HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.b. Discussion of Comprehensive Planning IssuesEXECUTIVE SUMMARY
City CouncilWork Session Meeting:June 13, 2016
AGENDA ITEM:Discussion of Comprehensive AGENDA SECTION:
Planning IssuesDiscussion
PREPARED BY:Kim Lindquist, Community Development
AGENDA NO. 2.b.
Director,Kyle Klatt, Senior Planner
ATTACHMENTS:Maps, Application MaterialsAPPROVED BY: ddj
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discussion Item
SUMMARY
Staff is embarking on the latest update to the Comprehensive Plan, required by the Metropolitan Council.
The first neighborhood meeting occurred on May 25 and focused on whether public utilities should be
planned for future extension into the transitional residential and rural residential areas in the North Central
portion of the City. The second meeting was June 1, and presented the idea of future development in the
southeast portion of the City and what would be appropriate land uses. A small task force comprised of SE
residents and property owners will be set up to provide some options to the larger neighborhood, Planning
Commission and City Council.
At the City Council meeting on May 9, SKB Environmental and their partner Enerkem made a presentation
about a municipal solid waste facility and gasification/refinery to be located in the northeast portion of the
City, outside of existing Heavy Industrial lands. While the first two processes will prompt community input
and decisions will evolve over the next several months as further input is obtained, the normal decision
making process for SKB is not the same. There are few neighbors in the area to state objections or profess
support. The lack of public engagement doesn’t mean that there isn’t an important land use issue associated
with the decision and also future implications associated with the project. There are two critical issues which
are broader than the site plan related items such as noise, traffic, or aesthetics. These relate to expansion of
the Heavy Industrial zoning and extension of the General Industrial Guide Plan designation and putting the
site into the MUSA, potentially prematurely. A broader decision-making process for the northeast industrial
area of Rosemount should be considered.
DISCUSSION
Presently there are three industrial land uses: Business Park, Light Industrial and General Industrial. The
zoning associated with the three land uses are listed as the following: (2030 Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 7
Land Use pg. 70-72)
Guided: Business Park Zonin g: Appropriate zoning is Business Park. Limited Secondary Zoning is General
Commercial near intersections of major roads with Light Industrial adjacent to industrial planned areas.
Guided: Light Industrial Zoning: Appropriate zoning is Light Industrial. Limited Secondary Zoning is
Business Park, Commercial, or residential planned areas; General Industrial adjacent to general industrial
planned area.
Guided: General Industrial Zoning: Appropriate zoning is General Industrial. Limited Secondary Zoning is
Light Industrial adjacent to other land uses, Heavy Industrial shall be provided sparingly and only to allow
the development or improvement of the four heavy industrial businesses.
“HeavyIndustrialzoning is limitedto developed areas of the fourheavy industrialbusinesses. The
City doesnot desire to expand the number of heavy industrial business beyond four, but it does
desire the four businesses to redevelop and expand as needed to stay economically viable. If any of
the four heavy industrial businesses desire to expand its Heavy Industrialzoning district, a Planned
Unit Development master planfor the business expansion must first be approved. The Planning Unit
Development master planshall concentrate the heaviest uses to the center of the site; provide a
transition of the lesser intensity uses to the perimeter of the site, and ensure the efficient use of the
existing heavy industrial property or prevent premature expansion of the zoning district. The rezoning
of the additional property toHeavy Industrialshall only occur immediately prior to an expansion of
thebusinessper its approved Planned Unit Development master plan.”
The four Heavy Industrial uses as the time of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan adoptions were Flint Hills
Refinery, CF Industries, Continental Nitrogen, and Dixie Petro Chemical.
The Plan also states:
“Rosemount has become increasingly concerned about its image within the region due to the heavy
industrial uses on the east side of Rosemount and the proliferation of low tax base industrial sites
requiring large amounts of outdoor storage, such as truck terminals and junk car parts providers.
