HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.b.2030 Comprehensive Plan ROSEN4O1JI JfEXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CITY COUNCIL
City Council Work Session: June 18, 2008
AGENDA ITEM: 2030 Comprehensive Plan AGENDA SECTION:
PREPARED BY: Eric Zweber; Senior Planner AGENDA NO. Z„ g
ATTACHMENTS: Draft 2030 Comprehensive Plan; Flint
Hills Letter; CF Industries Letter; Beberg
Letter; Le Foret Letter; McMenomy APPROVED BY: a
Letter; Hoisington Koegler Letter;
Excerpts from minutes of 4 -21 -08 and 5-
27 -08 Planning Commission meetings
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discussion
L
ISSUE
The City has completed the draft Comprehensive (Comp) Plan. In April and May, the Planning
Commission conducted two community hearings to allow the public to comment on the draft Comp Plan.
Tonight, staff and the Planning Commission would like to present the draft Comp Plan to the City
Council and address any comment that the Council members may have.
SUMMARY
The Comp Plan is the official document that the City uses to guide development. The current Comp Plan
envisions growth through the year 2020, only 12 years away. Every ten years, the City is required to
update their Comp Plan. The City has prepared a draft Comp Plan that will address growth for an
additional 10 years, through the year 2030. The Metropolitan Council has requested the plan be submitted
by December 31, 2008.
Two major changes are proposed in the Comp Plan that staff would like to call to the City Council's
attention: the residential designated land east of US Highway 52 and the different commercial designations.
RESIDENTIAL LAND USE EAST OF US HIGHWAY 52
Approximately 700 acres of land located east of US Highway 52 and south of County Road 42 has been
designated for residential uses. The mix of land uses include about 500 acres of low density residential
(single family homes), 150 acres of medium density residential (townhomes), and about 30 acres of high
density residential (apartment or condos). The mix of land uses are designed around two mix residential
neighborhood focused south of the two future full intersections with County Road 42.
The eastern neighborhood is focused onto the existing Emery Avenue and is the larger of the two
neighborhoods. The Emery Avenue neighborhood included commercial along County Road 42 to make a
true mixed use neighborhood. All the residential land east of US Highway 52 is designation in the 2030
MUSA line, meaning that it is expected to develop between 2020 and 2030. These residential
neighborhoods will have a physical disconnection from the other residential neighborhoods of Rosemount
of approximately 2 miles. Special effort will need to be made to make them feel they are a part of the City.
FOUR NEW COMMERCIAL LAND USE DESIGNATIONS
Currently, the City has only one Commercial land use designation that covers all the various retail and
office uses in the C1 Convenience Commercial, C2 Community Commercial, C3 Highway Service
Commercial, and the C4 General Commercial zoning districts. To provide more direction to the most
appropriate type of commercial business in different areas of the City, staff has proposed four different
commercial land use designations.
Neighborhood Commercial
The Neighborhood Commercial (NC) land use designation is meant for small districts of commercial
(generally less than 5 acres in size) that has a customer base that is focused on the surrounding residential
neighborhood. An example of this type of commercial in Rosemount is the triangular commercial area
south of 145 Street West and north of Dodd Boulevard at the intersection of 145 Street West, Dodd
Boulevard, Chippendale Avenue and Chili Avenue. The total area of commercial businesses at this
location is about three (3) acres. The businesses located there include a gas station, pizza restaurant, a
martial arts studio, and a laundermat.
A similar location that has been identified for commercial businesses, but has not yet been developed, is a
three (3) acre lot located on the south side of the Harmony neighborhood at the intersection Connemara
Trail and Brockway Avenue. The property has received preliminary plat approval for a commercial
development. Another area proposed for this designation is about a three (3) acre property located on the
northeast corner of Chippendale Avenue and County Road 46.
The most appropriate zoning district for the NC land use designation will be C1 Convenience
Commercial.
Community Commercial
The Community Commercial (CC) land use designation covers the retail commercial areas that are most
familiar to Rosemount, such as the commercial on the south side of County Road 42 located west of
South Robert Trail and most of the commercial located downtown. These commercial areas are
predominately retail and personal services, but also contain some professional office space. The size of
these commercial districts are generally over 50 acres in size, while often that area is spread out linearly
along a major roadway. The focus of these areas will be to draw their customers from throughout
Rosemount to meet their daily and weekly shopping needs.
The areas proposed for this level of commercial development are the south side of County Road 42
located west of South Robert Trail; north of the intersection of County Road 46 and South Robert Trail;
the north side of County Road 42 on both sides of South Robert Trail running east to Biscayne Avenue;
the north side of County Road 42 on both sides of Akron Avenue running east about a mile; and the four
corners surrounding the intersection of County Road 42 and Emery Avenue East.
The most appropriate zoning district for the CC land use designation will be C4 General Commercial,
while some limited amounts of C3 Highway Service Commercial will be considered for gas stations, oil
change, and tire shops provided that they do not require outdoor storage.
2
Regional Commercial
The Regional Commercial (RC) land use designation will cover two aspects of the commercial market:
auto orientated businesses that require outdoor storage; and commercial business that have a regional draw
or sell a product that is typically purchased, rented, or leased on an annual or even less frequent basis.
Businesses such as auto repair garages, machinery repair, tool rental, and contractor shops are commercial
operations identified as auto oriented businesses requiring outdoor storage. Businesses such as vehicle
rentals and vehicle sales are commercial operations that are patronized less than annually by the average
household, while hotels, theaters, or big box retail are businesses that have a regional draw for their
clientele. These districts vary in size from 10 acres in size for auto orientated businesses to 50 acres plus
for businesses with a regional draw.
The area proposed for the more auto orientated portion of the commercial market is the northwest corner
of South Robert Trail and Canada Circle. The area proposed to serve the businesses with a regional draw
is the southeast, southwest, and northeast corner of the County Road 42 and US Highway 52 interchange.
The most appropriate zoning district for the RC land use designation is C3 Highway Service
Commercial, while the C4 General Commercial zoning district may also be appropriate for businesses
that have a regional draw.
Downtown
The Downtown (DT) land use designation would best be described as a mixed use land use designation
rather than a true commercial district. The DT land use designation will cover not only the retail and
office commercial businesses currently downtown, but also the multiple family housing, institutional, and
recreational land uses downtown. The purpose of this land use designation is different than the other land
use designations in that the DT area because it is more concerned with performance standards than uses.
The performance standards will require distinctly different land uses to appear and function in a similar
manner as opposed to the traditional land use designations that concern themselves with separating
different land uses from each other. The purpose of the DT land use designation will be to concentrate
the civic functions of life (such as city government, education, and gather spaces) within a neighborhood
in which an individual could live, work, shop, and recreate.
The area proposed for the DT land use designation is roughly described as one block west of South
Robert Trail on the west to the railroad tracks on the east, and from 143` Street East on the north to just
short of County Road 42 on the south.
The current zoning districts that are most appropriate for the DT land use designation are the C2
Community Commercial, the C4 General Commercial, the R4 High Density Residential, and the PI
Public /Institutional zoning district. Staff is considering that one of the implementation measures of the
Comprehensive Plan will be to create a separate downtown zoning district that will focus on the
performance standards needed downtown (such as building materials and appearance, shared parking,
pedestrian focused streets and building frontages) while including a wide variety of land uses that are
normally segregated into the four downtown zoning districts listed above.
PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED
At the April 21, 2008 Planning Commission Meeting, three property owners provided public comment
regarding the Comp Plan's proposed land uses of their properties. The three individuals who spoke
included Don Kern representing Flint Hills Resources; Scott Dohmen representing CF Industries; and
Irene Beberg representing herself and her mother, Olga Treise.
3
At the May 27, 2008 Planning Commission Meeting, Scott Dohmen and Irene Beberg provided public
comment. Mr. Dohmen show a rough concept plan that he and his consultants have been working on and
asked staff and the Planning Commission to work with CF Industries to address their property during the
six month review period. Ms. Beberg changed he request to ask the City to consider 2.5 acres lots on her
property in exchange for park dedication and trail access to her lake and wetlands.
Flint Hills
Flint Hills Resources has submitted a letter requesting that all of their land north of 140 Street East and
east of Blaine Avenue /Rich Valley Boulevard be designated as General Industrial (GI). The purpose of
this designation would be to allow for future expansions of their refinery. Staff is supportive of the GI
designation for this area, but staff does not necessary shares the same vision as Flint Hills for the
development of the property closest to the intersection of 140` Street East and Blaine Avenue. Staff
understands that Flint Hills expects that their refinery will expand within the confines of an area bounded
by US Highway 52 to the east; 140` Street East to the south; Blaine Avenue and Rich Valley Boulevard to
the west; and the City Limits to the north; but staff expects any development near the intersection of 140`
Street East and Blaine Avenue is to be lower intensity and serve as a transition area between the public
streets and the more intense heavy industrial refinery to the northeast.
The Planning Commission has designated the Flint Hills property GI, but also desires a transition between
the heavy refinery use and the future urban development to the southeast. Text is provided within the GI
designation that requires a master development plan be development and approved by the City before any
additional land be rezoned to HI Heavy Industrial. The master development plan can provide guidelines
and performance standards for specific areas within the refinery to ensure that the appropriate transitions
occur.
On April 21, Mr. Kern stated that Flint Hills is satisfied with the land use designations of their properties
and that he personally was satisfied with the text description of the General Industrial (GI) land use
designation, but that some others at the company are reviewing the language. It is not anticipated that Mr.
Kern will have any additional comments at tonight's meeting and no changes are recommended to the land
use designation of Flint Hills property.
CF Industries
CF Industries (CF) has submitted a letter requesting that all of the property that they own be designated to
accommodate HI Heavy Industrial zoning. All of CF's land that is not zoned FP Floodplain, with the
exception of about 110 acres on the east side of their facility, is currently designated GI and zoned HI
Heavy Industrial. The Planning Commission was not supportive of changing the entire 110 acres to GI,
but has work with CF Industries (including a tour of their facility) to determine if any of the area would be
appropriate for development. About 25 of the 110 acres are above the river bluff and relatively flat. The
Planning Commission determined to include the western 12 acres of flat land in the GI designation
because the eastern 13 acres had a significant tree stand, is designated Rural Open Space in the Mississippi
River Critical Area Corridor, and is relatively close to the Spring Lake Regional Park.
Similar to Flint Hills, CF Industries would need to submit a master development plan before any
additional land would be consider for Heavy Industrial zoning.
On April 21, Mr. Dohmen stated that he appreciated the changes that the Planning Commission had done
to include more of their property into the GI land use designation, but that CF Industries requests that the
GI boundary line be moved an additional 750 feet to the east to include the additional 13 acres of property
within the GI designation. Mr. Dohmen stated that he understood that the additional 13 acres were within
4
the Rural Open Space designation of the Mississippi River Critical Area Corridor and that it contains a
signification stand of trees, but that CF Industries wished to work with the City to provide information
about the 13 acre area. The additional information that Mr. Dohmen had discussed providing was a tree
inventory of the stand of trees, a concept plan for their development of the property, and information
about revising the designation within the Critical Area Corridor.
The Planning Commission recommends releasing the Comp Plan for public and agency comment with the
land use map showing the additional 13 acres of CF Industries land as agricultural, but staff and the
Planning Commission will continue to work with CF Industries to review the 13 acres during the six
month review period.
Irene Beberg
Irene Beberg, on behalf of her mother Olga Treise, has submitted a letter requesting that her mother's
property be included in the MUSA and be designated as high density residential or commercial. Mrs.
Treise owns approximately 50 acres located northwest of the intersection of McAndrews Road and South
Robert Trail. The land is currently designated RR and has AG Agricultural and RR Rural Residential
zoning. The property is about three quarters of a mile from the nearest sewer and water lines and is
surrounded by other RR designated properties. On April 21, Irene Beberg requested that the 55 acres that
her mother, her sister, and she own on the northwest corner of County Road 38 (McAndrews Road) and
Minnesota Highway 3 (South Robert Trail) be served with urban services and designated as commercial
and high density residential.
Staff is not supportive of designating this property anything other than RR. The proposed land use map
does not change any of the areas designated RR in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan. In April of 2007, the
City conducted an open house with the rural residential land owners and asked them if they were
supportive of the one (1) unit per five (5) acre standard in the RR designation. The City received 55
responses to this question and 87% of them were supportive of the one (1) unit per five (5) acre standard.
Residents overwhelmingly want the rural residential character of northwest Rosemount to be maintained
and re- designating Mrs. Treise's property would urbanize this rural area and change its character.
The Planning Commission recommends maintaining the RR designation of Ms. Beberg's property.
Lawrence Lenertz
Mr. Lenertz owns a 2.2 acre property, only 100 feet in width that is located on the northern Rosemount
boundary and is surrounded by Flint Hills refinery. The property is currently undeveloped. The property
is located directly south of an 8.8 acre parcel that Mr. Lenertz owns in Inver Grove Heights and that has a
truck service and tire shop. The property is currently designated GI and Mr. Lenertz has requested that
the property maintain that designation.
The Planning Commission recommends maintaining Mr. Lenertz's GI designation.
Le Foret Neighborhood
Le Foret is a thirteen lot single family neighborhood on the west boundary of the City, located just west of
the Country Hills neighborhood. The neighborhood is about 40 acres in total and is currently designated
Transitional Residential (TR) and is zoned RR Rural Residential. The lots within Le Foret are typically
2.5 acres in size, but the surrounding neighborhoods all have lots less than one (1) acre in size, many less
than 0.5 acres. Le Foret and the 22 lot neighborhood to the north (Birchview Terrace) are both outside
the MUSA, but are completely surrounded by the MUSA both in Rosemount and Apple Valley.
5
The Le Foret Neighborhood has submitted a letter requesting that land use designation be changed to RR.
Staff is not supportive of this request. The lots in Le Foret meet the performance standards of a RR
neighborhood, but the neighborhood is 40 acres in size; it is surrounded by urban residences; and there is
sewer and water available along three of its boundaries. These traits do not provide the neighborhood the
same rural nature of the RR in northwest Rosemount. Maintaining RR designation does not require the Le
Foret neighborhood to change its character or zoning if they chose to stay as they are, but the ability to be
served with sewer and water is available to them if they choose.
The Planning Commission recommends maintaining the TR designation for the Le Foret neighborhood.
.Ed McMenomy
Ed McMenomy owns a 2.7 acre parcel on the northeast corner of Chippendale Avenue and County Road
46. The property currently is occupied by a single family house, but the land is designated for Business
Park (BP). The property used to be located west of Chippendale Avenue, but Chippendale Avenue was
re- aligned west of the home a number of years ago to separate the intersection from the rail crossing at
County Road 46. Mr. McMenomy requests that the property be designated commercial.
Staff is supportive of designating the property Neighborhood Commercial (NC). The property has
frontage on a busy county road and has significant frontage onto Chippendale Avenue, making the
property easy to develop into a small commercial establishment. NC is a new designation to the 2030
Comprehensive Plan, but is also a reflection of the existing commercial businesses that serve a
surrounding residential neighborhood, such as the businesses at the intersection of Chippendale Avenue
and 145` Street West and the three (3) acre outlot south of the Harmony neighborhood.
The Planning Commission recommends the NC designation of Mr. McMenomy's property.
Dennis Ozment
State Representative Dennis Ozment lives on a wooded three (3) acre lot about 700 feet west of the
County Road 42 and US Hwy 52 interchange. His lot is designated BP, as is the properties to the west of
his, while the properties to the north and east are designated GI. Representative Ozment requests that his
property be re- designated to GI. The boundary between the BP and GI was determined during the 42 -52
planning process to be the edge of the wooded ridge running from the northwest to the southeast.
Representative Ozment property lies on the west side of the ridge along with the other BP designated
properties.
Staff does not support the designation of GI for the same reasons as was determined during the 42 -52
plan. Representative Ozment's property is located west of the wooded ridgeline, which is the BP side of
the BP and GI land use designation boundary.
The Planning Commission recommends maintaining the BP designation of Representative Ozment's
property.
University of Minnesota
Mark Koegler of Hoisington Koegler, one of the planning consultants working with the University of
Minnesota on UMore Park, has submitted a letter requesting some changes to the text regarding
environmental review and interim uses. Mr. Koegler requested that has requested that the term
Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) be replaced appropriate environmental review and the tern
nuisances in interim uses be replaced with incompatible uses. Staff has removed the term AUAR, but
added text stating that it shall be the City that determines the appropriate environmental review. Instead
6
of removing the word nuisance, staff stated that interim use may be nuisance, as well as added the text
regarding incompatible uses.
PUBLIC AND AGENCY REVIEW PERIOD
State Statute requires that the neighboring communities have a six month review period of the draft Comp
Plan, which is proposed to end in December. After the review period, the Planning Commission and the
City Council will review the comments received, make revisions as necessary, approve the Comp Plan, and
submit the Comp Plan to the Metropolitan Council for their approval.
