _ + a , vs < front r
rva conservauorLvalue is ceraned by the f thud county to adgpc the~aedut t
At lease chr~ sraie/local consE
GR6S'
non = Cr edit proposa surfaced this ' aporoprtate land managing agcnry' Its Program'gtves donors an c c
r . readers: -
year The moss ambtnous is movrng The allowable credit 2s 25 percent of _ ongoing 100 perceni abatement t -
through rh YCalrforrua sraie legtsla ; the value of'&Eaaced real propem, k on county PoPerty~taxes For;
cure ac this wnring Supporters say applied towards corporate or^indr { lands proceatd by perpenial east. z _
- mend tltinaied to a ualrfied Voters and
Vi as a good ehance'af'passa~e Lai.statc income taxes Unused _ q _ _
,y works " statebortses
u h chc well-known volarili of credir'can be earned over co sue- nonprofit F Ieres how tt
rural > Jpper support (and
omias legislature makes the out 'teed-mg- yearsowner in
came haid.to predi cz The credit iatnally pio~zded for a'; = Monlgorrtcry County wtrh as conservation _
Also, N1tirth Carolina legustacors 55=000 anual-rtiaximuin Afrerrhe' - assessment or cax.purooses of _
e abo~uti
- 4mi~ cow
S 00 o00.
m .K •as ~ increased co 525000
in ~ .
a measure t -lift the ca •
considered to on the start's existing conservation 1989, the dollar. %aluc of donado * ris $10,380 foF 1995 property saxes Lessons from
tax credit. While chi's. was nor from about 5800,000 co_ Assume the parcel's value is drvtd `
Jumped Portland,
approved in the final flue y of censer S 17.5 million. It has since Icvcled off. cd equally benveeri land and resi-' Oregon's
vation legislarion (see accompanying Corporations now make up a dente: An owner who donates a winnin
the land 9
article);'Monceoinery County, third of the donors, and Vdliam L Perpetual casement on
T v.a credit o f 52,595- bond cainpaign.
Marviaiid, adopted a. new measure Flournoy, an official in North would recei _
to offer a 100 percent property-tax Carolina's Department of I andowners who already receive
credit for qualifed.individual and ' Environment, Health, and Na(ural • .preferential abatements for work- = t x
inQ farms are_noc cliQible,for this TRUST
corporate land donations. Resources, believes more could be g a o a
These credits share a core objet: wooed if the cap were lifted. "We. credit. PUBLIC
five: to procea quality lands without hear chat the 525,000 credit doesn't The California measure, 'LAND
F-ad ' '
r introduced b Stare Senator Jack
adding to direa budget outlays- Each pay ,or the Iawyers 'who put the " Y is crafted somewhat dir trendy to'. deal together,--" he says. The measure- O'Connell, would giant a quili-
emphasize additional goals- co is lil:dy to be" considered again fied donor of land and water.-
EcUicate nonprofir land transactions; next year rights, oc interests, a crcdic.rang= report on state
for example, encourage corporate- Maryland's propem-tax credit For ing from 60.4i:6 8_5 percent of and localj4nanu
donors, retain conservation lands in counties complements-the stare cre-c the value of his or her donation publ:shed by:
p ' wnership, and.so on. available since 1980 to donors of... cowards start income=tax liability.. The Tnur for
tocoenacted in 1983, the North - pc. acrual easements to the Maryland The scale is weighted so that Public I.znd
Carolina Credit is available.jo individ- EnNironmental•T.-ust NET), a individuals and corporations with
ual and corporate donors of lands scar:~ide.rand trust. MET does nor. higher taxable incomes receive Phyllis Myra:
Fdi
chat increase public access to beaches, : accept donaaons involving less than the lower percenca~ect_edic. :or
1 1
The Economic
Value of
4
Open Space
H
CHARLES J. FAUSOLD A
AND ROBERT J. LILIEHOLM_
G oi-crnments have lone recognized
the need to preserve certain open
space lands because of their im-
portance in producing public goods and
serices such as food, fiber, recreation and k
natural hazard mirigation, or because thcv
possess important geological or biological
features. 1=
• New impetus for open spare preser-a- t`
rion results from the desire to counteract
the effects of declining urban cores, suhur- h:
ban sprawl, and the socioeconomic and a.
land use changes now encroaching on
hich•amenin• rural areas. The'growinc use p
of habitat conserarion plans for reconcil-
ing environmental and economic objet- a.
tives also draws attention to the values
of open space, especially in comparison t`
to alternative land uses.
It is likch• that most decisions about tr
open space preservation will he made at 1
the hKai Icyel, due in part to the gcncral
tren,i of dc%olution of govcrnnicnia!
responsibility (with accontpaming fiscal
respunsibdiry i, as well as an increase in
the institutional capacity and activism of
local land conservarion trusts. Since local
governments are heavily dependent on
the properr• tai for operating revenue.
the tiscal and economic implications of
upcn space presmation decisiinn are para-
mount. Conservationists are frequemly
Open Space
continued on page 2
6 The New Urbanism
Challenges Conventional
Planning
7 Request Form
1
recreational activities rscc chart at 1cft1, as vary quite widcl• from community to est and hest use (as.afctcrnlincd M`,_thc
well as for nonuse values such as maintain- community; and fiscal impact analyses market) has usually been devdo mcnt,
ing populations of certain endangered do not address secondary or long-terns the open space value of land must be
pecics or preserving unique bird habitats. impacts. Nevertheless, fiscal impact anal- separated from its dcvelopment Talue,
Several types of nonuse values consider ysis is a powerful and increasingly sophis- especially when land is placed under
the possibility for future use. Option value ticated planning tool for making deci- a conservation casement.