Within the last five years, the City has changed its general industrial zoning to limit the amount of
outdoor storage and require a minimum building size and has implemented a heavy industrial zone
that will allow the existing heavy industrial uses to invest in their businesses but discourage a
proliferation of new heavy industrial uses.” (Chapter 4 Economic Development p25)
The excerpts from the adopted Comprehensive Plan are provided as it gets at the crux of the land use issue
associated with the SKB proposal and surrounding neighborhood. The issue of expanding Heavy Industrial
uses beyond the 2030 Plan is similar tothe discussion regarding FHR and the impact of that use on the
surrounding development pattern in the last Comprehensive Plan update. At that time, staff spent a lot of
time discussing the landholdings of FHR and the ability to provide residential development opportunities in
the central portion of the City. Initially, FHR appeared to support some residential, perhaps rural residential
along Akron Avenue, within and adjacent to their landholdings. Later, FHR’s position wasto not allow any
residential development east of Akron Avenue. The City indicated they could not support such restrictions
in land use; it was taking development opportunities from other property owners. The City ultimately guided
some of the land east of Akron Avenue for residential but recognized that the impact of the refinery use
would not promote residential closer to the plant. The City also indicated that not all of the FHR
landholdings would be reguided to Heavy Industrial to allow expansion of the refinery use, which would
further restrict development options in the area. The Heavy Industrial designation is “boxed” by Rich Valley
th
Blvd to the west, Hwy 52 to the east, the future alignment of 140Street to the south, and the City boundary
to the north. There is a portion of Heavy Industrial zoned located east of Hwy 52 currently owned by FHR
which was previously the Continental Nitrogen site. It was intentional that the Heavy Industrial zoning
would be contained within the general industrial area “boxed” by the above perimeters with the landfill on
the east. This would allow less impactful development to radiate from the General Industrial land use area to
provide a transition to the more public areas along County Road 42 and the east end of Hwy 55 with the
open space and river valley beyond.
Similarly, staff has indicated to other potential users that any Heavy Industrial uses would need to stay within
2
the properties designated for that type of use. FHR is proposing an ammonia plant, and had previously
requested that the plant be located on General Industrial zoned land. Staff directed them to the appropriate
zoning district, Heavy Industrial so that the amount of HI lands would not be expanded.
From a development standpoint, Heavy Industrial is often the least desirable land use. The zoning district
indicates that the site should be large to allow noxious uses to be set back from public views and contain
significant screening.
Purpose andIntent: The purpose of the HI heavy industrial district is to provide for the establishment
of uses that refine and store combustible or explosive materials or blend, store, and distribute
chemicals or fertilizer. Such uses may include large unscreened outdoor structures or equipment that
cannot be integrated into the building design or large scale outdoor storage. These uses typically
generate noise, odor, vibration, illumination, or particulate that may be offensive or obnoxious to
adjacent land uses. As a result of these characteristics, these uses require large areas and setbacks
as well as significant screening and are not compatible with residential uses or high concentrations of
people. Associated accessory, conditional, or interim uses are subject to the site and building
standards of the GI district, except as noted below
In the case of Rosemount, FHR is the largest heavy industrial business, and while paying a significant
amount in taxes, due to immense landholdings, much of the development in Rosemount is not taxed
because it is equipment rather than building. Additionally, the City Council and Port Authority have been
interested in business attraction to increase tax base and employment within the community. The most
recent inquiries from brokers and business owners wishing to relocate into Rosemount are industrial users
such as another car salvage yard, a semi-truck repair and storage facility and a construction yard. In every
instance the agents have indicated they thought these land uses were permitted due to the existing businesses
in the community. In the case of the salvage yard, they wanted to locate west of SKB landfill. They felt the
entire area was low in value due to the surrounding uses and were surprised the City would not allow a
salvage yard on the site. Expansion of the General Industrial land uses coupled with Heavy Industrial
zoning, will further this perception and will negatively impact the City’s ability to attract quality industrial and
business park uses.
Staff has also experienced comments from residential developers about the negative impact associated with
views to the refinery from residentially zoned property. They have indicated issues associated with the views
from residential lots and also noted that driving past the refinery to the neighborhood “makes a hard sell to
mothers with kids.” The interest in tightening down the heavy industrial land to the borders of the 2030 plan
are to reduce the negative impacts to other desired land uses in the community. While residential land uses
would not be immediately adjacent to residential development, a 150’ smokestack and other refinery
equipment will be visible for some distance. Significant truck traffic will be drawn to the area, affecting
numerous city and county streets, reducing desirability. Residential development is important to the City to
increase population which will drive additional commercial development, desired by existing and future
residents.