The anticipated schedule for the Comp Plan review and approval is:
Date Action
April 21, 2008 Planning Commission Community Hearing
May 27, 2008 Planning Commission Community Hearing and Recommendation
June 18, 2008 Joint Planning Commission and City Council Work Session
July 15, 2008 City Council authorizes the release for the Six Month Review
July 2008 to January 2009 Neighboring Community and Public Review
January /February 2009 Planning Commission Review of Comments and Recommendation
March 2009 City Council Adoption and Submittal to the Metropolitan Council
RECOMMENDATION
Discuss and provide comments on the draft Comprehensive Plan.
7
2030 COMPREHENSIVE
LAND USE PLAN
DRA.F7: June 18, 2008
City of Rosemount, Minnesota
Acknowledgements
City Council
William Droste, Mayor
Mike Baxter
Mark DeBettignies
Kim Shoe Corrigan
Phillip Sterner
Planning Commission
Jason Messner, Chair
Valerie Schultz
Dianne Howell
Jay Palda
Jeanne Schwartz
Port Authority
Mike Baxter, Chair
William Droste
Mark DeBettignies
Phillip Sterner
Mary Riley
Bruno DiNella
Jay Tentinger
Community Development Staff
Kim Lindquist, Community Development Director
Eric Zweber, Senior Planner
Jason Lindahl, Planner
For further information, contact:
Community Development Department
ATTN: Eric Zweber
2875 145 Street West
Rosemount, MN 55068
Table of Contents
CHAPTER 1: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4
CHAPTER 2: COMMUNITY BACKGROUND 6
CHAPTER 3: HOUSING 11
CHAPTER 4: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 17
CHAPTER 5: COMMUNITY FACILITIES ELEMENT 28
CHAPTER 6: ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES 37
CHAPTER 7: LAND USE 46
CHAPTER 8: IMPLEMENTATION 70
LIST OF TABLES i
LIST OF FIGURES ii
LIST OF FIGURES ii
3
CHAPTER 1: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Rosemount adopted the Rosemount 2020 Comprehensive Plan (2020 Plan) on
February 15, 2000. Realizing that the 2020 Plan was not addressing the level of residential
development that the City was experiencing, the City began a major amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan that was titled the County Road 42 -US Highway 52 Corridor Plan (42 -52
Plan). The 42 -52 Plan resulted in four major changes to the 2020 Plan.
1. Residential development west of Akron Avenue.
2. A medium density residential land use category.
3. A commercial district at the County Road 42 and US Highway 52 interchange.
4. Increased population and household forecasts by the Metropolitan Council.
The 42 -52 Plan was adopted by the City Council on July 19, 2005 by Resolution Number
2005 -84. Since its adoption, the City has created an alternative urban areawide review
(AUAR) for the residential areas north of Bonaire Path and east of Akron Avenue. In 2007,
the City approved the first preliminary plat within the AUAR that included 50 acres of
commercial property and 583 residential units. The City has used the planning work done
during the 42 -52 Plan as the basis for the Land Use Plan of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan.
The City Council charged the Planning Commission (with important help from the other
City committees, commission, and the public) to create the Comprehensive Plan. To guide
the creation of the Comprehensive Plan, the City Council determined nine over arching
goals.
Nine Over arching Goals
1. Maintain a manageable and reasonable growth rate that does not adversely impact the
delivery of services but allows the community to grow and become more diverse from
now until 2030.
2. Preserve the existing rural residential areas designated in the Comprehensive Plan and
increase housing opportunities in the community to attain a balance of life cycle housing
options.
3. Promote commercial renewal and rehabilitation in the Downtown and along Hwy 42
while accommodating new commercial development along appropriate transportation
corridors such as Akron Avenue and Cty Hwy 42; Cty Hwy 46 and MN Hwy 3; and Cty
Hwy 42 and US Hwy 52.
4. Encourage additional high quality and tax base generating industrial development in the
northeast portion of the community and within the Rosemount Business Park.
4
5. Preserve natural resources and open space within the community and ensure
development does not adversely impact on -going agricultural uses until urban services
are available.
6 Promote use of renewable resources by creating sustainable development and building
green.
7. Collaborate and provide connections between the City and surrounding Cities,
Townships, Dakota County and public and private schools in the area.
8. Work with the University of MN to create a neighborhood that can successfully integrate
into the community while achieving goals of health, energy, and education.
9. Collaborate and provide services (such as libraries, community center, senior center, etc.)
to all groups of residents.
The Planning Commission conducted numerous public meetings throughout 2007 and 2008
to review the various issues addressed within the Plan. The Utility Commission created the
Comprehensive Sewer and Water Plan. The Parks and Recreation Commission created the
Parks and Open Space Plan. The Port Authority created the Economic Development
chapter. To gather public input throughout the creation of the Comprehensive Plan, the
City conducted six public open houses. At these open houses, specific issues were presented
to the public and the public provided comments to guide the policies of the Comprehensive
Plan. The dates of the six open houses and the topic discussed are listed below.
Public Open Houses
Date Topic
April 10, 2007 Comprehensive Plan Kick -off Meeting
June 18, 2007 Rural Residential Northwest Rosemount
July 23, 2007 Parks and the Environment
October 9, 2007 Industrial East Side
January 10, 2008 Housing and Economic Development
April 3, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan
The 2030 Comprehensive Plan provides detailed descriptions of the goals of the City and its
expectation of future development. The majority of these goals and expectations are similar
to those as those expressed in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan and the 42 -52 Plan. The 2030
Comprehensive Plan expands other previous plans in three major areas:
No significant changes are proposed to the existing developed areas.
Residential development is expected east of US Highway 52 after 2020.
Additional detail is provided to the types of commercial development expected.
5
CHAPTER 2: COMMUNITY BACKGROUND
Rosemount History
The first settler of European ancestry was William Strathen who arrived in the Rich Valley of
Rosemount in 1853 and claimed land within the northeast quarter of Section 13, which is
located by the present day Flint Hills Refinery. Other settlers followed. The first religious
service being conducted in 1854 by Reverend Kidder. Andrew a surveyor was the first
postmaster 1855. In 1857, the Rich Valley post office, with C.H. Carr serving as postmaster.
In 1858, the Board of County Commissioners official designated Township 115 North,
Range 19 West (the portion of the present City located west of US Highway 52) by the name
Rosemount. The portion of the present City east of US Highway 52 was annexed by an act
of legislation in 1871. The name Rosemount was chosen to honor a village in Ireland. A
small school was also constructed in 1858.
In the 1860's, 52 men served in the Civil War. The village of Rosemount was formally
platted in 1866 by James A. Case and in 1867 the first grain elevator was constructed by the
railroad.
The Village of Rosemount was incorporated in 1875 and the first town hall was constructed
a year later.
The 1880's saw The Village of Rosemount became a viable business area. Many businesses
opened and 2 story brick building were built. 1881 Rosemount erected the first gas street
lamps in the downtown area.
The first school district building was built is 1896 and taught grades 1 through 8. In 1918,
the first high school was built and taught grades 1 through 12. In 1922, the school had 50
high school students and began the football program. The high school building still exists
today and is a part of the Rosemount Middle School complex on the northwest corner of
143' Street West and South Robert Trail. Dakota County technical College opened 1970
with the first graduating class in 1971.
With WWII in full swing the War Department of the federal government, in 1942, acquired
11,500 acres of farmland within Rosemount and Empire Township for the construction of
the Gopher Ordnance Works. The plant was built to produce white smokeless gunpowder.
At the end of the war, the government found the ordnance work unnecessary and sold some
of the property to farmers, but the majority of the property was sold to the University of
Minnesota for research. The property is current called UMore Park, while it is still owned
and managed by the University.
Rosemount has a long and successful business history. The First State Bank of Rosemount
was granted a charter in 1909. Rosemount Engineering was established in 1955 as a result of
the aeronautical research conducted at the University research facilities. Rosemount
6
Engineering first made total temperature sensors and eventually additional aeronautical
components. Rosemount Engineering first relocated to Bloomington, then renamed to
Rosemount Inc. and is located worldwide. Brockway Glass, which was located east of South
Robert Trail between Connemara Trail and Bonaire Path, began operation in 1961, but
closed in 1984. The Harmony subdivision now exists at the former Brockway Glass site.
Great Northern Oil Refinery began construction in 1954 and began operation in September
of 1955 at an operating capacity of 25,000 barrels per day. The refinery was purchased by
Koch Industries in 1969 and renamed Flint Hills Resources in 2002. The crude oil
processing capacity of the refinery in 2007 was about 320,000 barrels per day. The facility
primarily refines Canadian crude into petroleum products such as gasoline, diesel, propane
and butane.
The Township and Village of Rosemount merged in 1971 and the City Hall was moved to
1300 block of 145 Street East, directly north of the Dakota County Technical College. In
1972, the first Comprehensive plan and Zoning ordinance were adopted. In 1975,
Rosemount became a statutory city with a mayor council form of government In 1987, the
current City Hall at 2875 145 Street West was constructed and in 1992 the Rosemount
Community Center /National Guard Armory was built.
Rosemount Population and Resident Demographics
The City of Rosemount has experienced continual growth throughout it history. The City
nearly doubled its population from 1990 to 2000, and is anticipated to double its population
again from 2000 to 2010. The expected population 2030 is 45,500, more than double the
2006 population estimate of 20,207.
a. Table 2.1: Population
Year Population
1900 807a
1950 1,375'
1960 2,012 a
1970 4,034 a
1980 5,083
1990 8,622
2000 14,619
2010 29,600 b
2020 38,400 b
2030 45,500 b
Combined Rosemount Village and Rosemount Township populations
b Metropolitan Council projections
The population of Rosemount is predominately young families. Table 2.2 shows that more
than one third of the population is between 25 and 44, with an addition one quarter of the
population being their school aged children. The population of retirement age is a small
proportion of the City at approximately 5 but their percentage of the total population is
expected to increase over time as the existing population ages. This trend is shown by their
share of the population increasing by 1.3% during the 1990s.
7
One age group that is consistently lower than the others is the number of college age adult
within the community. One factor that causes this is characteristic is the lack of four
colleges in the area. High school students who graduate from Rosemount often leave the
area to attend college. This is a concern to Rosemount if these young adults do not return to
Rosemount after attending college. This trend is commonly referred to as a `brain drain"
because the bright student taught at Rosemount High School end up living in other
communities within returning the benefit of their quality education to the community.
These population trends are common of a growing suburban community.
b Table 2.2: Age Groups
Age Group 1990 2000
Under 5 Years Old 939 10.9% 1,380 9.4%
School Age (5 -17) 2,026 23.5% 3,751 25.6%
College Age (18 -24) 808 9.4% 914 6.3%
Young Workers (25 -44) 3,266 37.9% 5,332 36.5%
Mature Workers (45 -64) 1,230 14.3% 2,458 16.8%
Retired and Semi retired (65 353 4.1% 784 5.4%
and Older)
Total Population 8,622 100% 14,619 100%
Source: US Census Bureau
Rosemount is a community of young families, as shown in Table 2.3 by its high average
persons per household. In 2000, Rosemount's households averaged 3.08 persons per
household, while in comparison Dakota County averaged 2.70 and Minnesota averaged 2.52
persons per household. As Rosemount's population ages, the average person per household
is expected to decline, but the number is expected to remain higher than average as long as
Rosemount remains a growing community.
c Table 2.3: Persons per Household
1990 2000
Population in Households 8,613 14,609
Total Households 2,779 4,742
Average Persons per Household 3.10 3.08
Source: US Census Bureau
Table 2.4 shows that Rosemount's households predominately have children with over 52%
of households having children residing in the homes. This number has is similar to the
amount in 1990 when 54% of households having children residing in the homes. This figure
is expected to decline over time as the population ages and children grow up and move out
to start their own families, but households with children will likely remain a significant
portion of the population.
8
d Table 2.4: Household Type
Household Type Total Number of Households with Households
Households Children without Children
1990 2000 1990 2000 1990 2000
Families Married 1,990 3,326 1,226 2,045 764 1,281
Families Mother Only 283 430 234 329 49 101
Families Husband Only 75 176 50 113 25 63
Total Families 2,348 3,932 1,510 2,487 838 1,445
Non Family Households 428 810 N/A 76 N/A 734
Total Households 2,779 4,742 2,563 2,179
Source: US Census Bureau
Rosemount has a highly educated population with almost 19 of 20 of adults having high
school diplomas in 2000. This is a significant increase from 1990 when less than 9 of 10
adults had high school diplomas. The number of college graduates have also increased
significantly with almost 3 of 10 adults have a bachelor's degree in 2000, while less than 1 in
5 adults had degrees in 1990.
e Table 2.5: Highest Level of Education
1990 2000
No High School Diploma 495 10.2% 508 5.9%
High School Diploma 3,393 70.0% 5,573 64.8%
Bachelor's Degree 750 15.5% 2,000 23.3%
Graduate or Professional Degree 214 4.4% 518 6.0%
1 Persons 25 years or older
Source: US Census Bureau
Rosemount residents have relative high incomes. The median family income in 2000 was
$68,929 compared to median Minnesota family income of $56,874. The median Dakota
County family income was slightly larger than Rosemount's at $71,062. The amount of
Rosemount residents with incomes below the poverty line dropped from 5.0% in 1990 to
3.3% in 2000.
f Table 2.6: Income
1990 2000
Per Capita Income $14,931 $23,116
Median Household Income $41,992 $65,916
Median Family Income $43,726 $68,929
Percent of Individual below 5.0% 3.3%
the Poverty Line
Source: US Census Bureau
The amount of time that people spend in their cars traveling to work has increased. In 1990,
nearly 70% of residents spend more than 15 minutes in travel time to work, with almost
30% of residents traveling more than 30 minutes. In 2000, over 74% of residents spend
more than 15 minutes in travel time to work, with over 35% of residents traveling more than
30 minutes. Due to the increase congestion on roadways over the last two decades, this may
not mean that Rosemount residents are working farther from home than in the past, but
9
may mean that it is just taking resident longer to get to the same destination due to the
increased congestion. This trend is may continue in the future as congestion is expected to
continue to increase.
The number of Rosemount residents working from home in 2000 decrease both in number
and percentage from 1990. This may partially have to due with the number of farms that
have been developed during that period because farmers typically make up a large portion of
the population who work from home. It is anticipated that the number and percentage of
the population who work from home with increase in the future due to the advances in
technology that allow people to telecommute to work.
g Table 2.7: Travel Time to Work'
1990 2000
Work from Home 239 5.2% 176 2.3%
Less than 15 Minutes 1,171 25.5% 1,785 23.4%
15 to 29 Minutes 1,838 40.0% 2,949 38.6%
30 to 44 Minutes 967 21.0% 1,861 24.4%
45 Minutes or More 380 8.3% 863 11.3%
1 Persons 16 years or older
Source: US Census Bureau
10
CHAPTER 3: HOUSING
Rosemount Housing Characteristics
Rosemount has grown by 43% from 2000 to 2006. Rosemount has been stable in its
housing growth with a vacancy rate of only 2.1% in 2000. Many of the residents of the new
housing are young families, as depicted by the average household size of 3.08 persons per
household, higher than the average household size of the entire Dakota County at 2.59
persons per household.
Rosemount has experienced significant levels of growth during the early 2000's, as shown by
the continued increase in the number of building permits issued, from 285 residential
building permits in 2000 to a high of 551 residential building permits in 2004. Growth in
residential permits was also setting record numbers both regionally and nationally.
Residential construction stayed steady in 2005 with 454 building permits, but building
permits have significantly declined since 2006 due to the national decline in housing sales.
Housing experts expect building permits to stay low while builders are selling excess
inventory homes. Inventory homes are homes that were built without a homeowner by the
developer on speculation that the housing market would continue to stay strong. It is
anticipated the number of building permits will rise after the excess inventory homes are
sold, but probably not returning to the record national levels of 2004. Rosemount expects
an average of between 350 and 400 residential building permits between the period of 2007
to 2020.
a. Table 3.1: Population and Households
Year Population Households
2000' 14,619 4,742
2001" 15,270 4,997
2002 16,110 5,289
2003 16,794 5,571
2004" 17,740 6,004
2005" 19,418 6,508
2006` 20,207 6,805
U.S. Census Bureau as of April 1
b Metropolitan Council estimate as of July 1
Metropolitan Council estimate as of April 1
b. Table 3.2: Residential Building Permits
Year Single Family Units Multiple Family Units Total Units
2000 130 155 285
2001 201 103 304
2002 181 149 330
2003 261 179 440
2004 300 251 551
2005 189 265 454
2006 100 124 224
2000 -2006 1,362 1,226 2,588
11
Type of Housing
In 2000, Rosemount was predominately a community of single family houses. Multiple
family housing primarily consisted of townhouses along 151st St W; townhouses on the
northeast corner of Biscayne Ave and Cty Rd 42; townhouses and apa1 huents in the triangle
formed by Dodd Blvd, 145 St. W and Shannon Pkwy; and the senior apartment building
downtown.
From 2000 to 2006, Rosemount has experienced near equal construction of single family and
multiple family housing. In the last seven years, multiple family housing has consisted of
townhouses within the Bloomfield neighborhood, along Chippendale Avenue south of Cty
Rd 42, or within a' /z mile of the intersection of Connemara Trail and South Robert Trail.
High density housing consisted of the two 55 -unit four story buildings of Bard's Crossing.