represents an individual's willingness to lions about land use altcmativcs at the Open space may also affect the
pay to maintain the option of utilizing community level. surrounding land market, creatine an
a resource in the future. Existence value The most direct•measure of the econ- enhancement value. Casual observers
represents an individual's willingness to omit value of open space is its real estate find nidence o cnTianccment value in
pay to ensure that some resource exists, market value: the cash price that an real estate advertisements that feature
which may be motivated by the desire informed and willing buyer pays an in- proximiry to open space amenities, and it
to bequest the resource to future formed and willing seller in an open and is explicitly recognized by federal income
generations. competitive market. In rural areas, where tax law- governing the valuation of con-
highest and best use of land (i.e., most servation casements. A number of cm-
Measuring the Economic Value profitable use) is as open space, one can pirical studies have shown that proximin•
of Open Space examine market transactions. In urban or to preserved open space enhances propcM-
As a result of decreased intergovernmental urbbanizin,5_rcj~ons, however, where high- values, particularly if the open space is
transfers of financial aid and in- not intensively developed for
creasing cirizcn resistance to taxes, Summary of Expense/Revenue Ratios I recreation purposes and 1f it is
local officials now scrutinize the for Southern New England Towns
carefully integrated with the
fiscal consequences of land use neighborhood. Enhancement
TOWN RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL/ OPEN
decisions more than ever before. INDUSTRIAL SPACE } :value is important to the local
The primary analytic tool available CONNECTICUT - I. property tax base because it off
to policy makers for this purpose is i sets the effects of open space.
Durham 51.07 50.27 50.23
fiscal impact analysis, a formal Farmington 51.33 50.32 50.31 j which is usually tax-exempt or
comparison of the public costs and Litchfield 51.11 5034 50.34 i taxed at a low rate.
revenues associated with growth i Pomfret 51.06 50.27 50.86 1 Open space possesses natural
ithin a Parricular local govern- CT Average 51.14 So.30 So.44 j System va7uc is c>1 nit roe ides
ental unit. Fiscal impact analysis
v I MASSACHUSETTS direct benefits to human sucicn
is utilized frequents} in large tom- through such pnlcesscs as around
Becket 51.02 50.83 50.72
munities experiencing growth water storage, climate modern-
: Franklin 51.02 50.58 50.40
pressures on the metropolitan tion, flood control, storm damage
Leverett 51.15 50.29 50.25 _
fringe, and it is being applied to Westford 51.15 50.53 50.39 ; prevcniion, and air and water poll-
open space preservation. AnA Average S1.09 So.56 So.44 lution abatement. tt is possible it)
ArLyiew of fiscal impactstudies assign a moncran :value to such
RHODE ISLAND
by Ruben Burchell and David' benefits by calculating the cost
Lt is okin concludes Thai generally Hopkinton 51.08 50.31 $0.31 of the damages that lvould result
tell cd ntial_i~rlopm_cnr dory nut West Greenwich S1.46 50.40 50.46 if the benefits were not pry vidcd.
Little Compton 51.05 SO-56 50.37
pay its own away. Thcxv t(~un_d ttlat RI Average 51.20 So.42 So.38 or if public expenditures were
nonresidrritial development does required to build intra,tnlcturc
-
pay for itself, but is a magnet for Eleven Town Average 51.14 50.43 SO.42 to rcriace the function, 411tile
residential ~u_e: clopment, and that natural svstcnls.
open space tails at the break-even tAn cNa mpic of this mach
point. A studx ,ltrlr'~en towns x •Westtad the Charles River Basin in \ta~~a
the Southern New Fn_land Forest
f
aloft S..;4)0 acre, of
Consortium shows that on astricth.r wetlands were acquired and prey
financial basis the cost ufprovidin~ served as a natural : ailev st„ra_e
public services is more than nviir -,---s- :•r area for flood control ti ,r a:t -,I „t Mwl .
as highfixresidcntialdevel may; ' -+-s# S10 million. An ahernatac 11rT-
oelpi6il -
as fix commercial development or YR = (ywRrrfdl!:: 0sJI to construct dams and 1c, co,
upon sl+at-e rscc --/;1 7,-, ar r ,lhr W accUnlplish the samc goal vv„tdd
Cue must betaken when rvalu~ r have cost 5100 million. In anoteer
n; the results of tscal impact study, the MinneNo to I)cp artnl:nt
*ajses tur 5evcral reasons: the 14, Natural Resources :_1cuIaTcd
choices of methodology and is- that the cost utrcplacin_ the
sumptlons greatly lnfluetlee the Source: Cat: c
Sar..r. r-. st:a-cc• : Z" "•L.,- _ rrY _ Open Space
tllldill~S: Specltic ~If:11I11+t.;IliC~ c0 if,
continued on page 4
Lincoln Institute of Land Policy LandLines • September 1996
Page 1 of 1
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
• CITY OF SHOREWOOD CONFERENCE ROOM
LAND CONSERVATION MEETING CO ERE
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 1995
AGENDA
1. A. Roll Call Riesen
Svoboda
Bruno
B , Review Agenda
2. APPROV AL OF MINUTES
Land Conservation Committee Meeting Minutes for September 14, 1998 (Att.-#2 draft)
3. &F,-V- W PACI{~
A, Review September 14 mcetin¢ pace Ad Hoc Committee on Land Conservation
Resolution No. 98-025, A Resolution Establish.