In January the City Council approved a PUD Concept for the western 1/3 of the SKB site, east of the
landfill. At the time the property was designated for Light Industrial and Business Park. The request was to
create a campus type of development relating to recycling and reuse-the Resolution of approval specifically
stated that “future development on the site…will be consistent with General Industrial or Light Industrial
zoning standards and will meet the ordinance requirement for those districts.” Staff supported the proposal
to General Industrial because of the recycling use on the site. However, there are numerous conditions
associated with that land use, including using 10% of the land area for building. The current application of
recycling plant and equipment repair reflect a site plan contrary to many of the ordinance standards. The site
plan contains smaller, metal buildings with gravel parking and less landscaping with most of the trees
3
removed. Since the initial submittal some of the items have been addressed however the plan still does not
comply with many of the ordinance criteria. Certainly, if the Council would approve the modified land use
and zoning the ordinance high standards need to be enforced.
Staff believes there are numerous site planning issues associated with placement of the MSW recycling
facility and refinery in this portion of the City. There are issues about screening, landscaping, paving, views,
noise, odors, significant truck traffic and infrastructure wear and tear. While some of these items can be
mitigated to some extent, the concept of increasing the Heavy Industrial designation, broadening its scope
will be more impactful. Perhaps the concept of re-guiding the area should be included as part of the larger
update to the City’s Comprehensive Plan, where a more public vetting can occur rather than through a
planning application process in a portion of the community where the future residents aren’t yet available to
convey their thoughts.
UTILITIES/MUSA EXPANSION
Presently the site is adjacent to the landfill site. The landfill and lands to the west are located within the 2020
MUSA. The site and further to the east and south are located in the 2030 MUSA. Extension of utilities
would be needed to permit urban development, which has cost implications for the City. Presently, the only
site for development in the area is the first phase of the SKB development site. The Enerkem project would
be the second phase and according to the presentation would need approximately 1 million gallons of water
a day. They have indicated that they are investigating using a private well on the site, and could use a holding
tank until public utilities become available. There has also been some discussion about using effluent from
the Empire Treatment plant for some of the cooling water needs.
The question of whether the site should be developed prior to installation of public utilities is something the
City wrestles with often. In many areas of the City, property owners would like to develop their land, usually
residential, but have to wait until the services are brought to their property. In some cases the City had
extended the services and required the property owner to pay the cost. In other cases the City has extended
the services and assessed benefiting properties. Recently, property owners on the west side of Bacardi
Avenue were assessed when public services were installed to facilitate the Bella Vista residential
development. Ironically, the eastern portion of Bella Vista cannot develop without access to utilities and a
public road through the McMenomy property. Other private property owners are also waiting for the
utilities to be extended through the McMenomy site before they are able to develop their property to urban
standards. So, in some cases they must wait until orderly sequential development occurs. And in some cases,
the City has told developers they would have to pay the cost of utility installation since they are
“leapfrogging” over land designated for development.
In the case of the SKB site, the Comprehensive Plan did not anticipate utilities until later, after other more
eastern properties had developed. The SKB site would have benefitted from the GRE site development as
would the residential properties south of County Road 42. The SKB service is planned as an extension from
the GRE utility system. It is estimated that a significant financial investment is necessary to bring sanitary
sewer to the SKB site because it would include the GRE project with extension. Based upon a preliminary
analysis, the sanitary sewer extension to GRE would be approximately $ 4 million. The further extension to
SKB would beanother $1.5 million. Unfortunately, the SKB property does not develop as intensely as that
proposed for the GRE site, which was estimated at almost 1,000,000 square feet, which means that creation
of a TIF District for the site would not produce enough revenue tosignificantly offset utility costs. Given
the development in the area surrounding the SKB site, sanitary sewer extension does not appear to provide
much benefit to other sites. If development was phased consistent with the recent east side utility study,
which is complementary to the MUSA staging plan, the cost of sanitary sewer would be lessoned. It is due to
4
the fact that the SKB site relies on the extension of the sewer, and installation of lift station, to the GRE site
which creates a $6.5 million cost.
