The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About6.j. Great River Energy Lot Split, 05-23-LSAGENDA ITEM: Case 05 -23 -LS Great River Energy Lot Split AGENDA SECTION: Consent PREPARED BY: Eric Zweber, AICP; Senior Planner AGENDA NO. ATTACHMENTS: Lot Split Resolution, Location Map, Survey, Excerpt of Draft Parks Commission Minutes September 25, 2006, Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes May 24, 2005 APPROVED BY: RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to adopt a resolution approving the Lot Spilt as requested by Great River Energy, subject to conditions. 4 ROSEMOUNT City Council Regular Meeting• October 17, 2006 ISSUE Great River Energy has purchased six parcels of land from Pine Bend Development Company. Ehlers Path crosses two of the parcels, isolating smaller fragments east of the bend in 140` Street East, south of the SKB landfill. The lot split application will separate the parcel north of Ehlers Path from the rest of the East 1 /2 of the Northwest 'ii of Section 29, to be retained by Pine Bend Development Company. The West 1 /2 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 29 will be similarly split, but that lot split is not subject to the City of Rosemount Subdivision Ordinance. State statute allows division of the eastern property without approval by the local government due to the size of the parcel and the parcels created The Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 24, 2005 to discuss the lot split application. The Commission was comfortable with the condinons as recommended by staff and recommended approval of the request The applicant had expressed concern about the park dedication fees, given the amount due based upon the adopted fee schedule. There have been numerous meenngs relating to the park dedication fee issue The recommendation to the Council was also discussed by the Parks Commission at their meenng on September 25, 2006 and by the City Council at their work session meetmg on October 11, 2006. BACKGROUND Applicant Property Owner(s): Location Lot Split Data: Comp. Guide Plan Desig: Packet page 95 of 207 CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Jim Anderson, representing Great River Energy Ehlers Path, south of the SKB landfill Original Parcel North Parcel South Parcel 79.32 acres 4 06 acres 75 26 acres Mixed Use Industrial (4 western parcels) includes the westerly 79.32 -acre parcel Agriculture (2 eastern parcels) includes the 80 89 -acre easterly parcel 42/52 Land Use Study Recommendation: South 80 acres Business Park, North 80 acres Mixed Use Industrial Current Zoning: Agriculture SUMMARY Great liver Energy has purchased approximately 330 acres of land from Pine Bend Development Company, a large landowner east of U.S. 52. The land consists of six large parcels of which portions of two extend beyond the purchase area, the area north of Ehlers Path. It is anticipated that the southern property is intended for the future construction of a power plant. The timing for the power plant construction has been delayed from what was initially expected However, recently, staff has met with Great River Energy representatives who are looking at this site, as well as other GRE landholdings, for expansion.. The combined properties are bounded by West Rich Valley Golf Course South County Road 42 East Emery Ave. North 140 Street East Ehlers Path (SKB Landfill and Agricultural land) There are two other properties within the area described above, south of Ehlers Path and west of Emery Avenue that are not included in the purchase A residential property of 2 56 acres, and a small industrial company on 3 71 acres that makes concrete vaults (formerly A -1 Concrete) The primary objective of the review is to ensure that no parcels are being created that would be non- conforming to applicable standards The current zoning of all of the parcels is Agnculture with a minimum lot size of 2.5 acres (normally for agricultural residential use). In this case, the smallest parcel (northwest) being created is 4.06 acres It has a triangular shape with a lot depth ranging from about 340 feet on the east side to zero as the road right -of -way tapers to the property line. It is not uncommon for larger agricultural properties to be bisected by roads as in this particular case. Ehlers Path also happens to be old County Road 38 and has been m existence for many years The splitting of the parcels has been a functional reahty as long as the road has been in place. Now, separate ownership may ultimately facilitate development in the area and cause upgrading of the