Revised Committee Report Outline and Methodology Sections
Draft Committee Report - Introduction, Scope
Undeveloped Parcels Prioritized - First Draft Charitable B.- Estate Planning: The Basics of Estate Planning; web page print Trusts, Gifts, Charitable
Gifts, and Bequests; the Vermont Land Trust (A uts)
C. Landowner Registry Programs and Education: pages from "Natural Areas: Protecting a
Vital Community Asset" and "Land Protection Options" (Att.-#3C selections)
D , Tax Benefits of Conservation Easements, chapter from The Conservation Easement
Handbook (Att.-#3D chapter)
E. Land Banks, "Cape Cod Land Bank bill signed," The Standard Times; "Community Lands and open Space Acquisition Fund," Maui Tomorrow (Att.-#3E web page printouts)
F. 'l'ax Strategies in Land Conservation Transactions Workshop (Att.-#3F article)
*R'u DEV ~LnvMENT POTFNTIA~
4. INVENTORY OF i AND W.
' al number of lots on land with development potential. Staff Report - Brad Nielsen. (Att.-#4 table)
Potenn
♦ ~n D( A Ni`daNr r-~1~1~LycSION CO
5.
6. s n iOURNMENT
residents. This workshop might include some of the people
who have consulted with the Committee on these complex
issues. Perhaps, Mr. Svoboda continued, residents with land
of interest could be specifically invited to such a workshop.
Fred Bruno asked if the City bought a parcel for $200,000,
put an easement on it, and then sold it to a third party for
$100,000, would the third party's heirs receive any estate
tax benefit (assuming the third party died after owning the
land for 3 or more years)? Mr. Rossini responded that the
third party's heirs would not receive any estate tax benefit
because the third party did not grant the. easement.
7. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at
8:40 a.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Erica EJ Hahn
Planning Intern
•
f
page 3
l>F =
('{I,tS~I ~ n d
160G OOCI
Feet tax No estate tax due on
Fed a $ 0
192,800- husband's death, however,
Net tax 0 husband's unified credit is
wasted.
r n~ ~(~{$f~tl,Otltl fFOethusta~td + =
[.00 00iHx ♦f.' - r -
(10r; r l
x l e s 0
Full $1,200,000 subject to Fed tax $ 382,600
Estate Tax on death of Unif Cr $ 192,800
surviving spouse Net tax $ 236,000
1st death tax 0'
GRAND TOTAL 235,000
'~g ~ -;tea ~ +r'e: r'► S'
i
An effective estate plan not only maximizes the amount of property you can pass to your children and loved
ones, but also provides you and your family substantial non-tax benefits both during your lifetime and after
• you are gone. If you would like to learn more about how to take advantage of these benefits, I would be happy
to answer any questions you may have.
Further Questions
If you have any questions or would like to set up a free initial consultation, please do not hesitate to call me at
(561) 223-2237, contact me via e-mail at estatepian @usa.net, or leave me a question or message using the
form on my home page.
AIL-
E7M
I
0
O s,O66 U v O¢ til
0 C) 4)
~t U,
O ° L .s + U O CZ. r
a) cs v' c°c aA='~ c~ L Ro° 3'
0 r bA
U U cC 3 rn N O s _
1013. fr• L ..d ~ °
C:L.-o U c3 w W
N Q) 0 `i U L'. cc ° U cz `Cdr' U ° U F-1 C~
U O r u Wks Ca O y c - 00 U
L
CZ. w C V1 C v1 O ° ° U y y U O cn
U E : O 4 00 as > >r ~ 00 cz 0 a) -FS
~ cz W
c Y o cz 'n -v E 3 c W
0 L)
ca a~
CZ &W
r 0 r- .2
U C05 CA
ob
> 'Cs U .U U U r.y~ •U w.'~S ~Gy~ CC O O DD .iU~r(^~'~''~ ° C.7`
-.0 0 S~ to i U tar .i: ' L C U r N to
O C N A s~ •O W ° U rn O N O G O • r O O. y
Zo L.,
O cr "C7 L' Ri y O y G p = tea U U 0 ON y y cz c3
O 0. O C3 U y " W " j=.' L 7; CS.(~ -0
o r~r C'~ G~
o v w o° ~ t w o cs ° ° °
cn Q Q
GOS, (D Cz
L •o O U O b to O G O ^0 U O 0 W C W r-i 0 0
t,.
L. C cC C v1 G) U 0 = O L" 0 C C C
^ • v rn CS „U3 U p E V L. cs ~t ~...w cz w i" C. N cs ~O C~ L •.0 i Q) Q)
cl~ 4) C~ CA 1-4
r' U U > i.~ C U_U. " O wN L ~ cs O > Cw U ~ C O O ~ X
oa) cr Maio a.°o~
S = 0 F Er ° ¢ E E- Fr E~
c.0 F x Ems- F > -
a:
~ I
O I,
i
'
C o 15,
" J O :n O
~
Or^p ¢ C. < sU.
o. 0
CSC 'b C, cC3 v z"
C., ca
N~ C U B ~n W U
L. vi O
N OU 'o r u 3 O a~ C O~
cUia O U Q es i+ S
p G O 00
C" .1 0
C:w~ > U U O bpQ
a: 0
Cl CZ Q) 'n -a
64 71
cz ~5 'n E! V)
O p O
Z', O Csq Gr N CCS O 0
c3 .C O F a+ O cc C3 C" U L . cz
U b U U
^O r'C. 'O t. y " N C n `r
? cz
o O O Q N
°~W QQ LQ;~ ccz ° p
:3 cr
L O L. 73 - U G U 0 'J (Za c3 ~ i R~+ O cC
cC es i. . .
- i U y .14
.C > - c r a~ cn Ga s~ 'x. C p c> O
u t:;
= ~,o r 0 UOFE.¢UUpaU p o
U O c4 O C U U"
p s. Z.