In talking to the City Engineer, utilities could be installed directly to the SKB site without installation to
County Road 42. However, this would require installation of two lift stations, which is undesirable from a
capital and maintenance cost perspective. It is not recommended.
Water access for the first phase of the SKB project is available at the site. The concern is raised with the
second phase, should the Council approve the Enerkem project. The amount of water anticipated for its
operation is extensive, and would deplete the“excess water” available for other development anticipated in
the community. SKB had indicated that they could install a private well for their operations but staff has two
concerns. One, this area is designated for public utilities and therefore private service investments should not
be encouraged. It may be economically difficult to convert the site to public utilities when they became
available. The other issue relates to the discussions about water use in the Metropolitan area and the
depletion of groundwater aquifers. For example, there has been a lot of discussion and research to assess
groundwater replenishment and using surface water (river water) for local needs. There have been some
discussions about requiring cities to install surface water treatment plants rather than ground water treatment
plants so the aquifers aren’t negatively affected. A surface water plant is significantly more expensive than
the groundwater treatment facilities. Staff is concerned that cities will have new regulations placed upon
them, but private businesses with private systems would not have the same regulatory standards. For
example, FHR uses private wells which more than double the amount of water used by the entire City.
Unfortunately, the City is unable to regulate their use and its impacts on the communities’ system. It appears
that future regulations or initiatives will be implemented at the local or regional governmental level and it is
unclear there will be any regulations applied to private users. Staff is concerned about having other heavy
water users on private systems due to the future regulatory uncertainty and potential impacts on the rest of
the community.
Staff has discussed with the Council provision of services for other projects with the cost front-ended from
the City’s Core Funds. Repayment would occur through payment of charges at the time of benefiting
property development. However, that means the City will be carrying costs until fully reimbursed. Due to
the shape of the City, long on the east/west axis, and due to impediments to orderly development; Umore
and FHR landholdings, we are potentially facing large capital investments for infrastructure in other areas of
the community. The City has discussed installation of utilities for business park development along the east
side of Umore. It is estimated the sewer and water costs would approximate $3.6 million, which would be
reimbursed over time, as additional development occurs. Staff is working with Umore, DEED, and Greater
MSP on a proposal for a new user. Umore also continues to market the northeastern 160 acres of their
complex. The City has indicated we would be partners in infrastructure installation when a user comes
forward. However, the Core Funds cannot front end the amount of utility installation necessary for all the
potential projects mentioned above. Prioritization of financial resources needs to take place.
CONCLUSION
This memorandum is to raise several policy issues associated with the Enerkem/SKB proposal introduced to
the Council at a previous worksession. There is not presently an application for this phase of site
development, only the first phase, immediately east of the landfill site. However, given the amount of
discussion with various agencies and elected officials about the Enerkem project, staff felt it was important
to bring some of the policy issues to the forefront.
The update to the City’s Comprehensive Plan has just begun. There are three small area planning areas that
will be investigated over the next year. These plans will include several public comment opportunities. Staff
5
believes that a more robust public process should also be facilitated should the Council wish to entertain the
SKB/Enerkem project. Reguiding of the property to a General Industrial land use and the needed rezoning
to Heavy Industrial, is a departure from the currently adopted plan implementation strategy for development
on the east side.
Further, staff would anticipate having a more substantive discussion with the Council about the provision of
utilities for future development on the east side. We have discussed several areas of potential development;
all which require significant utility investment. A prioritization for utilizing financial resources should be
devised. A policy discussion regarding availability of utilities, who pays, and the concept of allowing private
systems when the long term plan for public infrastructure should also be reviewed. These discussions will
provide the basis for goals and objectives within the Comprehensive Plan and will assist staff and the
Planning Commission in carrying out the priorities of the City Council.
6
.mxd
elopment\\Planning File\\SKBCompPlanAmendment-15-45 CPA
Path: T:\\GIS\\City\\Maps\\Departmental Maps\\CommunityDev
elopment\\Planning File\\SKBZoningAmendment-15-44 RZ.mxd
Path: T:\\GIS\\City\\Maps\\Departmental Maps\\CommunityDev
A nq = \ \O
W =o�W=p=An
d.
�000ad
li lull � \
IfI
N
00 �
/
O /
1
/
III
�m
M
IL'
M
s
11