Apartments have received preliminary approval within the Harmony neighborhood, but
have yet to be constructed.
c. Table 3.3: Type of Housing
Single Family Units Multiple Family Units Total Units
Year Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
2000 3,757 77.6% 1,086 22.4% 4,843 100%
2007 5,119 68.9% 2,312 31.1% 7,431 100%
Tenure
Tenure is term to describe the difference between a house that the owner resides in and a
house that the owner rents to another family. Rosemount's tenure by housing type is
projected to be single family homes consisting of 96% ownership and 4% rental, and
multiple family homes consisting of 42% ownership and 58% rental.
d. Table 3.4: Tenure per Type of Community
Rental Homeownership
Dakota Growth Dakota Growth
County Communities County Communities
Single Family 4.5% 3.7% 95.5% 96.3%
Multiple Family 51.8% 63.4% 48.2% 36.6%
1 Growth Communities in Dakota County are Apple Valley, Farmington, Hastings, Lakeville and Rosemount
Census 2000 Tenure: 88.3% Homeownership and 11.7% Rental
Tenure of the 2000 2006 growth: 70.4% Homeownership and 29.6% Rental
2007 Tenure: 82.1 Homeownership and 17.9% Rental
Tenure of the 2007 -2030 growth: 65.0% Homeownership and 35.0% Rental
2030 Tenure: 72.8% Homeownership and 27.2% Rental
Condition of the Existing Housing Stock
Due to the significant growth that has occurred over the last three decades, the majority of
the housing stock within Rosemount is relatively new. Only about 12% (898 units) of
Rosemount's housing stock is over 35 years old, the age at which major maintenance efforts
need to take place such as furnace or roof replacements. Over the next twenty years, the
12
amount of houses over 35 years old will increase by about 1,800 homes. The City will need
to monitor carefully the condition of the aging housing stock to ensure that it is maintained.
e. Table 3.5: Age of Housing Unit
Number Percent
2000 2006 2,588 34.8%
1990 —1999 2,139 28.8%
1980 —1989 1,265 17.0%
1970 —1979 541 7.3%
1960 —1969 473 6.4%
Before 1960 425 5.7%
Housing on Individual Septic Systems
There are approximately 600 homes in Rosemount that are on their own individual septic
system. Predominantly, these homes are located in the rural residential area in northwest
Rosemount. Most of the rural residential area has lots that are 2.5 acres or larger, but there
are a number of lots that are less than one acre in size. The 2.5 acre plus lots are large
enough to provide multiple drain fields should any one system fail, but the lots less than one
acre would have difficulty locating a secondary drain field should their existing septic system
fail. The City would assist the neighborhoods with less than one acre lots to hook onto a
municipal system should the neighborhood request the assistance.
Rosemount Senior Housing
In 2006, Rosemount had 410 senior focused units, ranging from the two 55 -unit four story
buildings of Bard's Crossing to the 150 detached townhouses units of Evermoor Crosscroft.
44 of the 410 units are owned by the Dakota County Community Development Agency as
affordable senior housing. In addition, a 60 unit senior apartment building is planned within
the Harmony neighborhood and 136 (67 detached townhomes and 69 tri-plex units) senior
focused units are proposed within the Prestwick Place neighborhood. Rosemount expects
additional senior units to be constructed in the future as the baby boomers retire and current
Rosemount residents age.
f. Table 3.6: Location of Senior Housing
Name Location Number of Units
Bard's Crossing SW Comer of Connemara Trail and S. 110
Robert Trail
Evermoor Crosscroft Connemara Trail and Evermoor Parkway 150
Harmony Senior Housing NE Comer of Connemara Trail and S. 60
Robert Trail
Rosemount Plaza 145 Street and Burma Ave. 21
Rosemount Plaza 2 Add. 146 Street and Burma Ave. 39
Cameo Place Cameo between 146 and 147 44
Wachter Lake Chippendale Avenue south of 150 46
(County Rd. 42)
Harmony Senior Housing has received Planned Unit Development approval but has not been constructed to date.
13
Affordable Housing
The Metropolitan (Met) Council estimated that there were 1,010 affordable housing units
(14% of all units) within Rosemount in 2005. The Dakota County Community
Development Agency (CDA) estimated that there were 298 affordable rental units within
Rosemount in 2006, 44 of which are CDA owned senior units and 32 CDA owned family
units. The Met Council determined Rosemount's share of the regional affordable housing
need at 933 new affordable units between 2011 and 2020. Rosemount should be able to
meet this need in cooperation with the CDA and the continued development of multiple
family housing and small single family homes within planned unit developments (PUDs).
Projected Housing Growth
The Metropolitan (Met) Council projects that Rosemount will construct 3,500 additional
housing units between 2010 and 2020. In 2005, the Dakota County Community
Development Agency (CDA) hired Maxwell Research to create a Comprehensive Housing
Needs Assessment for all of Dakota County. The Maxwell Research findings for
Rosemount are provided on Table 3.7. These projections show an increasing percentage of
multiple family homes over the next 25 years. This trend is consistent with the observation
that communities develop with more density as they grow and land becomes more valuable.
These Maxwell projections are used to construct the projected housing demand within
Rosemount through 2030.
g. Table 3.7: Housing Growth Projections
Dakota County Community Development Agencyl Met Council
Single Family Multiple Family Total Total
Number Percent Number Percent Number
2000 -2010 1,850 -1,950 54% 1,515 -1,680 46% 3,365 -3,630 5,458
2010 -2020 1,350 -1,450 43% 1,765 -1,945 57% 3,115 -3,395 3,500
2020 -2030 650 -725 30% 1,545 -1,670 70% 2,195 -2,395 0
2000 -2030 3,850 -4,125 44% 4,825 -5,295 56% 8,675 -9,420 8,958
1 Comprehensive Housing Needs Assessment for Dakota County, Minnesota (Nov. 2005) for the Dakota County Community
Development Agency prepared by Maxfield Research
2 Metropolitan Council 2030 Regional Development Framework Revised Forecasts, January 3, 2007
Rosemount expects to construct 8,830 new housing units between 2007 and 2030. The
breakout of the expected housing types constructed is 3,765 single family units, 3,960
townhomes, and 1,105 apartments units. The term "apartment" is used generally to apply to
all multiple story residential buildings regardless of rental apartment units or ownership
condominiums. The information on Table 3.8 will be used within the Land Use Element to
determine the proper location of these additional housing units.
h. Table 3.8: Additional Housing Units
Single Family Townhouses Apartments Total
2007 -2010 1,275 775 130 2,180
2010 -2020 1,530 1,645 325 3,500
2020 -2030 960 1,540 650 3,150
2007 -2030 3,765 3,960 1,105 8,830
14
Housing Element Goals and Policies
1. Design subdivisions to create independent neighborhoods.
A. Facilitate neighborhood planning for improvements which reinforce neighborhood
unity, safety, and identity.
B. Natural corridors or buffer yards shall be utilized along boundaries of dissimilar
housing types and densities by maximizing the use of existing landforms, open space,
and vegetation to enhance neighborhood identity and integrity.
C. All transitional residential areas shall provide a unique urban /rural character with a
mixture of housing types, but with a relatively low average net density of 2.0 dwelling
units per acre, with a lower density along areas guided for rural residential use.
D. Encourage the use of planned unit developments to protect and enhance natural
features, open space, and to provide appropriate neighborhood transitions.
2. Provide recreational opportunities within and between neighborhoods.
A. Implement the Parks System Plan when locating parks and recreational facilities
within neighborhoods.
B. Incorporate pedestrian friendly neighborhoods with sidewalks and trails as important
design elements.
C. Provide pedestrian and recreational trail connections with the adjacent land uses.
D. Trails shall be planned to connect public areas and create pedestrian pathways within
natural corridors.
E. Design medium density housing with private amenities and open space for the
residents of the medium density housing.
3. Design neighborhoods to incorporate the existing environment and natural
resources.
A. Streets shall be designed to follow the natural contour of the property and shall
provide necessary vehicle connections throughout the geographic area.
B. Steep slopes shall be protected from development.
C. Development near wetlands and woodlands shall follow the Wetland Management
Plan and Tree Preservation Ordinance to ensure their preservation /protection and
incorporation into the natural landscape design of each development.
D. Clustering of housing units shall be designed into planned unit developments and the
transitional residential area to conserve the land's natural resources.
4. Provide a mixture of rental and homeownership opportunities to provide life
cycle housing.
A. Maintain the city's partnership with the Dakota County cluster for the Metropolitan
Livable Communities Act (LCA).
B. Encourage the construction of a variety of single family home sizes and styles to
increase home ownership opportunities.
C. Encourage the development of owner occupied medium density housing.
D. Provide ownership opportunities for seniors with access to transit and
public /institutional facilities.
E. Provide rental opportunities for young adults and recent college graduates returning
to Rosemount.
15
F. Provide an opportunity for student housing near Dakota County Technical College.
G. Implement a rental inspection program to ensure that rental properties are
maintained.
5. Locate the different housing styles within the appropriate areas.
A. Disperse medium density residential throughout the community to avoid entire
neighborhoods of medium density residential.
B. Disperse high density residential in appropriate areas throughout the community to
avoid entire neighborhoods of high density residential.
C. Locate high density residential with access to the collector and arterial street
network.
D. Locate high density residential in conjunction with downtown and the commercial
areas along Cty Rd 42 to create mixed use neighborhoods and transit oriented
districts.
E. Provide opportunities for seniors to live near their children and families.
6. Provide workforce and affordable housing opportunities through cooperative
effort with other agencies.
A. Work with the Dakota County Community Development Agency (CDA) and other
state and federal agencies to provide workforce and affordable housing
opportunities.
B. Work with Habitat for Humanity and similar organizations, along with Dakota
County Community Development Agency (CDA) and other state and federal
agencies, to provide affordable housing opportunities and to redevelop and
rehabilitate older homes in the City.
7. Maintain the rural character of northwest Rosemount.
A. Discourage the placement of structures on top of exposed ridge lines.
B. Allow clustering where natural areas and active agriculture can be retained.
C. Maximize the retention of vegetation, maintain natural landforms, and minimize
lawn areas.
D. Define, during the platting process, building envelopes that avoid the location of
structures in areas needing to be preserved.
E. Protect open space or conservation areas with conservation easements. These tools
are intended to be used for environmental and scenic resource protection, not public
access.
16
CHAPTER 4: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Rosemount Employment Base and Resident Employment
Rosemount is uniquely situated in the Twin Cities with the four lane, north to south running,
US Hwy 52 connecting Rosemount with the Minneapolis St. Paul Airport and downtown St.
Paul; the four lane, east to west running, County Road 42 connecting Rosemount to
Hastings and Burnsville and connecting to the major routes leading into downtown
Minneapolis; and the Mississippi River on Rosemount's northeast boundary, including three
barge terminals. The location of Rosemount's economic base is also uniquely situated
compared to its population base. The majority of Rosemount's households are located in
the western third of the City, while Rosemount businesses, industry, and institutions are
spread through the community. Taking advantage of these economic development
opportunities during the next 20 years will be the purpose of the Economic Development
Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
Table 4.1 shows the ten businesses and institutions that employ the most workers within
Rosemount. Two of the top three employers are the educational institutions of Independent
School District #196 and Dakota County Technical College. It will be important for
Rosemount to maintain cooperative relationships with these institutions, not only because of
their importance as employers within the City, but also to ensure that their education
programs prepare trained workers for current and future Rosemount businesses. Table 4.1
also shows that seven of the remaining eight employers are manufacturing or industrial in
nature. This illustrates the importance of industrial business for employment within the
community, but also should caution the City that Rosemount is currently dependent on one
sector of the economy. Rosemount should encourage additional retail commercial and
professional office commercial into the community to provide balance to the economic
landscape.
i Table 4.1: Rosemount Top Ten Employers in 2007
Product or Service Employees
Flint Hills Resources Oil Refining 850
Independent School District #196 Education 767
Dakota County Technical College Education 300
Cannon Equipment Metal Manufacturing 150
Wayne Transports Trucking 140
Webb Properties, LLC Advertising 131
Spectro Alloys Aluminum Smelting 109
Endres Processing Recycled Food Products 90
Greif Brothers Paper Multiwall Bags 85
City of Rosemount Municipal Government 80
Source: City of Rosemount
17
Table 4.2 shows that 7,929 Rosemount residents were employed in 2004 while there were
only 6,144 jobs offered by the businesses within Rosemount, which results in almost 1,800
people required to leave Rosemount to find employment. In looking at the various
industries in which residents are employed, the disparity between where residents work and
what employment opportunities are available in Rosemount is most prevalent in four
industries: Wholesale Trade; Transportation, Warehousing and Utilities; Finance, Insurance
and Real Estate; and Professional, Scientific, Management and Administration.
Within the wholesale trade industry, there are 1,639 Rosemount residents employed while
there are only 221 jobs available within the city, creating an employment pool of 1,418
workers. Table 4.3 shows the average yearly wage in Rosemount for a worker in wholesale
trade is $45,335, while the metro area average yearly wage is $62,299. Wholesale trade
businesses would typically be located within the business park and industrial /mixed use land
use designations of the Comprehensive Plan.
Within the transportation, warehousing and utility (transportation) industry, there are 555
Rosemount residents employed while there are only 236 jobs available within the city,
creating an employment pool of 319 workers. Table 4.3 shows the average yearly wage in
Rosemount for a worker in transportation is $48,675, while the metro area average yearly
wage is $51,490. Transportation businesses would typically be located with the general
industrial land use designations of the Comprehensive Plan. It should be noted that
Rosemount currently has a significant amount of transportation businesses in town that have
some less desirable land use characteristics, such a low employee to land area ratio and high
demand for outdoor storage.
Within the finance, insurance and real estate (FIRE) industry, there are 1,034 Rosemount
residents employed while there are only 110 jobs available within the city, creating an
employment pool of 924 workers. Table 4.3 shows the average yearly wage in Rosemount
for a worker in FIRE is $32,261, while the metro area average yearly wage is $74,294. FIRE
businesses would typically be located with the commercial or corporate campus land use
designations of the Comprehensive Plan.
Within the professional, scientific, management and administration (professional) industry,
there are 517 Rosemount residents employed while there are only 231 jobs available within
the city, creating an employment pool of 286 workers. Table 4.3 shows the average yearly
wage in Rosemount for a worker in a professional field is $30,894, while the metro area
average yearly wage is $58,288. Professional businesses would typically be located with the
commercial, corporate campus or business park land use designations of the Comprehensive
Plan.
The City should recruit businesses in the wholesale trade, FIRE and professional industries
to locate within Rosemount, while providing land for additional warehousing and utility
businesses. There is a significant amount of Rosemount residents employed in these fields
from which new businesses could draw their employees. The establishment of these
businesses would create jobs that can support households and provide a market for other
local businesses.
18
j. Table 4.2: Comparison of Employees to Employers within Rosemount in 2004
Rosemount Number of Employees Deficiency of Jobs
Residents within Rosemount to
Employed by Busines by Industry match Resident's Place
each Industry of Employment
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing,
Hunting and Mining 26 32 -6
Construction 715 811 -96
Manufacturing 1,246 1,264 -18
Wholesale Trade 1,639 221 1,418
Retail Trade 191 325 -134
Transportation, Warehousing and
Utilities 555 236 319
Information 107 75 32
Finance, Insurance and Real Estate 1,034 110 924
Professional, Scientific, Management
and Administrative 517 231 286
Educational, Health and Social
Services 1,103 2,240 -1,137
Arts, Entertainment, Recreation and
Food Service 427 439 -12
Other Services (Except Public
Administration) 141 117 24
Public Administration 228 43 185
7,929 6,144 1,785
Source: Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development and US Census Bureau
k. Table 4.3: Rosemount Industries in 2004
Average Average
Establishments Employees Total Wages Weekly Wage Yearly Wage
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing,
Hunting and Mining 4 32 $1,846,751 $1,127 $57,711
Construction 59 811 $46,605,926 $1,105 $57,467
Manufacturing 23 1,264 $89,294,259 $1,359 $70,644
Wholesale Trade 23 221 $10,019,071 $871 $45,335
Retail Trade 34 325 $7,118,038 $422 $21,902
Transportation, Warehousing and
Utilities 14 236 $11,487,253 $936 $48,675
Information 6 75 $2,210,703 $564 $29,476
Finance, Insurance and Real Estate 30 110 $3,548,670 $620 $32,261
Professional, Scientific,
Management and Administrative 68 231 $7,136,551 $594 $30,894
Educational, Health and Social
Services 39 2,240 $74,420,020 $639 $33,223
Arts, Entertainment, Recreation
and Food Service 32 439 $4,450,177 $195 $10,137
Other Services (Except Public
Administration) 28 117 $2,340,009 $384 $20,000
Public Administration 3 43 $2 ,279,736 $1,020 $53,017
363 6,144 $262,757,164 $822 $42,766
Source: Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development
19
Rosemount Port Authority
In 1979, the City of Rosemount established the Rosemount Housing and Redevelopment
Authority (HRA) which conducted a number of projects, most notably the Rosemount Plaza
block located southeast of the intersection of 145 Street West and South Robert Trail. In
1991, the City converted the HRA into the Rosemount Port Authority for the purpose of
undertaking housing, economic development and redevelopment activities within the City.