U O• c C U r cn
0. cn
i--~ U > F" cs
;y Q
O C ~
U .r bA
y a) p .y O C* 4] bA y
fl) CIO
072
10, 14 0 U •p ✓ C7 U Crr ..fir ~ p ..yr i p ~ ~ ~ ~ ^'Zi ri
3
cz U: (1) al C:
Q) i •y y0 O -G GD C C 0 N y C* -0 bUA ~ C ~0
y ' ° h 3 y 3 .0 bA ai o~
CS y p O ~Q C C L. O .C a) 3 o~ q6)
p~ A. O O O 2 G O 41i
y
o U ~ G
.54 0 (Z to 2 V)
0 6.
v 2 O 0 O• E ° Cp y V1 G) L -d U O V 0~
00 CEO y y U O CC ~ O
F' i< y fr O a. C
-d O ate. ' i". N Q) W . C Eti r" CC •~w e^..^'^
RS p u Cn ip. y y O z c, y 4 c~, h >,•Z V'Z6)
Q y 0 + (n r O; V r i IL) ^ y R+ S rte.
C/rr` yy v] 4~ bD
C7 U
(L) cu c 2 a. p•, s'. cc ;8
'l7 C O ET y M O
C C O
0u 000~~3 .n oo c~-d° C
7= M o t.
s
i +~.•,'~.U •C>G CS tn t4.)
p a) i y0 - U C h y' y v h L. 0 CO, 0O a) 00 5 d C
-O a) H cC O y o~ c,. , h . C s. s.
C Z. 0- .0 C
O
3 a as p cn C3 W CC y C L' Cool Q
Cn O cn O O 0 U C O O 4> .7 O c> sU. O CPis obi
CS - U '.4 R Q) ti C. y U Cn i"r y a) U J,) Cu cj
!••r. c~ CC N d y a) Cn Q+ a~ O y N i. L' 4. = > , 4>
C y h
f.' ' r U a~ C1) U it Er: " 'N 4z C cn O v~ ' an)
y CS Q) .D a a) . ? C~ t > C J V O i O 1 p• V O i -,t ^ ~O cr- w y h /R/~, O to i o> Q+ a) O O y 0 O
0 a" ` a~ y O U y a) O y V/ CIO O 3 .O y -CS U s. 0A h
C Cn ~ y
a~ o
y c u • U Y ram„ J y_ = R • U R u ^J
V R L u ✓ V r Y ^ V V• U _ J y' V cz Y p 0,0
Q Y
t .N- ti V 3 v U • - r c, _ i = 00 • co
ti O. _ R . V
19
CZ cc
y1 F s L O R r p f5 L R
y~ r ° v L L Y ^ - 'L O C R R _M V •C+ O ~~1 G. G.
i•• Uri ..Y• r - L Q q. .^r L •y U °u H V L.i
i.. V L Ll. OD 'L v Z`S i O L "O Y
N
O r y C L` p "Ci i v U
i. Y i L M 6v Sw•l •R OJ y L R R
O v C L ^
R
v vt" _ r 6J C 3 t0 i -W >
v i L• w L i i X
v GO OJ L.
y„ - Y Y In
„o y R r C Q L R O r r r"•
r
• 0~+°+ V cti CD v- C u ~0 C C p ~0 U bA V- v
R QJ Cr _ C tC R Y 7. _ 'G ^ O C L tY' - 3 L ' m Y • Q
N v L L = - C' i. a R L - y T... „ O b v
' Q L {'V • Q R r Y^ nV. C y • R Iv+ •L C Q ^ (~y~ fir" L
R Y C L L O y> 3 'C v •U S v i q p L •U, G
~ W u L y~ i. U L R ~ ti t4.. v n v
o v R K tva 3
_ CC to w C v i i C Op c0 C y 1 O Oy •u y r^r O O
p L L C y . V C'i U C. L~ b0 R t.. R R Y v .l' m G ✓ _
vt4 C C C 'v 0 0 0- O O L Q vvi •Y U
R 0 3 R R y CO
L > ^ y v" O y O ^ L U C. y y y C - y y U r-•
to tv O yY+ C .R. R i v+ i Q•` CJ L R .w y ✓ t! O M CO ✓ 3 3 U v CU p L p 7 "
3 +r u V C p Op V v Y O C. i y i✓
' U V O^ r v w (n CO C C J i V y .R. g p r .1' u v h
R _ p v O y O p y y G
v R v O ✓ _ t. Z+ • • • • 'r y
+ 60 L ~ r. . ~ 41 ~ ~ ~ V ~ 1 ' p'p O - y O -p DA CO n~i C-•,
3 r cr ti y O u r: C 3 c:: v t° m R 3
X111
• = L u
-V Cc
41 f: G i rr ^ ✓ C L C
v - v 3 3
cc
O • + U .fir ^ C v: vci y . V. y ^ y
v v v - R v v - O pRp , v
L L O O
(~2 > v. v V L L L y J > R L ' Q GG C
G. V ` L ✓ r t..., R
C C y L✓ R 3_ 7 L v 3
i R U R v R T y` C u ✓ `
cc cc
C o' L y C v% C O ✓ v " y R •L r. r. ✓ •U O ce >
S :1 C i ^ b_f v O C _ R > R
40 Zt
42 >1 u
.M. v J y U R ~ Cd ~ 't L ~ L ••L,.D OG ~ V ~ • ~ Y
riveness of community planning efforts. Derision-makers are often more
comfortable in their roles when they feel well-informed. Education of private
landowners about voluntary conservation practices can result in environmen-
tal quality improvements
When it may be appropriate. Ideally, on an ongoing basis. At minimum, an educa-
tional phase should be a component of any planning process and decision that
potentially impacts natural areas. Public education is a necessary tfaccettn cbond referenda and other efforts to fund natural areas protection using
public funds
While not a protection tool in and of itself, education often V~ to e apositive actions
bility to more
that directly benefit natural areas. Education offers perspective-the
objectively and realistically evaluate the relative merits of different courses of action.
If information is considered by all parties to be reliable and unbiased, it can provide
ng and planning.
a basis for discussions and reasoned debates in local decision-malo
Oftentimes, the knowledge gained through a shared education process represents
the first common understanding between people of otherwise disparate views.