road It is unhkely that the power plant development will need the entire 332.9 acres and perhaps additional subdivision of the properties will occur to allow additional development. FUTURE LAND USE The 42/52 future land use map shows the southern half of the properties along CSAH 42 to be Business Park and the northern half Mixed -Use Industnal The small northwesterly parcel (north of Ehlers Path) is shown as Waste Management as an extension of the SKB site The easterly parcel is Mixed-Use Industrial It is possible that industrial or business park development will not occur for many years. The property owners in the future may explore residential development as an interim use for land that is still guided and zoned for agricultural use. Therefore, the City Attorney has recommended the recording of restrictive covenants on the larger parcels limiting them each to one dwelling unit. The intent is to discourage the potential for future subdivisions yielding more than 1 dwelhng unit out of the 75 26 acres south of Ehlers Path. Packet page 96 of 207 PARK DEDICATION Parkland Dedication will be m the form of fee -in -heu of Parkland Dedication. The current zoning of all the land is Agricultural, and the Comprehensive Plan Designation is Mixed Use Industrial The applicant has indicated that the large southern parcel is being acquired for development of the power plant and compatible industrial or business park uses It is assumed given the land uses in the area the properties north of Ehlers Path will also be developed as mdustnal This belief is reinforced by the proposed 42/52 land use plan which recommends a combination of business park and mixed industnal in the entire area The City 2006 Fee Schedule states that the Industrial Parkland Dedication charged at a rate of $50,000 00 an acre This rate would equate to a fee -m -lieu of Parkland Dedication of $396,600 00 Great River Energy's attorneys, Stern and Anderson, stated that the computed fee exceeds the "rough proportionality" test as required by State Statute Staff acknowledges that this subdivision is unique because of it size, the total purchase of approximately 300 acre by Great River Energy, and the fact that we are unsure how much of this area will be developed as a power plant and how could be developed by other uses. The park dedication ordinance allows the City to re- evaluate the fee in the future if the land was further subdivided for additional development. Staff and Great River Energy negotiated a value of $22,784 00 per acre of land instead of requiring an appraisal. Staff and the Parks and Recreation Committee recommends a fee in -heu charge of $180,000 00 (10 of 79 acres times $22,784 00 per acre). EASEMENTS The City Engineer has indicated that 100 foot right -of -way easements (50 -feet on each side of the centerline) should be dedicated to the City over Ehlers Path if not previously recorded, as well as dedication to the County of a 75 foot north half of right -of -way (75 -feet north of the centerhne) of County Road 42. Additionally, standard drainage and utility easements for each of the created lots per the subdivision ordinance should be dedicated. CONCLUSION The lot spht will not create a non conforming situation. The split essentially formalises the division of property that functionally occurred with the original construction of the road Staffs view is that even though development is not imminent, future subdivisions may or may not occur, given the anticipated large scale of the intended industrial uses including the power plant. Given the current situation, and what staff believes to be the intended uses on the property, it is reasonable to obtain park dedication fees based upon the actual sale price of the land. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the attached resolunon. Packet page 97 of 207 3 CITY OF ROSEMOUNT DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA Packet page 98 of 207 RESOLUTION 2006- A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE LOT SPLIT REQUEST FROM GREAT RIVER ENERGY TO SPLIT THE PARCEL LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS THE EAST Y2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 115, RANGE 18 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department of the City of Rosemount received an application from Great River Energy requesting the Lot Spht of the property legally described as. The East 1 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 29, Township 115, Range 18 WHEREAS, on May 24, 2005, the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemount held a pubhc hearing to review the Lot Split; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted a motion to recommend that the City Council approve the Lot Split requested by Great River Energy, legally described as follows Great River Energy Descnpnon: That part of the East 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 29, Township 115, Range 18, lying southerly of the centerline of Right -of -Way of County Road No. 38 (Ehler's Path) as shown on Dakota County Road Right -of -Way Map No 81 filed December 27, 1988 Doc. #871736. Pine Bend Development Descnption: That part of the East Y of the Northwest Y< of Section 29, Township 115, Range 18, lying northerly of the centerline of Right -of -Way of County Road No. 38 Ehler's Path) as shown on Dakota County Road Right -of -Way Map No. 81 filed December 27, 1988 Doc #871736. WHEREAS, on October 17, 2006, the City Council of the City of Rosemount reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendation and the Lot Split requested by Great River Energy; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Rosemount hereby approves the Lot Split requested by Great River Energy, legally described as follows: Great River Energy Description: That part of the East 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 29, Township 115, Range 18, Lying southerly of the centerline of Right -of -Way of County Road No. 38 (Ehler's Path) as shown on Dakota County Road Right -of -Way Map No. 81 filed December 27, 1988 Doc. #871736. Pine Bend Development Description: That part of the East 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 29, Township 115, Range 18, lying northerly of the centerline of Right -of -Way of County Road No 38 Ehler's Path) as shown on Dakota County Road Right -of -Way Map No 81 filed December 27, 1988 Doc #871736. NOW, THEREFORE, FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED, the Council of the City of Rosemount hereby approves the Lot Split requested by Great River Energy, subject to ATTEST: Packet page 99 of 207 1. Payment of G.I.S. established by the current fee schedule. 2. Recording of restncnve covenants for the parcel south of Ehlers Path to limit the potential for dwelling units to a maximum of 1, ensuring 1 per 40 density. 3. Dedicate the 100 feet right -of -way for Ehlers Path (50 feet on each side of the centerline) if not previously recorded and standard drainage and utility easements per the Subdivision Ordinance. 4. Dedicate the 75 feet of the north half of tight -of -way for County Road 42 (75 feet on the north side of the centerline) 5. Payment of a Park Dedication Fee in the amount of $180,000 00. This amount is calculated based on $22,784 00 per acre tunes 7 9 acres of park dedication to arrive at the $180,000 00 ADOPTED this 17th day of October, 2006 by the City Council of the City of Rosemount. Amy Domeier, City Clerk William H. Droste, Mayor RESOLUTION 2006 Morton by Second by Voted in favor Voted against: Member absent 2 PROPERTY ID NUMBER 34. 02900-011 -25 PAYABLE 2006 TAXES PAYABLE 2007 ASMNT USAGEAG -GREEN ACRES NOTE Dimensions rounded to nearest foot SITE MAP 2006 ESTIMATED MARKET VALUES (PAYABLE 2007) 2006 BUILDING INFORMATION )PAYABLE 2007) FEE OWNER PINE REND DEVELOPCO LAND 445,300 LOT SIZE M G ASTLEFORD CO BUILDING BOX 110 705 CENTRAL AVE E TOTAL 445,300 3,276,201 TOTAL SO FT SAINT MICHAEL MN 55376 -8422 75 26 TOTAL ACRES SCHOOL DISTRICT 196 110375 ROAD R/W 50 F LOCATION NE1 /4 NW114 SECTION 29- 115 -18 NET TAX 1,56074 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0D0 PAYABLE 2007 HOMESTEAD STATUS NON HOMESTEAD TOTAL TAX SA 1,56074 WATERSHED DISTRICT VERMILLION RIVER LAST QUALIFIED SALE DATE AMOUNT NO DATA AVAILABLE Copyright 2036, Dakota County This drawing is neither a legally recadod map nor a survey and is nol Intended 10 De used as cne This drawing is a compilation of records, information and data totaled m venous city, county, and slate offices and other sources, affecting the area shown, end is to be used for reference purposes only Dakota County Is not responsible for any Inamuraaes herein contained If discrepancies are found, please contact Dakota Co.nfy Survey and Land Information Department Packet page 100 of 207 Map Date July 6, 2006 Parcels Upcated 529/2006 Penal Pholography 1990 PLAT NAME SECTION 29 TWN 115 RANGE 18 TAX DESCRIPTION E 112 OF NW 114 SUB] TO HWy ESMNT 'ARCEL 11 ON CTY RAN MAP 21C EX PT LYING N'LY OF CR 36 29 115 18 o 0 cc EXCERPT FROM MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MAY 24, 2005 Public Hearing: 5C. Case 05 -23 -LS Great River Energy Lot Split. City