The Port Authority has seven members consisting of the Mayor, three City
Councihnembers, and three appointed residents.
The Port Authority sets the economic development policy for the City, acquires and
demolishes buildings on blighted and underutilized land for redevelopment, and recruits new
businesses to locate within Rosemount, among many other responsibilities. Many of the
programs described within the Economic Development Element, such as Downtown
Redevelopment and the establishment of the Rosemount Business Park, have been or are
being accomplished through the work of the Port Authority. The Port Authority is
responsible for implementing the Goals and Objectives of the Economic Development
Element, as well as continuing to monitor the economic health of the City while recruiting
new business and encouraging the growth of existing businesses.
Downtown Redevelopment
The City of Rosemount adopted a redevelopment plan for downtown Rosemount in 2004
entitled the Development Framework for Downtown Rosemount. The Framework covets the
properties in the historic downtown, roughly described as the blocks on both sides of South
Robert Trail from 143r Street West on the north to approximately 148 Street on the south.
The Framework addresses eight focus areas within downtown: St. Joseph's Church,
Crossroads North; Crossroads South; Core Block West; Core Block East; Legion Block;
Genz -Ryan; and Fluegel's.
To help accomplish the downtown redevelopment, the City has established the Downtown
Brockway Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing (TIF) district. The TIF district uses the
increased tax income (also known as tax increment) from the former Brockway Glass factory
redevelopment into the Harmony residential neighborhood to pay for the land acquisition,
land clearing, and infrastructure costs associated with downtown redevelopment. TIF funds
have been instrumental in land assembly in Core Block East and will be used for
infrastructure and parking space construction for the proposed redevelopment.
The City has received almost $1.6 million from the Metropolitan Council's Livable
Community Demonstration Account (LCDA) grant for land acquisition costs and
infrastructure improvements for the Core Block East project. The Core Block East project
is a three story mixed use building with 106 apartment units and 12,000 square feet of
commercial space on the South Robert Trail frontage and is being developed by Stonebridge
Development and Acquisition. The Dakota County Community Development Agency
(CDA) is providing bonding for the project with the requirement that 20% (21 units) of the
106 units will be affordable from persons making less than 50% of the metro area median
income. Additional LCDA and CDA grant opportunities will be explored as future
downtown redevelopment projects are proposed.
20
The City owns the former Genz -Ryan property located on the west side of the 14700 block
of South Robert Trail. The property is currently used as short term office and storage space
for numerous businesses within Rosemount. The Framework development concept for this
block is for new office commercial space. The City has, and will continue to, solicit requests
for proposals (RFPs) for the redevelopment Genz -Ryan block.
The City has been active in the redevelopment of other focus areas to improve the lifestyle
and work setting of downtown Rosemount. The City has purchased the former St. Joseph's
Church and School. The church has since moved to the southeast corner of Biscayne
Avenue and Connemara Trail, but the school will remain downtown through 2011. The City
has given the south half of St. Joseph's to Dakota County for the construction of the Robert
Trail Library. The existing church and school building are planned to be converted into a
multiple use community space, such as a senior, teen, and cultural center. In addition, the
City has applied for federal SAFETYLU funds for the construction of a park and ride or
transit station in the location of the Legion focus area.
The City has established the Downtown Code Improvement Program that provides grant
funding for improvements to bring the existing downtown buildings into compliance with
the building code. The program is available to any business or property owner whose
building is listed within the Framework and is making exterior and facade improvements to
the building in accordance with the Downtown Rosemount Design Guidelines. To encourage the
reinvestment in the fac improvements, business and property owners who pay with their
own funds for the fac improvement can request grant funds to pay for code
improvements to their building.
Business Recruitment, Assistance, and Retention
The City participates in the Twin Cities Community Capital Fund TCCCF), which is a
cooperative venture by numerous metropolitan Cities and development financing
organizations. Through the TCCCF, revolving loan funds and other economic development
funds are pooled together to have the ability to issue larger loans and funding than what
would be available independently. Loans, with participation from a financial institution,
generally range from $50,000 to $1,000,000 for fixed assets, including land and building
purchase, building construction, leasehold improvements and renovations, acquisition,
renovation or moving machinery and equipment.
The City advertises the economic development opportunities available through a number of
mechanisms, including direct mailings to business and commercial brokers; advertisements
in trade journals; CD and paper newsletters containing recent growth statistics and available
commercial space; and video presentations of the City's economic development programs.
In addition, the City has solicited for a number of RFPs for projects such as Core Block East
and Genz -Ryan.
21
The City's relationships with the educational institutions within Rosemount, such as
Rosemount School District #196 and Dakota County Technical College, and the greater
region, such as Inver Hills Community College and the University of Minnesota, are
important for business recruitment and the health of the local economy. Businesses that are
looking to locate within Rosemount have concerns that there is an existing base of well
educated employees to recruit from, as well as local educational institutions that have
training programs to create new worker and provide continuing training and education to
existing employees. It is important for Rosemount to work with the local educational
institutions to ensure that their training programs will support needs of the existing
businesses within Rosemount and provided a well educated employee pool for future
businesses to draw from.
Rosemount Business Park
The City has established the Rosemount Business Park, which contains about 280 acres of
contiguous land roughly bounded by County Road 42 to the north, a line one quarter of a
mile north of County Road 46 to the south, Biscayne Avenue to the east, and the Union
Pacific rail line and South Robert Trail to the west. The Rosemount Business Park was
initiated with the City purchasing the northern 80 acres of the business park and establishing
a TIF district to provide the initial infrastructure to the park. The original 80 acres have
since been developed with seven new buildings housing businesses such as Webb
Advertising, Cannon Equipment, and Associated Wood Products. In 2005, the TIF district
was retired and the remaining 195 acres of the business park will be developed with private
financing.
Retail Commercial
The City currently has about 100 acres of land developed with retail commercial uses. The
retail businesses are predominately located either in downtown Rosemount or in a district
west of South Robert Trail and south of County Road 42. The retail businesses are
predominately small service retail businesses, several restaurants, and two grocery stores.
The vacant retail commercial space in town is located within several downtown buildings,
small portions of newly constructed multiple tenant commercial strips, and the former
Knowlan's grocery store.
There are no general merchandise, home improvement, or other types of big box stores in
Rosemount. For this reason, most Rosemount residents are required to leave the city to
fulfill their daily or weekly shopping needs, typically to the communities to the west and
north, such as Eagan, Apple Valley, Burnsville, and Lakeville. Recent efforts to solicit big
box businesses to Rosemount have been unsuccessful for a number of reasons, but
businesses most commonly cited the lack of direct controlled access to major roads and the
lack of residential households. Nearly 9,000 additional households are expected to be
constructed by 2030, which is an increase of 120% over the nearly 7,500 households within
Rosemount today. The Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan should consider
locating future retail commercial land uses near these new households and adjacent to
controlled accesses to major roads.
22
Office Commercial
Rosemount has minimal office space, with the current office supply normally occupied with
either professional office, such as dentists or insurance agents, or associated with existing
manufacturing or industrial businesses. In 2007, a 25,000 square foot multiple tenant office
building was constructed on the southeast corner of Chippendale Avenue and Carrousel
Way. The only other significant office construction in Rosemount during 2007 occurred in
conjunction with the maintenance shop expansion at Flint Hills Resources.
As shown in Table 4.3, there are over 1,000 Rosemount residents who are working in the
finance, insurance, and real estate (FIRE) field, while Rosemount FIRE businesses employ
only 110 people. This deficiency of about 900 residents who need to leave Rosemount to
work in the FIRE field would indicate that there is a need for additional office space within
Rosemount. Table 4.3 also shows a deficiency of almost 300 residents who need to leave
Rosemount to work in the professional, scientific, management, and administrative field.
The Comprehensive Plan should designate commercial and corporate campus land not only
to support independent stand -alone office buildings, but also to ensure the ability to provide
office space needed in conjunction with manufacturing and industrial businesses as well.
Industrial
Rosemount has a long history of industrial development, from manufacturing facilities near
the downtown, such as Greif Paper and the former Brockway Glass factory, to heavier
industrial on the east near US Hwy 52, such as Flint Hills Refinery (formerly known as the
Great Northern Oil Refinery and the Koch Refinery), Continental Nitrogen, and CF
Industries. More recently, junk car parts and propane storage industrial development has
occurred near the intersection of South Robert Trail and County Road 46; office /warehouse
and manufacturing industrial within the Rosemount Business Park; trucking terminals near
the interchange with US Hwy 52 and County Road 42; and smelting and food recycling
businesses along Minnesota Highway 55.
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.
While Rosemount is discouraging new heavy industrial or other industrial businesses that
require significant amounts of outdoor storage, Rosemount does encourage new
manufacturing, warehousing, and trade industrial businesses to locate within Rosemount.
These businesses bring jobs that can support an entire family while providing a significant
industrial property tax base. In addition, Table 4.3 shows that more than 1,400 Rosemount
residents in the wholesale trade field need to leave Rosemount to work everyday, as well as
over 300 people in the transportation, warehousing, and utility fields. Providing sufficient
business park and industrial /mixed use land within the Comprehensive Plan would allow
these businesses to locate within Rosemount.
23
UMore Park
The University of Minnesota owns about 5,000 contiguous acres of land, 3,000 acres of
which is located in southern Rosemount and 2,000 acres of which are located in northern
Empire Township. The University currently uses the land as a research farm named the
University of Minnesota Outreach, Research and Education (UMore) Park. Within this
Comprehensive Plan, UMore Park will continue to be designated as Agricultural Research,
but the University has begun planning efforts to evaluate the possible development of a
mixed use, full service community.
For the first step of the planning process, the University hired Sasaki and Associates to
develop the UMore Park Strategic Plan. The plan that Sasaki generated proposes a community
of 16,000 households mixed in with retail commercial, employment centers, and institutional
uses. The Sasaki plan calls for approximately 2,500,000 square feet of commercial and
industrial (500,000 square feet of retail, 1,000,000 square feet of office, and 1,000,000 square
feet of industrial) development, mostly located on the eastern third of UMore Park.
The University has initiated the second phase of the planning by hiring Design Workshop,
based in Denver, Colorado, to construct a design guidebook to facilitate the development of
the mixed use community. The City is working in cooperation with the University and the
other interested parties to ensure that the plans for the development of UMore Park are
compatible with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. This work will not be completed in
time to be submitted with this Comprehensive Plan. Before the University chooses to
proceed with development, the City will submit a Comprehensive Plan amendment and
required environmental review documents covering the proposed development for approval
by the Metropolitan Council and other applicable agencies. The City shall determine the
appropriate environmental review process based on the magnitude of the development, the
potential impacts, and State agency guidance on the appropriate level of review.
Fiscal Disparity
In the seven county Twin Cities metropolitan (metro) area, the tax base gained from new
commercial or industrial growth is shared by the entire metro area, not solely by the
community in which the economic development occurs. This commercial and industrial
(C /I) tax base sharing program is called fiscal disparity. Since 1971, 40% of the tax base of
any new C/I development is taken from the local community and given to a common metro
area pool. This common pool is then redistributed to all the communities based on their
total tax base (commercial, industrial, residential, and agricultural). Essentially, fiscal
disparity takes tax base from communities that have seen significant economic development
since 1971 and gives it to communities in which post -1971 commercial /industrial
development is a small percentage of their total tax base. Various justifications are given for
this program, most notably to discourage individual communities from competing for the
same new businesses.
Fiscal disparity generally takes C/I tax base from the first and second ring suburbs along the
I -494 and I -694 strip that have seen significant growth since 1971 (Bloomington,
Minnetonka, Eagan) and gives it to the inner cities that had significant C/I tax base before
24
1971 (Minneapolis and Saint Paul) or to suburban communities that have lower levels of C/I
tax base compared to their total tax base (Cottage Grove, Apple Valley, Prior Lake). Table
4, attached to this executive summary, shows that Minnetonka lost $6.8 million in tax base
while Saint Paul gained $19 million and Cottage Grove gained $2.1 million in tax base due to
fiscal disparity. Rosemount is affected fairly neutrally by fiscal disparity, receiving only about
$100,000 in tax base.
L Table 4.4: Fiscal Disparity of Select Cities Payable in 2006
Fiscal Post -1971 C/I Tax
Pre -1971 C/I Post -1971 C/I Total 2006 2004 Disparity Base as a percentage
Tax Base Tax Base Tax Base Population Tax Base of Total 2006 Tax
Adjustment Base
Prior Lake $278,935 $1,328,800 $22,294,144 21,156 $1,360,601 5.96%
Cottage Grove $537,275 $3,721,645 $28,043,619 31,774 $2,118,313 13.27%
Lakeville $1,215,214 $8,574,915 $55,545,397 49,097 $1,277,635 15.44%
Apple Valley $1,113,396 $8,269,598 $52,279,631 48,875 $1,434,275 15.81%
Rosemount $702,215 $3,929,398 $21,645,806 17,740 $101,288 18.15%
Saint Paul $25,299,251 $42,687,458 $224,854,823 287,410 $19,039,665 18.98%
Minneapolis $56,441,944 $81,946,785 $387,469,064 382,400 $6,799,501 21.15%
Minnetonka $3,361,788 $25,599,440 $90,431,553 51,480 $6,851,418 28.30%
Eagan $2,654,377 $25,160,598 $85,077,507 65,764 $4,186,797 29.57%
Source: Minnesota House of Representatives Research Department
25
Economic Development Element Goals and Policies
1. Provide local shopping opportunities for residents to purchase their daily and
weekly needs within Rosemount.
a. Work with the Dakota County Regional Chamber of Commerce to recruit more
retail commercial businesses to locate within Rosemount.
b. Provide retail commercial land adjacent to planned controlled accesses onto major
roads.
c. Provide retail commercial land near existing and planned households.
d. Continue to use the Downtown Code Improvement Plan, Twin Cities Community
Capital Fund, and similar programs to assist businesses to improve existing retail
commercial buildings.
e. Continue to actively market Rosemount to commercial brokers and retail businesses
through the Rosemount marketing strategy to expand the retail opportunities within
the City.
2. Expand Rosemount's employment base to provide jobs that can support an entire
household.
a. Provide office commercial land to support businesses with the financial and
professional fields.
b. Provide additional light industrial land to support wholesale trade, warehousing, and
utility businesses.
c. Work cooperatively with the Dakota County Technical College and Rosemount
School District #196 and other educational institutions within Dakota County to
train workers with the skills needed for existing and future Rosemount businesses.
d. Pursue outside funding sources to develop or redevelop land for commercial and
industrial uses, such as Metropolitan Council Livable Communities Demonstration
Account and Tax Base Revitalization Account, Dakota County Community
Development Agency, Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic
Development, and other applicable grants.
e. Continue to actively market Rosemount to commercial brokers and appropriate
businesses through the Rosemount marketing strategy to recruit businesses that
provide wages to support an entire household.
3. Expand Rosemount's employment base to provide employment opportunities for
all residents.
a. Provide land that would support a variety of commercial and industrial businesses to
ensure a sufficient mix of employment opportunities for all skilled Rosemount
residents.
b. Work cooperatively with the Dakota County Technical College and Rosemount
School District #196 and other educational institutions within Dakota County to
train workers with the skills needed for existing and future Rosemount businesses.
c. Pursue outside funding sources to develop or redevelop land for commercial and
industrial uses, such as Metropolitan Council Livable Communities Demonstration
Account and Tax Base Revitalization Account, Dakota County Community
Development Agency, Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic
Development, and other applicable grants.
26
d. Continue to actively market Rosemount to commercial brokers and appropriate
businesses through the Rosemount marketing strategy to recruit additional
businesses.
4. Balance economic growth within the overall tax base of Rosemount.
a. Provide land available for a balance of commercial and industrial businesses,
including expanding the retail and office commercial sectors while continuing to
support industrial businesses.
b. Work cooperatively with the Dakota County Technical College, and Independent
School District #196 and other educational institutions within Dakota County to
train workers with the skills needed for existing and future Rosemount businesses.
c. Continue to provide for additional residential growth to serve as an expanding
employee pool for Rosemount business, a growing market to attract additional retail
establishments, and balanced tax base when considering the regional Fiscal Disparity
program.
5. Provide for economic development opportunities that create a vibrant Downtown
that maintains a home town feel.
a. Continue Port Authority involvement in redevelopment projects that implement the
Development Framework for Downtown Rosemount.
b. Pursue outside funding sources to redevelop downtown properties, such as
Metropolitan Council Livable Communities Demonstration Account and Tax Base
Revitalization Account, Dakota County Community Development Agency,
Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development, and other
applicable grants
c. Continue to use the Downtown Code Improvement Plan, Twin Cities Community
Capital Fund, and similar programs to assist businesses to improve existing retail
commercial buildings and implement the Development Framework for Downtown
Rosemount and Downtown Design Guidelines.