Landowners and the general public may be informed about issues related to natural
areas through a coordinated effort including regular public programs with guest
speakers, local media outlets, and one-on-one outreach staffed by trained volunteers,
local or state government agencies, or nonprofit conservation organizations. Specific
goals and a timeline for public education initiatives should be established, along
with assignment of responsibility for their implementation. o o Topics should da~er
ed that focus on key themes relevant to the natural
Registry programs, which have already been discussed in Section I (see p.56), may
be considered one type of educational initiative aimed at increasing public knowl-
edge about the value of natural areas and conservation practices.
Because many local decisions involve consideration of impacts on natural areas and
the environment (subdivision ordinance, transportation and utilities development,
etc.) local officials also benefit from a basic understanding of the location and bio-
logical significance of natural areas within the jurisdictional boundaries of their
authority, as well as the key land use issues that affect them. Such efforts should
include agency natural resource specialists who may benefit from a broader per-
spective on topics outside their usual areas of expertise. A good example is the city
of Chanhassen (See Case Study, p.28) which incorporated two education phases
into a natural resources planning effort. At meetings in the initial stages of a plan-
ning process, local natural resource professionals and outside experts gave presenta-
tions; tions to the plan's steering committee, which included elected officials, city •
and local citizens. While not exhaustive in their scope, these presentations served to
59
1-- M
From "ILA 4CA5-0VVAZt:-
i .
C R Tax Benefits.
Discussing Deductions
with Property Owners
Mention tax benefits and most donors will think of income taxes. On
reflection, their interest also may be piqued by the chance to reduce their estate,
property, and gift taxes. Certain farmers, ranchers, and other land-
rich-but-cash-poor property owners may be especially drawn to the chance of
reducing estate taxes. Easement program administrators should be able to
discuss all types of potential tax benefits with a familiarity that makes their
listeners comfortable.
Explaining Income Tax Deductions
- When telling property owners how donating an easement might lower
their federal, and often state, income tax, here are essential points to convey:
Less than Fair Market Value. The easement must be donated or sold for
less than fair market value.
Perpetuity. It must be granted in perpetuity.
Qualified Conservation organization. The easement must be granted to
_ a qualified conservation organization-such as a land trust or historic
preservation organization-or a public agency charged with overseeing land
conservation or historic programs.
Conservation Purposes. It must be granted exclusively for conservation
purposes, as described in chapter 2.
Amount of Deduction. The amount a property owner can deduct for a
donated easement generally equals the reduction in the property's value due to
the easement-the difference between the property's value before the easement
is granted and after the easement's restrictions take effect.
Appraisals. The appraisal that determines the easement value must meet
strict standards set by the IRS.
Limits on Deductions. Taxpayers cannot eliminate all of their taxable
income by making charitable donations, no matter how big the donation. In
general, the deduction for charitable donations of appreciated property cannot
exceed 30 percent of the taxpayer's adjusted gross income, although any excess
amount may be carried forward and deducted over the five succeeding years.
TAX BENEFITS
Audits?
' [emphasis added] Don't Easement Donations Egger IRS
property contrib- - tential donor might say to you, "about
"i've heard horror stories, a po
off the donation. Five pears later, the IRS
things, a descrip- people giving easements and writing
audits them, disallows the donation, and slaps on a penalty. I don't want to risk
1 to determine the
mation about the that!" What can a responsible donee say to counter that ear.. with the
cription of the fee Donees certainly cannot deny that the IRS has not always agreed
claimed charitable gift deductions for easement donations. In the past, some IRS
the laid-Atlantic and Southeast regions, have
X283 and must in- regional offices, especially in
or disallowing. ~y claimed
ser, and the prop- taken a very hard-line position, reducing
the donee preservation and conservation easements donations. However, recent Tax
and by while not always fully agreeing with the taxpayers' claimed
at the donee 's sig- Court rulings,
-aised value of the value, have favored the methods and conclusions of the donors' appraisers over
the methods and conclusions of the IRS appraisers. (The best resource for
wledgment of re-
ands the informa- keeping abreast of such significant tax developments affecting land conserva-
6050L" [which] tion is the "Conservation Tax Program," a subscription service of the Land
:-m 8282) with the 'Dust Exchange.)
:e subject donated The only way for donors to be certain that their easement donation is tax
9-3). from the IRS before granting the
deductible is to seek a private letter ruling donor and his or her
utlined by Small is the easement. To get a private letter ruling, the easement d transaction and
attorney submit to the IRS, in writing, the facts of a proposed
his book for details...` what the writer believes to be controlling law (e.g., "tinder Section 170(h) of the
Revenue Code, a deduction is allowed for the donation of...'~• The
ua decision claimed by each >
Internal
ial de that the posed transaction will
taxpayer asks the IRS to rule, in writing, pro
bsection entitled "The indeed meet the requirements of the law and that the tax treatment suggested
by the taxpayer will apply. A private letter ruling tells easement donors
whether or not their contributions will qualify for an income tax deduction. The
isal? _ IRS will not, however, issue a private letter ruling on the amount of deduction.
the
The Land Trust Exchange's 1985 easement survey found that ~d 21 aught
) Ries. If the valuation - easement program administrators who reported that their do
a the valuation deter- had received favorable decisions. The process, however, is
pp longer due, plus a penalty yH private letter rulings sometimes taking than a year.
raiser also may be quite expensive and time-consuming. Potential donors should.
pp raiser Private letter rulings are optional, not mandatory.
not feel that they must undergo this expense. In fact, most easement donations
iservation Easements.
are not challenged by the IRS.
ed conservation ease-
ue to be $50,000. As a
:-nment an additional - EXpl a~ning Estate Tax Savings
-n ($100,000) is more
50,000 is $75,000), the I Estate taxes reflect the value of property's "highest and best use"--the
additional tax due), or most profitable use at the time of the owner's death. For example, although a
1ty would not apply, rancher simply may want to continue ranching on his or her 500 acres of
~
an 150 percent of the ; mountain pasture, the estate taxes due on that pasture may reflect the value of
Heirs may
the 50 ten-acre ranchettes that could be constructed on the property.