Planner Pearson reviewed the ,taff report. Great River Energy has purchased six parcels of land from Pine Bend Development Company. Ehlers Path crosses two of the parcels, isolating smaller fragments east of the bend in 140 Street East, south of the SIC landfill. The lot spht applications will separate the parcels north of Ehlers Path from the bulk of the two lots, to be retained by Pine Bend Development Company. Chairperson Messner asked the Commission for any questions for Mr. Pearson. Chairperson Messner questioned what the minimum lot size requirement would be for the remnant parcels. bit Pearson stated the nunumum lots size for industrial parcels is typically five acres and the northerly one here is a little bit less than that The zoning is Agricultural and the minimum lot size is 2.5 acres Discussion was held regarding minimum lot size requirements, replatung and development of the property. Chairperson Messner opened the Pubhc Hearing. There were no pubhc comments. MOTION by Humphrey to close the Public Hearing. Second by Zurn. Ayes: Zurn, Messner and Humphrey. Nayes: None. Morton carried. Chairperson Messner asked for any follow -up questions or discussion. MOTION by Messner to recommend that the City Council approve the lot splits requested by Great River Energy subject to: 1. Payment of G.I S and Park dedication fees at industrial rates as estabhshed by the current fee schedule 2. Provision of a 20 feet wide trail easement along the north side of the Ehlers Path right of -way. 3. Approval of the Dakota County Plat Commission as needed. 4 Recording of restrictive covenants for the two parcels south of Ehlers Path to limit the potential for dwelling units to a maximum of 2, ensunng 1 per 40 density. 5. Dedicate right -of -way for Ehlers Path if not previously recorded and standard drainage and unlity easements per the Subdivision Ordinance Second by Humphrey Ayes: Zurn, Messner and Humphrey. Nayes: None. Motion approved Packet page 102 of 207 EXCERPT FROM MINUTES PARKS RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 25, 2006 a Lot Split Great River Energy This item was discussed previously at the May 23, 2005 Parks and Recreation Commission meeting At that tone, the Commission recommended collecting cash in lieu of land for parks dedication Great River Energy (GRE) onginally was proposing a lot split on a 79 32 acre parcel. The lot would be split by Ehler's Path and would divide the parcel into two sections, one being 4 06 acres and the other 75.26 acres GRE felt that the $50,000 /acre fee for the lot split was too high, as they had paid $15,000 /acre a couple of years ago The $50,000 /acre fee was based on our fee policy for parks dedication collection for industrial use After several discussions between staff and GRE, it was agreed that a lower fee would be brought to the Parks and Recreation Commission Staff is recommending that we collect a parks dedication fee of $180,000, ($180,000 divided by 7 9 acres $22,784 /acre) for the lot split The reasons for the lower fee are that the land is currently zoned for agriculture, it is worth less than land being developed on the west side of Hwy 52, and our subdivision ordinance allows us to review subdivisions on a case by case basis The Commission discussed the revised parks dedication fee and expressed concern that it was quite a bit lower than the $50,000 /acre allowed per our current fee policy Eliason asked what would happen if the land was sold and rezoned to be used for another purpose at some time in the future Per Schultz, if that should happen, our subdivision ordinance allows for this to be reviewed again and we could collect an additional fee if appropriate. MOTION by Sampo to recommend that the City Council accept cash in lieu of land to satisfy the parks dedication for the GRE lot split as presented by staff SECOND by Jacobs Discussion followed regarding the revised fee. Fliason felt that the City was not collecting as it should and that $22,784/acre was too low If it is rezoned to industrial, the land will instantly be worth more. Jacobs asked what would happen if the land was sold and rezoned residential Per Schultz, if this should happen we would look at the amount we had already collected, what the new use would be and its impact on the parks system Our subdivision ordinance does allow us to review the property being resubdivided and to collect additional parks dedication fees if they are warranted Ehason felt that if we tned to collect additional fees, it would be challenged Ayes: 4 Nays- 1 (Ehason) Motion passed Packet page 103 of 207