27
CHAPTER 5: COMMUNITY FACILITIES ELEMENT
City of Rosemount Facilities
Community Center and National Guard Armory
The mission of the Rosemount Community Center is to provide a central gathering place, a
focal point for the citizens of Rosemount and the surrounding communities to experience
social, cultural, educational and recreational opportunities which enhance community
wellness and promote growth. The Community Center has a multi- purpose arena, banquet
room, auditorium, gymnasium, and classrooms, that can acommidate groups and gather
from 25 to 1,000 people. Common activities at the community center include hockey and
broomball games, wedding, anniversaries, reunions, trade and craft shows.
The Minnesota National Guard Armory shares the same building as the Rosemount
Community Center. The Armory is the headquarters and Main Command Post for the 34
Infantry Division of the Army National Guard, also known as the "Red Bulls The Red
Bulls has brigades in eight states and its 1st Brigade has distinction of the longest continuous
deployment of 16 months during Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Family Resource Center
In 1998, the City of Rosemount constructed the Family Resource Center and leased the
facility to the Community Action Council (CAC). The CAC is a nonprofit dedicated to
helping families in crisis get back on their feet, through the work of over 2,000 volunteers
working out of more than 50 locations in Dakota and Scott counties. The CAC lease to the
Family Resource Center states that the facility will be used for serving children and families
in the community through services such as crisis intervention, providing food, clothing,
housing assistance, parenting support, and academic support through mentorship, child care
assistance, violence prevention, outreach and recreation.
City Hall /Police Station
City Hall and the Police Station are currently housed jointly in a two -story building located at
2875 145t St. W. The City Hall is located on the upper level and the Police Station in the
lower level. City Hall houses all the City Departments other than the Police Department,
Public Works, Fire Department, and Parks and Recreation. The Police Department is
housed in the lower level of the same building and Public Works is housed in the adjacent
Public Works Garages. The Fire Department is housed at the Fire Stations and the Parks
and Recreation Department is housed in the Community Center.
As the City grows, it is expected that all City Departments will need additional facilities to
serve the needs of the growing population. Short term growth may be accomplished by
expansions of current facilities. Long term growth may require the relocation of one of
three facilities (City Hall, Police Station, or Public Works Garage) to accommodate the
growth of the other two facilities.
Fire Stations
The City currently has two fire stations. Fire Station #1 is located at the northeast corner of
Dodd Blvd and Shannon Parkway and is situated to serve the developed western portion of
the City. Fire Station #2, constructed in 2006, is located at Connemara Trail and Azalea Ave
28
and is situated near the Connemara Trail bridge over the Union Pacific rail line to allow fire
protection to the east side of the City without needing to wait at a railroad crossing if a train
is running through town. Future fire stations will be sited as needed to serve the future
population.
Former St. Joseph's Complex
The City purchased the former St. Joseph's complex on South Robert Trail in 2004. The
southern third of the site has been subdivided for the construction of the Robert Trail
Library. The City formed the St. Joseph's Task Force to study the future of the former
school and church buildings.
Public Works Facilities
The Public Works Department has two facilities, the Public Works Garage located
northwest of City Hall on Brazil Ave. and the Public Works Storage Yard located at the
former Village of Rosemount Dump west of South Robert Trail and north of Canada Cir.
The Public Works Garage houses all the public works employees and equipment, while
Public Works Storage Yard houses the large quantity of supplies needed by the City, such as
sand, gravel, and mulch.
The City is considering the development of the former dump along with the adjacent land
into light industrial uses. Should this development occur, a new location will need to be
found for the storage yard. Consideration should be given to find a central location to house
a common Public Works Garage and Storage Yard that will support needs of the City
through its ultimate development.
Public Schools
The City of Rosemount is a part of four school districts, Independent School District (ISD)
#196, ISD #199, ISD #200, and ISD #917
ISD #196
Rosemount -Apple Valley -Eagan ISD #196 serves the majority of the City of Rosemount.
ISD #196 has two elementary schools (Rosemount and Shannon Park), one middle school
(Rosemount) and one high school (Rosemount) within the City of Rosemount. All
Rosemount middle and high school students attend Rosemount Middle School and
Rosemount High School. According to 2006 -2007 attendance boundaries, Rosemount
elementary students are split among four elementary schools. Generally, students north of
145 St. W. and east of Biscayne Ave attend Red Pine Elementary in Eagan, while students
south of County Road 42 and around downtown attend Rosemount Elementary. Generally,
the remaining students attend Shannon Park Elementary, while a small neighborhood west
of Shannon Parkway and between County Road 42 and 145 St. W. attends Diamond Path
Elementary in Apple Valley.
ISD #196 officials believe that they do not need to construct a new middle school nor high
school within the timeframe of the Comprehensive Plan. Eagan's student population is
declining and Apple Valley's student population is stagnant which leads school officials to
anticipate changing middle and high school attendance boundaries rather than constructing
29
new facilities. New elementary school construction will be dependant on the rate of growth
and increases in student population within the new neighborhoods.
ISD #199
Inver Grove Heights ISD #199 covers parts of the Flint Hills refinery and the industrial area
directly east of the refinery. Any students within this area attend Pine Bend Elementary,
Inver Grove Middle School or Simley High School. Rosemount is not expected to add any
significant number of housing units within the ISD #199 area during the 2030
Comprehensive Plan.
ISD #200
Hastings ISD #200 covers about 320 acres in the extreme southeast comer of Rosemount.
Any students within this area attend Pinecrest Elementary, Hastings Middle School or
Hastings High School. Rosemount is not expected to add any significant number of housing
units within the ISD #200 area during the 2030 Comprehensive Plan.
ISD #917
ISD #917 is an educational partnership to provide vocation and special education to
students of need from the Burnsville, Farmington, Hastings, Inver Grove Heights, Lakeville,
Randolph, Rosemount, South St. Paul, and West St. Paul school districts. ISD #917 is
proposing to construct a school at the location of the former Dakota County Public Works
Garage on the east side of Biscayne Ave and south of the railroad tracks. The school will be
constructed for approximately 100 students and house offices for itinerate teachers. The
itinerate teachers specialize in Braille, sign language, or other skills needed by students with
special needs. These itinerate teachers spend most of their time at the different schools of
the member school districts, but will have their offices within the ISD #917 school in
Rosemount.
Dakota County Technical College
The Dakota County Technical College (DCTC) is currently a two -year community college
and technical school and is a part of the Minnesota State Colleges and University System.
DCTC is located at the southeast corner of Akron Avenue and County Road 42. Currently,
DCTC has a full time equivalent enrollment of 2,245 students and offers student athletics
including baseball, soccer, softball, and wrestling, but no student housing. DCTC has only
one softball field located on the north side of County Road 42 and plays most of its games at
other facilities. DCTC has a long term expansion plan that includes the possibility of
additional athletic fields, student housing, and development of four -year college programs.
University of Minnesota
The University of Minnesota has one facility within Rosemount, the University of Minnesota
Outreach, Research, and Education (UMore) Park. UMore is 7,686 acres, approximately
3,300 of which are located within Rosemount and the remaining acres are located south of
the city in Empire Township. UMore is the research and outreach component of the
College of Food, Agriculture, and Natural Resource Sciences. UMore also houses the
Rosemount Research Center which is a self supporting department that leases land to local
farmers, police departments, other University departments and private entities.
3 0
The University is currently performing strategic planning for the future use of the land
within UMore. In 2006, Sasaki and Associates created the UMore Park Strategic Plan that
plans for a mixed use community on approximately 5,000 acres within Rosemount and
northern Empire Township. The Sasaki study contains development scenarios of
approximately 16,500 dwelling units and 41,000 residents at full development. Currently,
there is no commitment by the University to implement the Sasaki recommendations. If the
University chooses to go forward with the development of a community, Rosemount will
submit a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Metropolitan Council.
31
W
F
Q
iS
p
2
O
5 47' O tu
`I
O fn
v
pj O O
O 2
p L
U
L
u s
m a
d
t en
N N N
co
IA) U u
L
L t\ m U
7
L U d L
ep �I1 v d w
PP); LS7 °v N
p o
i
itek,-1. (%1 to
y 6 ap T O
n 14
iF+ 3 4
Y C f a)
f ..y�am i- 'B s r o
a o
V 1 l ;,,q T U N
U o-
Y O 1..", YO O
O N b
a3 a3 3
p ii ii w a
6
e I
A-1 (.11 C
y o g
V
N o O c i m rn E
i� V I-
('�j n d m Y
co q LL 1 O O t 1i'rF,. L y N N L U co
rg
AEI 1 �o r ao m
Q I 7.1
�0 tea X o
6 mow J a o E
j
m vy �7 I I I �I ®Q C d
U r 1 le a., a) o m
yn� ,�l1 Ill ems- O N to
!S b 9 Vi ..i #111 Y a E il l 1 0 1,1 Mil- r i t z k i 1 .1 i E It 'ail N I 111 j lir ,1111 4 4' 1:2
1._ e tl id -e tiy.,,,,,•• 1 1 7 t 4 1, A 1 1-- 1 ,.-t, Atilt E i
N x
w
L Q u
Private Schools
Currently, there are two private schools within the City of Rosemount. The First Baptist
Church, located at the northeast corner of 145 St. West and Diamond Path, operates a
kindergarten through 12 grade school. St. Joseph's Catholic Church operates a
kindergarten through 8 grade school. The St. Joseph's school is currently located at the
former church location on the southwest corner of 143r St. W. and South Robert Trail, but
the school is scheduled to move to the current church location at the southeast comer of
Biscayne Ave. and Connemara Trail for the 2009 -2010 school year.
Churches
Community of Hope Church
The Community of Hope Church is a mission congregation of the Evangelical Lutheran
Church of America. In 2001, congregations from Burnsville, Lakeville, Eagan, and Apple
Valley committed to combine resources to create a church in Rosemount. Community of
Hope Church began worshipping at the Rosemount Middle School in 2002 and moved to
the current location at the northwest corner of 145 St. W. and Biscayne Ave. in 2005.
First Baptist Church
First Baptist Church began in 1959 with services in the old St. John's Lutheran Church. In
1970, First Baptist constructed its current church at the northeast comer of 145 St. W. and
Diamond Path. In 1971, the First Baptist School began, initially as a kindergarten through
4 grade. Currently, the school serves students from kindergarten through 12 grade.
Lighthouse Community Church
Over 100 years old, the church was founded as St. John's Lutheran Church. In the 1990's,
the church became St. John's Lighthouse, then the Lighthouse Community Church.
Lighthouse Community Church is an inter- denominational Christian church under the
apostolic covering of the International Ministerial Fellowship.
Lutheran Church of Out Savior
Our Savior held its first worship services in 1964, and constructed its first church on the
corner of Diamond Path and County Road 42 in 1967. The church has had two building
additions since 1967, including the most recent in 2006 to add a gymnasium and remodeling
the education wing. The church offers a Christian preschool that presently serves 140
students ages three through five.
Rosemount United Methodist Church
Formal incorporation took place in 1868 under the name German Methodist Episcopal
Church with services in private homes. In 1874, a church was constructed at the corner of
146 St. W. and Burma Ave. In 1962, an adjacent 2.5 acres were purchased and the current
church was constructed in 1963. The official name of the church was changed to the
Rosemount United Methodist Church (RUMC) in 1968. RUMC is currently planning for a
$3.5 million expansion to double the size of the church.
33
l! AdAA
IP
ri. 1 7f\d,, 0
K
N
A II I .i
8.
7 1
IVA ,Ami 0
I M i� 2
ig t�.� :V: r J C /T Ffik.i
Ili a ■'f Iltr k /r �p III r
1; o
aping
1 use ilmor sit 1
1 i t ■lam i
L!!4E1 k 1
k i mil
lei
mi l
liff
1„....-,-„, MI E
.T" sof
1
puitIlizicati 1113 li
IRO 4 c liii Pke
cr 1,1111: 4 K
1111 Z i I i iiir m
:7111 ,,11111‘,,,...„ lot --...,,,iiill
4_, :ib ..li 4. ti a
:_,.:,,_,:i _91F.2. ;W84 rivih r it ioliti.,..,,e__ ,i.,1410,,,4- 7.,,,,:ii,...,..,_,....4 1
,:no,....„
0 .0. 3 z,„ 43 0.0,1 1 (w.„4,,,,,
cZ i i i lp !Li mr1 0 :1,j■ p u 'n±
ciao ais■��V I r NI.m. 1
ji 1'T�a '1llmi1` La: y r t 3 �111[�....,_ 0 „111, jr In -y�� r P w= :`1111 r i 1 :1�- 1� 111 T 0 1
g �T
1 F -7 1 P (w e1l so �l 1 v q li 11 h .di- 0 3
St. John's Lutheran of the Unaltered Augsburg Confession
St. John's Lutheran Church was founded in 1911 at the comer of Blaine Ave. and 145 St.
E. (County Road 42) as a member congregation of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod.
The current church was constructed in 1977 and the 1911 church was moved 1/2 mile east to
property owned by a member of the congregation.
St Joseph's Catholic Church
Founded in 1856 with services in private homes, the first church building was constructed in
1868 about three miles southwest of Rosemount. After the first church was destroyed by a
cyclone, the second church was constructed in 1881 on the east side South Robert Trail
south of 143 St. W. in downtown Rosemount. In 1924, the brick church was constructed
at the same site. St. Joseph's Parish School was constructed in 1953. St. Joseph's moved to
its current location at the southeast corner of Connemara Trail and Biscayne Ave. in 2003.
The school is expected to move to the site of the new church in 2010.
Private Recreation Providers
The Irish Sport Dome is a private recreation provider that is located on the grounds of the
Rosemount High School, directly west of the Rosemount Community Center /National
Guard Armory. The Irish Sports Dome is enclosed within an inflatable fabric roof that
allows for multiple configurations that includes softball, baseball, soccer, and football. The
Rosemount High School uses the facility for practices during the school year, while youth
recreation leagues use the facility during the remaining times. The Irish Sports Dome has a
long term lease for the school property and the Rosemount High School will receive the
dome at the completion of the lease.
The City will encourage additional private recreational providers to locate within
Rosemount, particularly for indoor recreation. The City will also evaluate partnerships with
other entities, such as ISD #196, the Boys and Girls Club, and the YMCA, to provide
additional community facilities when it benefits all parties.
Community Facilities Goals and Objectives
1. Provide community facilities for all age groups.
F. Encourage indoor recreation by private providers or public /private partnerships.
G. Work with ISD #196, the Boys and Girls Club, the YMCA and other interested
agencies to evaluate the feasibility of a teen center.
H. Annually review the services provided for seniors and explore partnerships
opportunities with other agencies.
I. Periodically review the community interest of an aquatic center.
J. Periodically review the community interest of a multi- purpose arena with the
capability for additional sheet(s) of ice.
K. Work with Dakota County to construct the Robert Trail Library and License Center.
L. Explore possible developers of or partnerships for a conference center.
35
M. Work with Dakota County, churches, and civic organizations to provide services for
residents in need.
N. Locate community facilities near their target population.
2. Encourage the reuse or redevelopment of historic or culturally significant
buildings.
A. Evaluate the reuse or redevelopment of the St. Joseph's Complex on South Robert
Trail for public benefit.
B. Work with the Rosemount Historical Society to record and document historic and
culturally significant buildings and artifacts.
3. Provide municipal services that meet the needs of our growing population.
A. Evaluate expanding or relocating City Hall when service demands warrant.
B. Locate fire and emergency services to provide responsive service to urban residents.
C. Evaluate the police facilities needed to meet the demands of the community.
D. Determine the appropriate location for a centralized public works garage and storage
yard.
4. Encourage the establishment of citywide coverage of private utilities.
A. Encourage the installation of state of the art telecommunication infrastructure into
business parks and commercial areas to facilitate high technology businesses to
locate within Rosemount.
B. Encourage the establishment of private utilities that allow residents to work from
home, telecommute, or otherwise reduce the need to commute to work.
5. Locate private utilities where they have the least impacts.
A. Install new utilities underground and bury existing utilities where possible when land
is developed.
B. Encourage future utility transmission facilities or expansions to co- locate within
existing utility corridors to limit encumbrances on property owners and future
development.
C. Encourage private utilities to co- locate or joint trench to limit the need for utility
easements and maximize the use of private property.
36
CHAPTER 6: ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL
RESOURCES
INTRODUCTION
This chapter of the Comprehensive Plan addresses the management of the community's
environment and natural resources. This plan makes the case for protecting environment
and natural resources, develops a context for establishing Rosemount's environment and
natural resource vision, provides a generalized Natural Areas Assessment, recommends goals
and objectives and concludes by identifying tools and strategies to implement the
community's environment and natural resources vision.
Importance of Environment and Natural Resource Protection
Minnesota in general, and Rosemount specifically, has an abundance of natural resources.
Lakes, rivers, wetlands, woodlands, prairies and bluffs define the area's landscape and are the
basis for why we live, work and play in this community. These natural areas and their
associated benefits contribute to the community's popularity and are a key factor its
associated growth. However, this same popularity and growth if not managed wisely could
threaten many of these same natural features and negatively impact the community's overall
quality of life. Managing the community's growth in such a way as to preserve, protect, and
restore its environment and natural resources offers numerous benefits including: increasing
property values, supporting overall economic growth while reducing our depends on foreign
energy sources, providing low -cost storm water management and flood control, supplying a
purification system for drinking and surface water, providing habitat and biological diversity,
contributing to air purity, and creating a sense of place and identity for the community.