:hat a real effort was have no choice but to sell the property to cover estate (inheritance) taxes.
The Federal Tax f z, Easements can sometimes dramatically reduce estate taxes. As such, they
can be significant estate planning tools and should be approached as such.
55
TAX BENEFITS
to research unfamiliar - ❑ an organization controlled by one of the two above (a closely held sat-
of the
ellite) . See LR..C. § 170(h)(3)(B)(ii); Treas. Reg. § 1.170A-14(c) for all
:t of legal review. First, above.
to the model easement` and
x Law of Conservation
;ve that information to B. ❑ the donee has the commitment and the resources to enforce the ease-
he client money. ment's restrictions. See Treas. Reg. § 1.170A-14(c)(1).
information on a pro- and
)n which the deduction C. ❑ the easement is transferable only to other qualified organizations. See
y the mental process to Treas. Reg. § 1.170A-14(c)(2).
i attorney the facts on To support your claim to meet these tests you will need:
)e able to say: "Assum- _
e that the easement is :-r For governmental units:
❑ a description of the governmental unit; and
l questions, bring the ❑ a copy of the agency's resolution to accept the easement.
yions should never say For private nonprofit organizations:
donor's attorney and, ❑ a copy of the charitable organization's letter of determination from the IRS of
=i tax-exempt status;
❑ a copy of the organization's resolution to accept the easement; and
❑ a copy of the organization's articles of incorporation indicating that it is
must meet three primarily organized for conservation purposes.
h)(1): For controlled organizations (satellites):
❑ the satellite's resolution to accept the easement; and
~d ❑ a copy of its IRS tax-exemption determination letter.
purposes. For all organization types, some indication must be provided of the donee's
our tests below. overall stability and commitment to enforce the terms of the easement. This
could include:
❑ an annual report describing its track record of easement stewardship; and/or
cause it is: ❑ a financial statement indicating availability of funds to defend easement
iay be made of the real: (although the regulations state that a separate enforcement fund is not
170(h)(2)(C).necessary, it certainly helps); and/or
❑ availability of a back-up grantee; and/or
mmbers of "Prohibited CI a list of the nonprofit donee's directors and their occupations and organiza-ei' tional connections.
TEST 3: CONSERVATION PURPOSES
The gift is given for conservation purposes because it will: (check all those that
,nee is: (check one item ys
- apply)
:.R.C. § 170(b)(1)(A)(v) ' ❑ preserve land areas for outdoor recreation by the general public. See I.R.C. §
170(h)(4)(A)(i) and Treas. Reg. § 1.170A-14(d)(2).
escribed in I.R.C. § ❑ preserve land areas for the education of the general public. See I.R.C. §
170(h)(4)(A)(i) and Treas. Reg. § 1.170A-14(d)(2).
59
ut~7 rr www iawsa av.vvur .uv .tea .a..u. ums~avw.
Maui Tomorrow - "Land t3anw,
emau anmony(Qlmaul-tomorrow. orQ u you woula uKe to De nounea or ruture
opportunities to influence the outcome.
Tent of 1998 Bill
Background Proposal
1998 Democratic Partv Resolution Urging the Passage of Enabling
Legislation for County Land Banks
Maui County Council recommendations
MAUI LAND BANK:
an idea whose time has come
South Maui Times, February 25, 1998
Editorial by Gene Thompson
BACKGROUND
Support is requested from all islands - although this initiative is originating in
Maui, it enables each county to set up its own land acquisition fund, and to
decide locally how the fund will be used, and support from all islands will be
needed to pass the bill in 1999.
This bill would empower the counties to levy a small tax on every transfer of
real estate within the county. This tax would be used to fund the Maui County
Open Space and Community Lands Acquisition Program, as provided for in the
General Plan. This idea is commonly referred to as a "Land Bank". A Land
Bank is a permanent fund that is available when the need arises for the County
to acquire important lands for open space, recreational, park, or shoreline
access purposes.
This legislation would give the counties the ability to levy a surcharge on the
State conveyance tax, and the revenues resulting from that surcharge would be
returned in full to the county where the real estate transactions took place. This
method of funding the Land Bank is especially appropriate because real estate
speculation tends to drive up the price of land and make it more difficult for the
County to purchase park land. The real estate transfer tax would appropriately
tap into those transactions and provide the County with funds to help pay the
4 high cost of acquiring park land.
2 of 7 09/17/99 20:5727
Maui Tomorrow - "Land Bank" http:i/www.hookele.com/mvimidbmiLhtmi#backgmund
grass-roots. support The establishment of a land bank is probably the biggest
single step that Maui can take to preserve open space and special natural areas.
There is simply not enough funding available for the needed acquisitions, and a
• separate funding mechanism must be created in order for an effective
Community Lands and Open Space Acquisition Program to take effect. If the
Hawaii State Legislature wants to ensure that the Hawaiian Islands continue to
be an accessible recreational resource to the residents and visitor industry, it
must act now before it's too late. Preservation is simply good business.
Footnotes
1. Nantucket's program evolved during the early 1980s when a booming real
estate market threatened to drive the price of conservation land beyond
affordability. By 1982, only 1.5 of 80 miles of shoreline were public. In 1984,
residents voted to approve the land bank, 446-1. Developers, mortgage brokers,
year-round and part-time residents all recognized that preserving undeveloped
land is of vital importance to everyone. "If we didn't move fast and
aggressively, everything that made Nantucket special and valuable would be
gone," said Nantucket's land bank creator, Bill Kline.