Rosemount's Environment and Natural Resource Vision
Rosemount's vision describes the community's environment and natural resource values and
how the community wants to utilize these resources as it grows. To assist local communities
in the developing their own unique vision, the Metropolitan Council established the overall
goal of "working with local and regional partners to conserve, protect and enhance the
region's vital natural resources." More commonly, residents may define their goals as clean
air and water, parks and open space, and the preservation of wildlife habitats and other
natural features. Rosemount's environment and natural resource vision is mostly clearly
identified in two of the community's nine over arching goals, which are:
Preserve natural resources and open space within the community and ensure
development does not adversely impact on -going agricultural uses until urban services
are available.
Promote use of renewable resources by creating sustainable development and building
green.
With these two over arching goals as a guide, this plan identifies five (5) specific
environment and natural resources goals to further define Rosemount's natural resource
vision. Two key challenges to realizing this vision include balancing it with the community's
37
continued growth and development and protecting natural systems that cross municipal,
state and even national boundaries. Rosemount's Environment and Natural Resources Plan
strives to use the community's resources in a sustainable way to promote economic
development.
ENVRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
The natural resource assessment establishes the foundation for creating the environment and
natural resources plan. This assessment is broken into three sections: the community's
special natural resource areas, key environmental resources, and a generalized inventory of
existing natural areas.
Special Natural Resource Areas
The Environment and Natural Resources chapter identifies two (2) special natural resource
areas within the City of Rosemount. These resources are the Mississippi National River
Critical Area and the Vermillion River Watershed. Each resource is described below.
Mississippi River Critical Area. The Mississippi River Critical Area was created in 1973
by the Minnesota State Legislature and encompasses 72 miles of the Mississippi River, four
miles of the Minnesota River and 54,000 acres of adjacent lands. The Area extends from the
communities of Dayton and Ramsey on the north to the southern boundary of Dakota
County on the west /south side of the river and the boundary with the Lower St. Croix
National Scenic Riverway on the east /north side of the river. The portion of the Critical
Area within Rosemount is located east of Highway 52 and north of Highway 55.
This special natural resource is governed by the Mississippi River Critical Area Program, a
joint local and state program that provides coordinated planning and management of this
area of recreational and statewide public interest. The Mississippi River Critical Area
Program works in partnership with the Mississippi National River and Recreation Area
MNRRA), part of the National Park System.
In response to these programs, the City of Rosemount adopted a Critical Area Plan and
Ordinance in 1980. During the City's 1998 Comprehensive Plan Update, the City replaced
the Critical Area Plan with its own MNRAA Plan. The MNRAA Plan is incorporated into
Rosemount's Comprehensive Plan as Appendix The MNRAA Plan together with the
Critical Area Ordinance and the underlying zoning districts serve as the development
standards for the area. All three documents should be consulted when reviewing any
development proposal in the Mississippi River Critical Area.
The Vermillion River Watershed. Watersheds are areas of land that drain to a body of
water such as a lake, river or wetland. The Vermillion River Joint Powers Organization
GPO) encompasses the Minnesota, Mississippi and Vermillion River hydrological watersheds
and includes 335 square miles. It is the dominant watershed in the county containing 21
communities in Dakota and Scott Counties; 90% of the area is agricultural but rapid urban
development is occurring in the upstream reaches.
The Vermillion River has 45.5 miles of designated trout stream. The major environmental
issues associated with this feature include storm water runoff quality and quantity and trout
habitat protection. According to Trout Unlimited, the Vermilion River is the only world
38
Bv,T
s.
Ci
F.
°6
1 ,,,,,,,,,,,4
q PM
PM
F.
as r o E e
o
g 43
0
1 1
Off`
b
A.' N klf y f- U I
s
r T tb I i v"$ 2 4 p II
z al a V 6
A it
0. a 11 II
a az d d
DI 1 0 7n E.14'
e �j k
o ,_.J22 g 1 0 !gg
L a C E 3 7 i
12 1 I
/d -II% li 1 2
.i r ,,,4 1 r Ci X i d e ii 21 41 Et
t �i
4. a 2 41311311111,1
x
1 7 '4 j Ob .0 1. 1 1 11 e q
gg 4 I ,r y /%jj/ o �'lJl I �I,I g �p J v)
..d.
y j r r s Jt �®Ui 1 t i
i iii8 i tp v
"G f F d I O cl lI j L I d Ii L �j L R5
d
Pi t i t O i i I t 1 1 ;Ilia A a a3 L O Et
4- 11 Z
tXd r J l ti co O
class trout stream within a major metropolitan Area in the United States. In the spring 2006,
the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and the Twin Cities chapter of Trout
Unlimited completed a survey of the trout population in the Vermillion River and found the
number of trout hatched was higher than in previous years. It is the intent of this plan that
the City should work with the JPO and other interested stakeholders to protect this unique
natural resources area.
Key Environmental Resources
This plan identifies two (2) key environmental resources within the community including
surface water and open space. These resources are major environmental systems that extend
throughout the community. As such, these resources are both effected by and have an effect
upon environmental resources within and beyond the City limits. Additional resources
worthy of consideration in this section include woodlands, prairies, soils and bluff areas.
Surface Water (Lakes, Streams and Wetlands) Management. Rosemount's surface
water management plan includes both the Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan
and the Comprehensive Wetland Management Plan. These plans are incorporated into the
Environment and Natural Resources chapter as Appendixes and and consider part of
the Comprehensive Plan.
The Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan includes the layout of the trunk storm
sewer system and ponding areas for the entire City. The ponding areas have been designed
with a regional approach in order to control run -off and minimize flooding. The general
objectives of the plan are to reduce the extent of public capital expenditures necessary to
control excessive volumes and rates of run -off, to prevent flooding, and to improve water
quality.
The Comprehensive Wetland Management Plan was originally adopted in 1998 and
subsequently amended in both 1999 and 2005. This plan includes an ordinance that outlines
the use of lawn and garden chemicals and buffer zones around wetlands and their effect on
groundwater recharge. Use of the plan's provisions will maximize the benefit that surface
waters can provide to Rosemount residents. The plan also includes an inventory and
assessment of wetlands in Rosemount.
Open Space. Residents often cite open space has one of Rosemount's most important and
desirable characteristics. Open space consists of undeveloped sites that do not qualify as
natural areas (see Natural Areas Inventory below), but still provide habitat, scenery and other
community benefits. Examples of open spaces include: farm fields, golf courses, utility
corridors, woodlots and simple view sheds with no developments or parkland. The
community's open spaces are significant resources worthy of preservation. Several potential
methods for protecting the community's open spaces are outlined in the Implementation
Tools and Strategies section below.
Natural Areas Inventory
In 2006, the City retained the consulting firm of Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc (HKGi) to
inventory the community's natural areas. This inventory consolidated natural areas into
three categories: Highest Priority, Lower Priority, and Other Natural and Greenway Planning
Efforts. These three categories are characterized below and illustrated on the attached
40
Natural Areas map (Attachment 1). This map and its associated data are intended to serve as
a resource for the City to identify natural areas to be preserved, protected or restored during
the development process. Additional information about this map, including landownership
data and the criteria used to classify an area as either highest or lower priority, may be
obtained from the City's GIS Department.
Highest Priority. The Highest Priority classification are areas that are the most important
water quality and habitat resources in the City. This classification includes six (6) items:
open water, wetlands, seventy -five (75) foot buffer around open water and wetlands, land
within the 100 and 500 year floodplains, Natural Community Land (as identified by the
Minnesota County Biological Survey), and Natural /Semi Natural land cover (including at
least one of the following: land with native vegetation, presence or habitat for a state
endangered or threaten animal or plant, or land within 300 feet of a lake, stream, or water
body).
Lower Priority. The Lower Priority classification are natural areas that have habitat and
water quality value but have experienced some disturbance or are dominated by non -native
species. Lower Priority areas includes three (3) items: Natural /Semi Natural land that does
not meet the criteria outlined in the High Priority category, land having man -made
impervious surface of less than twenty -five (25) percent and at least fifty (50) acres in size,
and areas of significant tree cover (as identified by the City's Parks and Recreation staff).
Other Natural Area and Greenway Planning Efforts. This category includes three
proposed greenway or trail locations: the Mississippi River Greenway, the Northern Dakota
County Greenway and the Rosemount Interpretive Corridor. The City should work with
landowners, adjacent cities and Dakota County to implement these greenways.
According to the American Planning Association's Planning and Urban Design Standards,
Greenways are lands set aside for preservation of natural resources, open space and visual
aesthetic /buffering. Greenways also provide passive -use opportunities, most often in the
form of trails and occasionally nature centers. The key focus is on protecting ecological
resources and providing wildlife corridors. In the broadest application, greenways form a
network of interconnected natural areas throughout a community. They function as part of
a borderless system that links together parks, natural open space and trail corridors.
Future /Expanded Natural Areas Inventory. The 2006 Natural Areas Assessment and
associated map represent a good generalized inventory of the community's environment and
natural resources. However, a goal of this plan should be to expand on this inventory to
include additional resources both within and outside Rosemount. An expanded assessment
should work to identify additional important resources, classify criteria for ranking important
resources, and categorize criteria to create a priority map. Additional important resource
could include any of the following nine items: open space /recreation opportunities, bluff
areas and slopes, soils (including aggregate), ground water, wildlife /endangered species,
woodland /forested areas, non -woody upland vegetation, solar, and wind.
41
Environment and Natural Resources Goals and Policies
1. Preserve, protect and restore the natural environment with emphasis on the conservation
of needed and useful natural resources for the present and future benefit of the
community.
A. Protect wetlands the natural resources identified in the Natural Resource Assessment
from environmentally insensitive development.
B. Establish an Environmental Advisory Committee (EAC) to advise the City Council
on environment and natural resource issues.
C. Encourage and support tree planting and restoration efforts especially plantings of
native, non invasive species.
D. Work with development and redevelopment to reduce the use of non renewable
resources and to reduce pollution.
E. Identify methods to quantify and reduce the community's Carbon Footprint.
2. Utilize natural resource areas to provide an overall open space system that satisfies the
physiological and psychological needs of both individuals and the community.
A. Expand the Natural Resources Assessment to identify additional important
resources, classify criteria for ranking important resources, and categorize criteria to
update the priority map.
B. Connect and coordinate existing natural resources areas through a continuous
greenway network creating a more ecological system of open space.
C. Encourage through development incentives, the preservation and management of all
natural resource amenities.
D. Develop partnerships with non -profit or private organizations, neighborhood groups
or other interested parties for the purpose of acquiring targeted open spaces.
E. Support the construction of soft, permeable, low impact trail in natural areas when
feasible.
3. Create a livable community where future development respects and integrates the
natural, cultural, and historic resources of the community while maintaining or
enhancing economic opportunity and community well- being.
A. Study the development of "Clean Industry" such as Biofuel /Biomass, solar, and
wind energy production.
42
B. Use natural resource open space to physically separate uses which are incompatible
by scale or function.
C. Conduct a sustainability audit to identify and develop how the city can enhance
livability through sustainable practices.
D. Promote environmentally friendly design standards such as Active Living, Smart
Growth, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) and the like.
E. Study the feasibility and economic viability of creating a Green Fleet of City vehicles.
4. Encourage activities that reduce the consumption of finite resources and ensure there are
opportunities to re -use or recycle natural resources.
A. Encourage activities that conserve energy and result in less /no pollution output such
as waste reduction, alternative transportation modes, alternative energy sources and
composting.
B. Encourage and support sustainable farming practices including Integrated Pest
Management (IPM) and the Minnesota Department of Agriculture's `Best
Management Practices" for specific crops.
C. Encourage limited and responsible use of herbicides, pesticides and fertilizers on
residential and public lands.
D. Reduce the waste stream and create a sustainable environment by continue to provide
and encourage curbside recycling of reusable waste materials through educational events,
promotional materials and volunteer efforts.
E. Reduce City government's use of scarce and non renewable resources and actively support
similar efforts throughout the community.
5. Work with federal, state, regional, and local governments as well as with residents'
groups and nonprofit organizations to protect natural resources both within and around
the City of Rosemount.
A. Continue implementation of the Mississippi River Recreation Area (MNRRA) plan.
B. Support and encourage community efforts in environmental awareness, education
and stewardship.
C. Establish and maintain conservation areas for wildlife management and education
and scientific purposes.
D. Work with Dakota County Technical College and the University of Minnesota at U
More Park to promote environmental education.
43
E. Promote the extension of natural resource corridors into adjacent jurisdiction.
Implementation Tools and Strategies
The environment and natural resources implementation tools and strategies are divided into
eight (8) categories, each of which is detailed below. These are intended to provide examples
of tactics to realize this plan. Each category should be reviewed and implemented in
compliance with this plan.
1. Advisory Committee Establishment. The Environmental Advisory Committee
(EAC) would serve as an advisory board to the City Council on environment and natural
resource issues. The EAC could review land use and development proposals and
recommend policies, ordinances, and procedures to enhance the City's environment and
natural resources. The EAC could also provide direction regarding creation of
greenways, protection of cultural and ecological assets within the community and
guidance concerning community -wide education programs. The City Council could
appoint the members of the EAC from residents, members of existing advisory boards
or the City Council.
2. Future /Expanded Natural Areas Assessment. An expanded assessment should
work to identify additional important resources, classify criteria for ranking important
resources, and categorize criteria to update the priority map. Additional important
resource could include any of the following nine items: open space /recreation
opportunities, bluff areas and slopes, soils (including aggregate), ground water,
wildlife /endangered species, woodland /forested areas, non -woody upland vegetation,
solar, wind
3. Economic Development. Natural Resources are a vital component of economic
activity. Uses for natural resources range from raw materials for industrial activity to
environments for active and passive recreational opportunities for both residents and
tourists. Balancing environmental needs with economic growth is a vital component of
environment and natural resource planning. One strategy to attempt this would be to
promote the development of "Clean Industry" or "Green Collar" jobs including
Biomass /Biofuel, solar, and wind production. Development of these industries could
serve to compliment and diversify Rosemount's existing agriculture and fuel refining
industries.
4. Design Guidelines. Design guidelines are supplementary documents that further
define the community's vision by identifying desired elements for a given development
topic or special planning area. For example, Rosemount has already developed design
guidelines to help direct the redevelopment of downtown. Other development topics or
special planning areas to consider include: Energy- Efficient Development, Green
Infrastructure, LEED ND (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design for
Neighborhood Design), State of Minnesota Sustainable Building Guidelines, Growth
Management, Smart Growth and Active Living. Once guidelines are developed they
could be used to create specific zoning standards (see Ordinance Development below).
While Active Living policies are further defined in Appendix the City should study
development of these other tools as part of comprehensive plan implementation.
44
5. Ordinance Development. To date, the City of Rosemount has created several
ordinances to implement the community's environment and natural resources vision.
These ordinances include: Agriculture Preserve, Shoreland Management, Floodplain,
Tree Protection, Wetland Protection and Individual Sewage Treatment ordinances.
Additional items for the City to research and consider include: Open -Space Preservation
or Clustering, Wellhead Protection, Aggregate Resources Protection and Natural
Resource Overlay Ordinances (see Minnesota Environmental Quality Board Model
Ordinance).
6. Open Space Preservation. The rationale for creating open -space or cluster standards is
to guide development to preserve contiguous open space and protect natural resources
that would otherwise be lost through the typical development process. Examples of
these zoning techniques include: Conservation Easements, Transfer of Development
Rights, Purchase of Development Rights, Preferential Taxation, Property Acquisition
and Land Banking. The intent of these methods is not to alter the overall density of a
project but rather to transfer density from desired preservation areas to other
developable areas. The result being that private property owners are granted reasonable
economic use of their property without adversely impacting the natural or open space
resources desired by the community as a whole.
7. Education Outreach. Education outreach is an essential yet often underutilized
component of environment and natural resource planning. While environmental issues
have become more mainstream, many people do not realize how their daily personal
habits impact the environment. To this end, the City should develop educational
materials and resources for residents in the areas of composting, recycling, landscaping,
energy use, personal consumption and other conservation issues. In addition, the City
should develop partnerships with organizations whose mission is to educate the public
about environmental protection and natural resource management. Potential partners
and resources for these two strategies include the Department of Natural Resources,
Friends of the Mississippi River, the Metropolitan Council, the Minnesota Sustainable
Communities Network, the University of Minnesota (U More Park), Dakota County
Technical College, Home Owners' Associations and District 196 schools as well as the
Environmental (Zoo) School.
8. Intergovernmental Cooperation. Environmental resources span across local, state and
international boundaries. Examples of this include the Mississippi River which runs
through Rosemount to several other states and into the Golf of Mexico or the air
pollution produce by Rosemount residents and industry which flows into the
surrounding region. While Rosemount's impact on the world's water and air resources is
relatively small, these examples serve to illustrate the interconnection between local
decisions and global environmental resources. As a result, the City of Rosemount
should develop partnerships with others (local, regional, state, national and international)
groups and agencies committed to environmental and natural resource preservation,
protection and restoration.
45
CHAPTER 7: LAND USE
Recent Land Use Planning
The City of Rosemount adopted the Rosemount 2020 Comprehensive Plan (2020 Plan) on
February 15, 2000 by Resolution Number 2000 -08. The 2020 Plan is shown in Figure 7.1.
The 2020 Plan expected 7,345 housing units by 2010 (a number that Rosemount has reached
in 2007) and 10,200 housing units by 2020 (the number of units in the current Metropolitan
Council forecast for 2010). The 2020 Plan predicted that urban residential growth through
2020 would not occur east of Akron Avenue nor north of Bonaire Path (Old County Road
38). The residential land uses that receive City sewer and water service were limited to two
designations, Urban Residential (typically single family housing) and High Density
Residential (typically multiple story apartment or condominiums).
Realizing that the 2020 Plan was not addressing the level of residential development that the
City was experiencing, the City began a major amendment to the Comprehensive Plan that
was titled the County Road 42 -US Highway 52 Corridor Plan (42 -52 Plan). The 42 -52 Plan is
shown in Figure 7.2. The 42 -52 Plan resulted in four major changes to the 2020 Plan. First,
residential development was expected to occur north of Bonaire Path and east of Akron
Avenue. Second, a Medium Density Residential designation was created that would typically
be attached townhomes. Third, additional commercial and industrial land was expected east
of US Highway 52 in anticipation of an improved County Road 42 and US Highway 52
interchange. Fourth, the Metropolitan Council forecast was revised to expect 10,200
housing units by 2010 and 13,700 housing units by 2020.
The 42 -52 Plan was adopted by the City Council on July 19, 2005 by Resolution Number
2005 -84. Since its adoption, the City has created an alternative urban areawide review
(AUAR) for the residential areas north of Bonaire Path and east of Akron Avenue. In 2007,
the City approved the first preliminary plat within the AUAR that included 50 acres of
commercial property and 583 residential units. The City has used the planning work done
during the 42 -52 Plan as the basis for the Land Use Plan of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan.
Population, Housing, and Employment Forecasts
According to the 2000 Census, the City of Rosemount had a population of 14,619 people
within 4,742 households. Using data from the City of Rosemount Building Division, the
City created an additional 2,688 housing units between 2000 and 2006, resulting in a January
1, 2007 household count of 7,430 and an estimated population of 21,950.
m. Table 7.1: Population, Household, and Employment Forecasts
2000a 2007b 2010c 2020c 2030c
Population 14,619 21,950 29,600 38,400 45,500
Households 4,742 7,430 10,200 13,700 16,850
Employment 6,356 7,780 8,400 10,100 12,200
US Census Bureau
b City of Rosemount, as of December 31, 2007
c Metropolitan Council
46
(7141 Fr llidniall:1111144-111A1111111
0 11:111-6-=
co
1p
8
_14
isl
.61.
s t"
tt
"II
11 IA
r
Lu r.
v.) iii I
-17 ,r11/7.:=49,,,,,11-w Arirliamall 11111111 111 1
...ell
r_.-
ismult- A ii.
IIIV /AN
mg i
roam— N■
mp 11111.1111111
Er i r 1 N1111111111
l'
1,
II
2
1111111
111
14 L----
V In
1
I
i
I
1 1 I DA iffirla i
1
C 1 KI
A I
CU
I
CL i I
1111j
4:1) P I I
"I g
n V 1 a
1- kin
-0 s g t I !laid
1 mi-ux
niii
c u, i tiw-101
M
(1' '.....;,,,Rigi idahos
E g.
■.I hi M=11
I" s Vlb-.,,.
Rh 111A.=;
CD 3 "0 g i 1 NM/ -00\ r iati
8 MIMI mi 111111/ isait4k
chins al
..votn.m.
1 1 a-1 11 4 1 1.., 4 NI r--L-
1 ,:m PIMA 'Ittoo
Q) 3 J a 1 i i i I 1., ;-,-.F.:::;-....0:,...7.1„....,,,,r.„,,
S•-■ -6 -6 1 1.0 -IL: ."T-""111111 nill P-'1 GI 0 IMF.
nt- ci l' .2 CL 1 -'414151111:217-y(41111■11101) ::::2141 1“.1,-..
C 7, 2 f, t imillek:. Alm.--re. rp r
2 2' 3 :r 12 im• to_ 1 siL 1
0 III 1 i ■741 )w,,,,;, WA i li Illb:-,- _.,•0°....
0 V, .2 i I japotitonom.• (t min Eggmt 1 4. A
e 1
1 1 1 i 10e ltbroll =Ism 01. P;:s Se' 4.14.1g v,! NIP: lb. 4r.... i
-5 IA E
C i N 1 1 lumwAmplootrovially.4L> 4%. it
iV lm 1 lei rim I L tf!j■S 3
„m,„-- in 4/0 l' .6;
•E, z ,2 g I Tif, tria 11 I_ ttftkk maNtrry:'
Z; F, w i c, 1 rawigplairr ;":,';u: LzitA..:OVesfliii. lfy 1,1WEAN'ill
j
1 1
0;:::?. Ei”:91iP it Ve! 2V.15 ...um ■••0•':' '.4 2: :Ft; .rt :iiiPiill
1 ■01. Er■ welzo Atg:P.eA73.t.T_05 Ii• z
astaktip.....gOtogh71*
4 iicrakigft i? 4 ,,v...izig.T evill'A..i; i
i mg 7,—,........= •ovivioi:4
W ,15 1 I i oh 1.7,4 'pull 1.4_,,IN, ,,-..-0
5.. nD`'w i re -1111 milli rii .144 git ;P;;;;i:. A ,S.i E; i ai i: :2
1
1 b A p I .m 1 We lite kl fa =Ali 3%.,L
C D 7 9 2 O Q O I 1
4
Maim
co
II
H j 1 N
ovisitm:‘,, 1, i 11 i I iiiiiii ATiimm
ti i
l
/11 40
wL 4 k
e l
S imw EW II
rame„.„ ,L__ v lirs
mi. Al
rr 7 1
,„,J.
1 _I L
I MI 1
h 1
Cti
0. i I 1 _i y�lll
to
1 I
I
C
III I
ME
1
v
LIL �7
.L. i l J
0 i t
N
LO 1
1
1
cz
'IA on
IL
AvEaro
1 Ii iII L7 i f
N 1 ..D S
0 5 8 1 11 a 1, 1
t 7 11..;-7::7;:;
2 to a ..a A e v l
h'amUU� .HIV �i i 3
c E
t �fr� k, I,
i K y m 1 F i j "VIIIl N v. \I
r
'4,`'.-.4-41-'1 MPliagc '41 1
;Sid III,
r. m m 11 mill g .c
1_0 e c e �1� 1 !U p ry{. l —i �/mfi
N N O I I r VIII 1 p
7
2 o. 2 m ��R 1 11', a f ,'1 l `I`' m, y 4
II II MOO
In 2005, the Metropolitan Council provided forecasts for each community within the seven
county metropolitan area to be used during the creation of each community's
Comprehensive Plan. The forecasts for Rosemount included 10,200 households by 2010
and 13,700 households by 2020, both of which were forecasts determined during the 42 -52
Plan approval. The Metropolitan Council did not determine a 2030 household estimate in its
original forecast.
The City of Rosemount has planned for an additional 3,150 households from 2021 to 2030,
for a total 16,850 households in 2030. The household figure was determined by the
additional residential land that was designated within this 2030 Comprehensive Land Use
Plan, which is shown on Figure 7.3 and Table 7.2. Metropolitan Council staff has reviewed
the forecast of 16,850 households in 2030 and instructed the City to use this figure
throughout the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The population forecast of 45,500 people and
16,850 households in the year 2030 has been used within the Comprehensive Land Use Plan,
the Parks and Open Space Plan, the Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan, and the
Comprehensive Municipal Water Plan of this 2030 Comprehensive Plan.
n. Table 7.2: Additional Housing Units Developed from 2020 to 2030
Land Use Designation Acres Density (Units /Acre)' Units
Transitional Residential 155 2.00 310
Low Density Residential 510 2.35 1199
Medium Density Residential 150 7.00 1050
High Density Residential 30 20.00 600
Total Residential Development 3159
Based on actual development densities per the Plat Monitoring data
Existing Land Uses
The City of Rosemount currently has 4,860 acres of developed residential land, 295 acres of
developed commercial or business park land, 1,950 acres of developed industrial land, and
935 acres developed as institutional or recreational. The developed areas of Rosemount are
predominately located in the western third of the City. The development located within the
eastern two thirds of the City is generally limited to the Dakota County Technical College,
the Flint Hills refinery, and the industrial uses along Minnesota Highway 55.
The 2020 Plan, as amended by the 42 -52 Plan, has 1,460 acres of undeveloped residential
land within the existing metropolitan urban service area (MUSA) boundary. Additionally,
there are 1,250 undeveloped acres of commercial and business park land and about 1,400
undeveloped acres of industrial land within the MUSA.
The Land Use Plan generally supports the land uses that currently exist within the developed
portions of the City, with the exception of the Downtown area and the commercial
properties along South Robert Trail. Some of the land use designations within this plan have
been changed from the 2020 Plan, but most often they reflect the actual development that
has occured during the last ten years.
49
Downtown Rosemount will be encouraged to redevelop as depicted in the Development
Framework for Downtown Rosemount. The existing commercial uses along South Robert Trail
between County Road 42 and County Road 46 are typical auto oriented or light industrial in
nature. The City will encourage redevelopment of these properties into a retail commercial
or professional office when appropriate.
o. Table 7.3: 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations
Land Use Developed Undeveloped Total Land
Land Use Designation Abbreviation Land Areal Land Areal Area (Acres)
(Acres) (Acres)
Agriculture AG 5,340 0 5,340
Agricultural Research AGR 3,200 0 3,200
Rural Residential RR 1,540 290 1,830
Transitional Residential TR 740 190 930
Low Density Residential LDR 2,510 1,130 3,640
Medium Density Residential MDR 0 290 290
High Density Residential HDR 70 40 110
Commercial C 175 525 700
Business Park BP 120 725 845
Light Industrial LI 35 900 935
General Industrial GI 1,675 905 2,580
Waste Management WM 240 0 240
Public /Institutional PI 410 0 410
Parks and Open Space PO 525 0 525
Floodplain (and Mississippi FP 975 0 975
River)
Total Land Uses 17,555 4,995 22,550
1 As of 12/31/2007
2030 Planned Land Uses
To accommodate the additional growth that is expected by 2030, the Land Use Plan
proposes an additional 1,510 acres of land for development. Of the 1,510 acres, 845 acres
are designated for additional residential development, while the remaining 665 acres are
designated for various levels of commercial and industrial uses. The distribution of land
uses within the Land Use Plan is shown in the Figure 7.3 and Table 7.3.
The land uses of 1,510 additional acres of developable land are generally consistent with the
land uses of the 42 -52 Plan, with the boundaries between the land uses generally located
along the major roadways depicted within the Transportation Plan as shown in Figure 7.4. The
east side of Rosemount is the area of biggest change between the 2020 Plan and the 2030
Land Use Plan. The 2030 Land Use Plan maintains the Commercial node at the intersection
US Highway 52 and County Road 42, but the majority of the County Road 42 frontage
between US Highway 52 and Emery Avenue is expected to develop as professional offices
and office showrooms of the Business Park designation. Surrounding the intersection of
Emery Avenue and County Road 42 is a commercial node expected to develop as retail
commercial, personal services and professional offices.
50
7N j a
mai! II
II i
t,
0
I_i! h
Q s
li
l N
worie6a
A P L''
I a i
r ia- 1;
i h DI t
Y.
s F
j
®IC®�
1
III" I
CL
1
J J 111.
alk 1
To B p
i
W c y E I 1 P1S i ���I ^1 ®F 11�� fir n j x
L xa am7 Q 11'-
o Aw as.' i1I x 47
0 :f t l 1
N ,y Ir CL o ti. 7 el:
M P M,. '^fi'1�,�,�.Sv f 'lllfll@ 'auk I ap$ F
E 1 /c C J��r��1 s wry'] ■a= A
v E m�'
S. E I III .�11111D� R ui� n fa n� ZI N -7.141.0e v `y" O i g L 41111LS ft.* ig r.„ 3 Et 4:;;; .14.,,,,, fL.- 74111 1 /::::=W::::::r Iting=
LO 1
o z 1 11�111,�_ A 1� `i� �m� g iW t P9 q N a
E11 .1 o P.
Z co
y 0 N
0 a
w
.5 1 a o i gri
IN
1. 4
i
ja r iimmin l
v
m i
r v ring s
l r
r w
edit l ,s, e l i
MP fr
116 t.
i r 1
v iii i
5 L 1 m UU !i
I 1
il
1 *ill
i g e e: WI
40 i
N o IF
U T
t✓
a o
m m t 1.11111
m
C4 iIIII F 1 j
,1 3 it r `l6 h n 1 I �l b 00
CIS -g.,---a c a
,4 M 7; EZ .0(1 N ,I
I O
cu 111 r
cn
e lI 7I■ Wi
I p
umi l r
w u? i
m I r F.
0 H i nsl►7I I t e m. �C i�' r `tee a s
m
6 T w t iF I P 1 44 a 30 x'=11• di t 3 0 1
9
to p
690 acres of residential land uses are planned east of US Highway 52 and south of County
Road 42. The residential development is focused around two mixed residential
neighborhoods, one located along Emery Avenue and the other located along a future major
collector roadway which will have a full access onto County Road 42. This pattern of
residential development supports the Housing Goals of designing subdivisions to create
independent neighborhoods, providing a mixture of rental and ownership opportunities to
provide life cycle housing, and locating different housing styles within appropriate areas.
p. Table 7.3: 2030 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations
Land Use Developed Undeveloped Total Land
Land Use Designation Abbreviation Land Areal Land Areal Area (Acres)
(Acres) (Acres)
Agriculture AG 3,600 0 3,600
Agricultural Research AGR 3,200 0 3,200
Rural Residential RR 1,540 290 1,830
Transitional Residential TR 740 170 910
Low Density Residential LDR 2,510 1,280 3,790
Medium Density Residential MDR 0 690 690
High Density Residential HDR 70 70 140
Downtown DT 65 0 65
Neighborhood Commercial NC 5 10 15
Community Commercial CC 125 475 600
Regional Commercial RC 0 370 370
Business Park BP 120 1,485 1,605
Light Industrial LI 35 580 615
General Industrial GI 1,675 1,085 2,760
Waste Management WM 240 0 240
Public /Institutional PI 470 0 470
Parks and Open Space PO 675 0 675
Floodplain (and Mississippi FP 975 0 975
River)
Total Land Uses 16,045 6,505 22,550
As of 12/31/2007
Metropolitan Council MUSA Implementation Guidelines
The Metropolitan Council is determined to enforce its minimum urban density standard of
three (3) to five (5) units per acre within the areas planned for sanitary sewer service during
the approval of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. To enforce this level of development, the
Metropolitan Council approved on September 12, 2007 a set of guidelines to determine
minimum urban density. The Metropolitan Council guidelines that affect Rosemount are:
The lowest allowable density shall be used for each residential land use designation.
The City may be credited on a one for one basis for the number of housing units
that have been platted in excess of three units per acre.
Only residential land that has been re- guided from the 2020 Land Use Plan or new
residential land to be developed from 2020 to 2030 needs to be calculated.
53
Table 7.4 shows that the minimum urban density of the 2030 Land Use Plan, per the
Metropolitan Council guidelines, shall develop at a minimum of three units per acre.
q. Table 7.4: New Residential Land Uses in the 2030 Land Use Map
Land Use Designation Acres Density (Units /Acre) Units
Transitional Residential 155 1.00 155
Low Density Residential 510 1.00 510
Medium Density Residential 150 5.00 750
High Density Residential 30 10.00 300
Units over 3 un /ac since 2000 n/a n/a 822
Total Residential Development 845 3.00 2537
The lowest allowed den i y per the Metropolitan Council guidelines.
Growth and Development between 2007 and 2030
The Land Use Plan shows two MUSA boundaries: a 2020 MUSA that is expected before
2020 and a 2030 MUSA which is expected to develop between 2021 and 2030. The 2020
MUSA includes the currendy developed areas of Rosemount; the developable land north of
County Road 42 and west of US Highway 52; the general industrial land south of Minnesota
Highway 55; and the land surrounding the intersection of County Road 42 and US Highway
52. The 2030 MUSA includes the general industrial land between Minnesota Highway 55
and Pine Bend Trail; the industrial and commercial land south along US Highway 52 and
east along County Road 42; and residential property located approximately one mile east of
US Highway 52 and three quarters of a mile south of County Road 42.
Residential development between 2008 and 2010 is expected to occur generally south of
Bonaire Path and west of Akron Avenue. The majority of the development will likely occur
in subsequent phases of previously developed subdivisions, such as Evermoor, Harmony,
and Prestwick Place.
r. Table 7.6: 2007 2010 Residential Development
Land Use Designation Acres Developed Units per Acre Number of Units
Transitional Residential 15 2 30
Low Density Residential 151 2.35 355
Medium Density Residential 77 7 540
High Density Residential 0 20 0
Total Residential 243 3.81 925
Residential development between 2011 and 2020 is expected to occur north of Bonaire Path
(between Bacardi Avenue and Akron Avenue) and west of Akron Avenue (between Bonaire
Path and County Road 42). The area north of Bonaire Path is a mixture of farm fields,
wetlands, and trees. This area is designated Low Density Residential and will most likely be
single family homes.