To maintain a market-responsive program, the Nantucket land bank derives
funds from a real estate transfer tax. At closing, buyers write two checks - one
to the mortgage company, the other to the land bank. In 12 years, Nantucket has
conserved more than 1,000 acres of ecologically sensitive areas valued at more
than $35 million. Martha's Vineyard has acquired 33 properties in ten years.
Nantucket applies a 2% tax - just two cents on a dollar. To adapt to dips in the
real estate market and their affects on the land bank income stream, a viable,
well-administered program can issue bonds, thus maintaining its ability to buy
critical parcels as they become available.
2. Nantucket and Martha's Vineyard received conveyance taxation authority by
an act of the Massachusetts legislature. The same would be necessary for
Hawai' is counties to employ a conveyance tax funding mechanism for land
banking, because the State manages real estate conveyances. Fortunately,
Article VIII, Section 3 of the Hawai' i Constitution permits the State to delegate
specific powers of taxation to the counties. Furthermore, the State has already
entrusted the counties with taxation powers in the area of real property.
6 of 7 09/17/98 20:57:42
Points for Vacant Parcels
• % of
Pts possible points assigned to each crfteda
points
Acreage # of points % of total points
~ a
1 ac 1 38 assigned
5 ac 2 7
10 ac 3 2
possible pts 3 23% tot 47 24%
Covertype(s)
Natural area appears to have some
value in terms of resource protection 2 32
or intact native community
possible pts 2 15% tot 32 16%
Density
Number of Immediately Adjacent
Residential Units
> 5 residential units 0.5 13
>10 residential units 1 7
Zoning
Shoreiand - protection of water 0.5 20.5
resources
R-1 C - 0.5 acre lots 0.5 18
possible pts 2 15% tot 58.5 29%
Open Space in Neighborhood
(does not include island parcels)
no permanent, public open space in 0.5 18.5
1/2 section - does not include lakes
immediately adjacent to natural area or 0.5 8.5
park - includes lakes
> 0.5 mi. to nearest permanent, public 0.5 20
open space
> 1 mi. to nearest permanent, public 1 0
open space
possible pts 2 15% tot 47 24%
Market Value undetermined
low price per acre 1 0
lower price per acre 2 0
possible pts 2 15% tot 0 0%
Number of Potential Lots
>=3 0.5 4
>=5 lots 1 6
>=10 lots 2 4
possible pts 2 15% tot 14 7%
total possible 13 100% TOTAL 198.5 100%
without "other"
Other
forfeited land 1 2
• next to school property 1 1
owners willing to sell/donate 0 0
explanation of points
Points for Vacant Parcels Page 1 of 1 09/21 /199 8
rn
s;utodj o 0 0 0 q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ln cn )n Ln I rn
N CV N N cV N N N N N N N N N r+ e- N r~ r-4
' T
N
s40'I 30 laquanN (eyua;odl r r•+ r~ $ r+ N r-. N r- r" ry O o
N O
i
anleA Sax-mWi
az)eds uado ;saleau o; llu I <I
a:)edsi
uado ;saleau o; nu SO <I i X X X X X X X X X X
31led to ease leltgem x X X X X
o;;ua;)eipe Xla;eipauiuq
~ I
uo.pas Z/L ui aaeds
X X X X X X X
uado;uaueuuad':)tlgnd oNj
a~
N
y
X [ [
. h h ry [
'iO
' y y 4J N h ^R C U 4!
R C. y 'v R
iC laq" 'L1
v 0. 3
u u p ci c 3 m
O O O o y 0
~ I
d
U) 0
c i U< U U U U to m ct~ cn u¢
U U V V
E $unto U < V <"ry <"r. co
Z i i r~ i i r-~ r-+ e-~ rr r~ rv
> i
s;iun leuuapcsag;ua:)eipvi
L ~o %C e-~ Lo N N LO eN d~ d~ cn C% IV L" N N r+ N in
3 ,fla;etpatuuq;o iaqucnN
papaaN ssaaz)d~ x x x x x x x
c
cc I
U
> Owl
w
3 R : G 'LS R
(s)adA4lano' w 3 F
c oom a 0.=
m 'a CL 3 ~ m m
T1 C 'e~ ^O 'C p 'rs 'C ^O
a, 0 o ti d is
v 0 v a~ a~ m ~ a~ a~ a+ v v ~
ss -a cs "a zs 3 0, zs ss 'a -a -o •a
o 0 0 0 o m v o 0 0 0 0 m 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 o m a, 0 0 0 0 o v o 0 0
! 3 3 3 3 3~ ~ 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
N t, N M w cn di L~ N N ~o r~ O LO O CO n
salav! '1! N N O cn O Ci0 L~ 'R C., N O 0, N U') CA
i 0 M r4 C C O C C r4 r-i tV C C O C C ~
cts
of i i i I i I I ~
Z cr)
Lam: Ln ~o;r~y i a)
0.N'm in iLn IAi ~O!~GI~OIL*liaOfC~lG)
0 CD
Ri
I
CL U)
Points for Occupied Parcels
•
% of
possible
Pts points points assigned to each criteria
% of total points
Acreage # of points assigned
5 ac 1 10
10ac 2 1
possible pts 2 17% tot 11 8%
Covertype(s)
Natural area appears to have some
value in terms of resource protection
or intact native community 2 36
possible pts 2 17% tot 36 27%
Density
Number of Immediately Adjacent
Residential Units
>5 residential units 0.5 9.5
>10 residential units 1 3
Zoning
Shoreland - protection of. water
resources 0.5 15
R-1 C - 0.5 acre lots 0.5 11
possible pts 2 17% tot 38.5 29%
Open Space in-Neighborhood
(does not include island parcels)
no permanent, public open space in
1/2 section - does not include lakes 0.5 10
immediately adjacent to natural area
or park - includes lakes 0.5 8
> 0.5 mi. to nearest permanent,
public open space 0.5 4
> 1 mi. to nearest permanent, public
open space 1 16
possible pts 2 17% tot 38 29%
Market Value undetermined
low price per acre 1
lower price per acre 2
possible pts 2 17% tot
Number of Potential Lots
>=5 lots 1 6
>=10 lots 2 2
possible pts 2 17% tot 8 6%
total possible 12 100% TOTAL 131.5 100%
without "other"
Other
forfeited land 1
next to school property 1
owners willing to sell/donate 1
explanation of points
Points for Occupied Parcels Page 1 of 1 9/21 /98
co
co LC) m
O O O 0 0 0 0 0 to N O S r
S;uTO~ N N N N N N N N r r r r p N
01
M O O
N " r
9401 ;O ~ ~ C C O O~ N r r• N N r-+ N N O N
r+ r
iaquinN Iet}ua;od MaN o 0
> c c
cc$ E E
anIVA 4a3l-WW
a~eds X X
uado ;saaeau o; nu j <
m aaeds
uado ;sa mau o; nu S-0 < X X
p >Ized so ease Iem;e x X X
N o;;uaaefpe SIa;eipaunui
0
~ (s) X X X X x
uo pas Z/Iq aaeds uado X X
;uaueuuad'otjgnd ON
a~
0
CL cn cn cn cn cn cn cn cn
O Q Q ~ Q Q U r.¢ r r¢+ Q rU, U a p
E $ OZ r-q r r• r'' ra ~ r• , i , r r•
o
v
a~
Ier;uapisag;uaaeipd co er o` N N co •c cn eN d~ cn to CC
,iia;erpaunni;O iagwn
c
x x x x x
papaaN ssaa:)d x
1I I-
a~
.Q ~
V 3 3 y y o
& ow ft, E 07
'O m 'C m 'C r. 0 L-L w L 'CJ
100y to m -0 w m V 3
(S)adA4JZAO = I u d a o r_ ea a a ^C
40
3 r. R .o R 3; a
0 0 0 0 0 R R N tv
3 E ~s o
~c~.z c~ o°'ssw'dd 3 Ts°~-'ti~-a 3•d c
v i a 'a 3 v c 3= v c, y o a, a, v a o a, ca
O O y a. O y O O O O w o O O V O >
oo o o > o
ca E
3~ 3a 3.a 3 3 ta 3 3 3 m 3 3 3 c 3
coOrl-
N
N e-~ O N N l~ O N N tF} n N 6 O co
Sa17~' eM ~O C~ O~ ~O O~ O O Q~ to ' co N e}! ~ C) lA N S1
fV (V co r~ cV e-~ r~ ~M r» C-4 M CV r+ N C In
r U
U
G O
V Y
C- cn
Land Conservation Committee Report Page :
DRAFT 9/27/98
2 Inventory of Land with Development Potential
The first step in developing a process to protect open space is to g thor
information about existing open space. The Committee compiled informatiorr
about land with development potential (parcels that can be subdivided) in
Shorewood. This data includes acreage, natural features, land Valuo, struck)r,c
value (if applicable), development potential, zoning, and location relative; to
other open space.
Ninety-seven vacant and 47 occupied parcels with development potential were
inventoried. For each parcel a number of factors were measured (Appendix
The average vacant parcel was 1.9 acres, and the average occ uplod, parc or
was somewhat larger, 3.5 acres (Table Some vacant parcels had small
structures, but most were not developed. Occupied parcels were prirrtari[V
residential.
update table
Table . Acreage Summary of Vacant and Occupied Land with
Development Potential.
Vacant Occupied Overall Total
Number of Parcels 97 47 144
Total Acreage 192.54 154.97 347.51
Average Acreage 1.92 3.45 2.68
Minimum Acreage 0.37 0.78
Maximum Acreage 13.00 7.73 Each parcel's natural features were inventoried. Natural features iMIU60d,
dominant species and covertype, e.g., woodland or wetland. The. Goo-liilitioc,
compiled general information about natural features. A detailed irwe.rrtc}c~ ~~c>.a
•
Land Conservation Committee Report Page 6
DRAFT 9/27/98
not done because it would be expensive and time consuming to do a detailed
• study of every parcel with development potential. (After the list of 144 parcels is
prioritized, a detailed inventory of natural features should be done.) it was
noted which parcels appeared to have ecological value or sensitive resources,
e.g., steep slopes.
Density was assessed in the area where parcels occurred. The zoning district
of each parcel with development potential was in was recorded. The number of
immediately adjacent residential units was also used as a measure of the
number of people that would be served if the parcel would become permanent
public open space.
Property values were taken from the Hennepin County Tax (book?). Property
values in this book represent the value of property based on its current use and
does not reflect a property's highest and best use. (The market value of some of
the parcels was estimated by the Hennepin County Assessor's Office. }
Development potential was determined by the number of potential lots into
which the parcel could be subdivided. The number of potential lots was
calculated by
To assess the availability of open space in Shorewood neighborhoods, the
presence of public permanent open space in each 112 section was recorded.
(Half sections whose area in Shorewood was small were combined with other
w2 sections.) Open space was considered to be any park or other natural area
that has public access and is permanently protected. This classification does
•
Land Conservation Committee Report Page 7
DRAFT 9/27/98
not include lakes. Another measure cf open space availability used was the
• distance from inventoried parcels to the nearest open space.
Parcels' relationship to adjacent natural areas was estimated. For instance,
some parcels expand adjacent natural areas, others serve as a buffer for
wildlife or as permeable surface to control storm water runoff. To estimate these
functions, it was noted if the studied parcels are adjacent to parks or other
natural areas, including lakes.
The City will require a more detailed inventory of parcels that are seriously
considered for protection. A list of important factors are listed in the
implementation section.
•