The area west of Akron Avenue is predominately farm fields with some trees, mostly in
windrows along the property lines. This area is designated a mixture of Low Density,
Medium Density, and High Density Residential. These neighborhoods are intended to
provide a wide variety of housing types for residents of all age groups. This area provides
the densities to meet the Metropolitan Council density and affordable housing guidelines.
54
s. Table 7.7: 2011 2015 Residential Development
Land Use Designation Acres Developed Units per Acre Number of Units
Transitional Residential 70 2 140
Low Density Residential 317 2.35 745
Medium Density Residential 171 7 1195
High Density Residential 20 20 400
Total Residential 578 4.29 2480
t.Table 7.8: 2016 2020 Residential Development
Land Use Designation Acres Developed Units per Acre Number of Units
Transitional Residential 70 2 140
Low Density Residential 317 2.35 745
Medium Density Residential 171 7 1200
High Density Residential 20 20 400
Total Residential 578 4.30 2485
Residential development between 2021 and 2030 is expected to occur predominately east of
US Highway 52 and south of County Road 42. This large area is divided into two mixed
residential neighborhood, one centered on Emery Avenue, and the other centered along a
future major collector street between US Highway 52 and Emery Avenue. The future major
collector will likely be the only street with a full access intersection of County Road 42
between US Highway 52 and Emery Avenue.
These neighborhoods are intended to provide a wide variety of housing types for residents
of all age groups. There is an opportunity for a mixed use development along Emery
Avenue similar to a transit orientated district, but no transit service is anticipated east of US
Highway 52 within the timeframe of the 2030 Land Use Plan. This area provides the
densities to meet the Metropolitan Council density and affordable housing guidelines.
u. Table 7.9: 2021 2025 Residential Development
Land Use Designation Acres Developed Units per Acre Number of Units
Transitional Residential 0 2 0
Low Density Residential 234 2.35 550
Medium Density Residential 131 7 915
High Density Residential 15 20 300
Total Residential 380 4.64 1765
v. Table 7.10: 2026 2030 Residential Development
Land Use Designation Acres Developed Units per Acre Number of Units
Transitional Residential 0 2 0
Low Density Residential 234 2.35 550
Medium Density Residential 131 7 915
High Density Residential 15 20 300
Total Residential 380 4.64 1765
55
Affordable Housing Need from 2011 -2020
The Metropolitan Council has determined that 51,030 new affordable housing units are
needed for the seven county metropolitan area between the years 2011 and 2020, which is
equivalent to 30.6% of the 166,547 total housing units expected during the same period.
The Metropolitan Council has determined that Rosemount's share of the region's affordable
housing need is 933 units. The Metropolitan Council has defined an affordable unit as a
housing unit that is priced at or below 30% of the gross income of a household earning 60%
of the Twin Cities median family income.
Land Use Plans determine residential designations based on density and housing type, not
housing unit costs or pricing. Low Density Residential housing units are typically single
family homes, Medium Density Residential units are typically townhomes, and High Density
Residential units are typically multiple story apartment or condominium units. Generally,
single family homes are the most expensive housing units and apartments are the least
expensive, but some small lot single family homes can be affordable and some multiple story
condominium buildings can have units in excess of $500,000. While increased density does
not equal affordability, the Metropolitan Council has chosen density to serve as a proxy for
affordability.
The Metropolitan Council has stated that residential land designated for densities in excess
of six (6) units per acre will be determined as affordable units. Tables 7.7 and 7.8
demonstrate that the Land Use Plan will develop 342 acres of Medium Density Residential
land and 40 acres of High Density Residential land. The Medium Density Residential land is
anticipated to develop at an average of seven (7) units per acre for a total of 2,395 units,
while the High Density Residential land is anticipated to develop at twenty (20) units per
acre for a total of 800 units. From 2011 to 2020, the Land Use Plan anticipates developing a
total of 3,195 units in excess of six (6) units per acre, well exceeding the 933 affordable units
that the Metropolitan Council has determined for the City of Rosemount.
Land Use Designations
Agricultural (AG)
Purpose: This land use designation is intended for the majority of the land that is located
outside the MUSA. Rosemount has a long history of agriculture, but the community is
rapidly urbanizing. The City must balance the needs of the continued farming operations
with the expansion of the urban landscape.
Location Criteria: Outside the MUSA.
Minimum Requirements for Development: Development is discouraged in the agricultural
land use designations. Construction activities should be limited to expansions of farming
operations and housing for farm families.
Utilities: Private wells and septic systems are required.
Typical Uses: Crop and livestock farming; farmstead housing; churches; recreational open
spaces; parks; and public buildings.
Density: One (1) unit per forty (40) acres
Appropriate Zoning: AG Agricultural
Limited Secondary Zoning: AGP Agricultural Preserve for property enrolled in the
agricultural preserve program; P Public and Institutional for churches, parks, or open
space.
56
There are a number of agricultural properties within the City that are enrolled in the
Agricultural Preserve, Green Acres, or other property tax relief programs. The City will
continue to support enrollment of active agricultural properties within these programs
provided that it does not inhibit the orderly development of the City. The City discourages
the use of these programs by land owners to reduce the holding costs of land before the
property develops or the use of these programs to defer assessments of public infrastructure
on properties that are to be developed in the near future.
Agricultural Research (AGR)
Purpose: This land use designation is used solely for the UMore Park property that is owned
and operated by the University of Minnesota. It is anticipated that, after the UMore Park
Master Plan is created and adopted, a major Comprehensive Plan amendment will be
conducted to re- designate the land to its appropriate land use category.
Location Criteria: Within the UMore Park property owned and operated by the University
of Minnesota.
Minimum Requirements for Development: Land uses that support the educational and
research missions of the University of Minnesota are exempt from local land use regulations.
Utilities: Private wells and septic systems are required.
Typical Uses: Agricultural production; research laboratories; classrooms; offices; and
conference rooms
Density: One (1) unit per (40) acres
Appropriate Zoning: AG Agricultural
Limited Secondary Zoning: None
The University of Minnesota is currently preparing a Master Plan for the development of the
UMore Park property into a mixed use urban neighborhood(s). The City of Rosemount,
Empire Township, Dakota County, and other relevant parties are working with the
University of Minnesota in the creation of the Master Plan. The Master Plan will not be
completed in time for inclusion in the 2030 Land Use Plan, which is required to be
submitted to the Metropolitan Council by December 31, 2008. The City will maintain the
Agricultural Research designation on the UMore Park property for the submittal of the 2030
Land Use Plan.
The City anticipates that a major Comprehensive Plan amendment will be submitted to the
Metropolitan Council following the completion of the Master Plan. The City expects that
the UMore Park Master Plan will be a unique development that will have its own resources
and marketing that is beyond that available to the typical urban developer. For that reason,
the City anticipates that the potential future development of UMore Park will be in addition
to the growth depicted within the 2030 Land Use Plan. The City expects that the
population, households, and employment forecasts will need to be increased due to the
magnitude of this development.
Rural Residential (RR)
Purpose: Northwestern Rosemount is characterized by a rolling, wooded landscape that
includes numerous lakes and wetlands. To preserve this natural landscape, the City has
designated this land as rural residential to provide residential housing while preserving
57
significant areas of wetlands and woodlands. The keeping of horses is anticipated within the
rural residential area, but the farming of other livestock is discouraged.
Location Criteria: Located in northwest Rosemount, generally described as north of 132n
Street West and west of Akron Avenue.
Minimum Requirements for Development: Street frontage and a buildable area outside of
wetlands and wetland buffers. Being rural in nature, it is not expected that urban features
such as sidewalks, neighborhood parks, or a grid pattern of streets will be installed when the
land is developed. Trail corridors (for pedestrian, bicyclists, and /or horses) shall be
encouraged to provide the connection of the rural residents with each other, as well as to the
City as a whole.
Utilities: Private wells and septic systems are required.
Typical Uses: Single family homes; hobby farm; churches; recreational open spaces; parks;
and public buildings.
Density: One (1) unit per five (5) acres
Appropriate Zoning: RR Rural Residential
Limited Secondary Zoning: AG Agricultural for lots that are greater twenty (20) acres in
size.
The City conducted an open house with the rural residential land owners on June 18, 2007
and asked them if they were supportive of the one (1) unit per five (5) acre standard in the
Rural Residential designation. The City received 55 responses to this question and 87% of
them were supportive of the one (1) unit per five (5) acre standard. Residents
overwhelmingly want the rural residential character of northwest Rosemount to be
maintained.
The majority of the parcels that is designated Rural Residential is five (5) acres or less in size,
meaning that no further subdivision would be allowed. There are a small number of parcels
that are twenty (20) acres or larger in size that are suitable for further subdivision. The
development of these parcels will need to be sensitive to the wetlands, trees, and other
natural resources unique to this area.
Transitional Residential (TR)
Purpose: This land use designation is intended to transition between the rural residential
area of northwest Rosemount and the urban development of greater Rosemount.
Transitional residential areas are intended to receive urban services sometime in the future,
while it may not be within the timeframe of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Development
that occurs within the transitional residential designation is intended to have urban densities,
but generally at a lesser density than the other residential land use designation.
Location Criteria: Areas within the MUSA that have a rolling, wooded landscape similar to
the rural residential northwest; developed residential neighborhoods with lots less than one
(1) acre in size outside of the MUSA.
Minimum Requirements for Development: The extension of urban service is needed for the
further development of the Transitional Residential area. Transitional Residential land
within the MUSA is currently suitable for development. The subdivision of property is
expected to provide the full range of urban infrastructure, such as sidewalks, neighborhood
parks, and streets with good access and interconnectivity.
58
Utilities: Private wells and septic systems are required for rural residential land. Municipal
water and sanitary sewer are required for land to be developed at urban densities.
Typical Uses: Single family homes; churches; parks; and public buildings. Duplexes or
townhomes with four (4) or less units per building may be considered as a part of a planned
unit development provided that the overall density does not exceed three (3) units per acre.
Density: One (1) unit per five (5) acres without municipal water and sanitary sewer. One (1)
to three (3) units per acre with municipal water and sanitary sewer. The Transitional
Residential area along Dodd Boulevard between 132n Street West and Connemara Trail may
be considered to exceed three (3) per acre to transition between the multiple family housing
to the south and east and the single family housing to the west.
Appropriate Zoning: RR Rural Residential for parcels without municipal water and sanitary
sewer; R1 Low Density Residential for parcels with municipal water and sanitary sewer.
Limited Secondary Zoning: RL Very Low Density Residential for neighborhoods of
existing non conforming rural residential lots if municipal water and sanitary sewer is
provided; AG Agricultural for lots that are greater twenty (20) acres in size
There are two major areas of undeveloped or underdeveloped Transitional Residential
designated land within the 2030 Land Use Plan that are within the 2020 MUSA. The first is
the area bounded generally bounded by Dodd Boulevard, South Robert Trail, Connemara
Trail and 132n Street West (Dodd Blvd Area). The second area is generally bounded by the
Progress Rail rail line, Bonaire Path, Bacardi Avenue, and 130 Street West (Bacardi Area).
The Dodd Blvd Area is bounded by townhouses and multiple family housing to the south
and the east, single family housing to the west, and rural residential homes to the north. The
property is expected to transition from townhouses along the South Robert Trail frontage to
single family housing towards the Dodd Boulevard frontage. It is expected that the
development of this area would require the reconstruction and reconnection of Dodd
Boulevard to Connemara Trail and 132 Street West to provide direct access to the
development without requiring the long term use of the single family neighborhood to the
east for access. It is anticipated that this level of development may create a density of greater
than three (3) units per acre for the Dodd Blvd Area.
The Bacardi Area is bounded by single family homes to the south, a mixed residential
neighborhood to the southwest, an existing rural neighborhood of single family homes with
lots about one (1) acre in size to the north, and anticipated Low Density Residential
development to the east. The area is within the shoreland district for Kegan Lake and
therefore has an ordinance requiring open space and additional setbacks from the lake. It is
anticipated that the area will develop predominately with single family homes to transition
from the urban levels of development to the south and east to the rural neighborhoods to
the north. Small lot single family homes or multiple family units less than four (4) units per
building may be considered if that form of development provides for increased open space
preservation and wetland /shoreland protection while not exceeding a gross density of three
(3) units per acre.
The Transitional Residential land outside of the MUSA is not anticipated to be developed
within the 2030 Land Use Plan provided the individual septic systems continue to function
without causing health concerns for the wells and wetlands. The City has a plan for
providing municipal sanitary sewer service to the Transitional Residential land outside the
59
MUSA if health concerns from failing septic systems arise. It is anticipated that the
underdeveloped properties within the Transitional Residential areas would develop to urban
densities if municipal sanitary sewer service is installed to supplement the costs of providing
services to the existing Transitional Residential residents.
Low Density Residential (LDR)
Purpose: Low Density Residential housing is the predominant land use by area within the
MUSA boundary. Low Density Residential housing is typically single family housing or
townhouses with few units per building. The houses usually contain multiple bedrooms,
bathrooms, and garage stalls per unit. Low Density Residential land provides housing
suitable for families with children, and as such, should be located close to schools, churches,
public parks, and neighborhood commercial.
Location Criteria: Street frontage and within the MUSA.
Minimum Requirements for Development: Low Density Residential subdivisions are
expected to be provided with the full urban infrastructure, such as sidewalks, neighborhood
parks, and streets with good access and interconnectivity. Attention should be paid to
pedestrian and bicycle transportation to provide access for children to schools, churches,
and public parks.
Utilities: Municipal water and sanitary sewer are required.
Typical Uses: Single family homes; duplexes; townhomes with four (4) or less units per
building; churches; elementary and secondary schools; private recreation spaces maintained
by homeowner associations; and public parks.
Density: One (1) to five (5) units per acre
Appropriate Zoning: R1 Low Density Residential
Limited Secondary Zoning: R2 Moderate Density Residential; R1A Low Density
Residential within subdivisions that were developed prior to 1980
Medium Density Residential (MDR)
Purpose: Medium Density Residential land uses provide almost half of the total housing
units that will be developed between 2008 and 2030, while providing only a quarter of the
currently undeveloped residential area. To provide the level of density within Medium
Density Residential neighborhoods, individual yards outside of the units are typically not
included. As opposed to Low Density Residential, these developments incorporate many
common features outside the units, such as yards, driveways, maintenance, and recreational
space.
Location Criteria: Frontage onto collector and local streets and within the MUSA. Medium
Density Housing works well in mixed uses development and adjacent to all land uses except
industrial.
Minimum Requirements for Development: Common private recreational opportunities
should be provided within each residential development to compensate for the lack of
private yard space per housing unit. Due to the density, individual garages should have
access to private streets or driveways to limit the number of curb cuts onto public local
street. Limiting the number of curb cuts will provide the maximum amount of public
parking spaces on the public street frontages. Residential subdivisions are expected to be
provided with the full urban infrastructure, such as sidewalks, neighborhood parks, and
streets with good access and interconnectivity. Attention should be paid to pedestrian and
bicycle transportation to provide access for children to schools, churches, and public parks.
Utilities: Municipal water and sanitary sewer are required.
60
Typical Uses: Single family homes or detached townhomes on smaller lots; duplexes;
townhomes with three (3) of more units per building; churches; elementary and secondary
schools; private recreation spaces maintained by homeowner associations; and public parks.
Density: Five (5) to ten (10) units per acre
Appropriate Zoning: R3 Medium Density Residential
Limited Secondary Zoning: R2 Moderate Density Residential
High Density Residential (HDR)
Purpose: The intent of the High Density Residential district is to accommodate many of the
life cycle housing options not addressed within the Low Density or Medium Density
Residential land uses. Senior and assisted living development for the increasing aging
population, along with affordable rental or ownership units for new graduates or young
families, often require greater densities than are allowed within the low or medium density
neighborhoods. High density residential housing shall be constructed of the same or better
building materials and have access to the same recreational, institutional, and commercial
amenities as the other residential uses.
Location Criteria: Frontage onto collector and local streets and within the MUSA. High
Density Housing works well in mixed uses development and adjacent to most land uses
except industrial
Minimum Requirements for Development: Common private recreational opportunities
should be provided within each residential development to compensate for the lack of
private yard space per housing unit. Care will need to be taken to buffer between high
density and low density residential due to the difference in scale of the uses. Residential
subdivisions are expected to be provided with the full urban infrastructure, such as
sidewalks, neighborhood parks, and streets with good access and interconnectivity.
Attention should be paid to pedestrian and bicycle transportation to provide access for
children to schools, churches, and public parks.
Utilities: Municipal water and sanitary sewer are required.
Typical Uses: Townhomes with six (6) to twelve (12) units per building; multiple story
apartment or condominium buildings; churches; elementary and secondary schools; private
recreation spaces maintained by homeowner associations; and public parks.
Density: Ten (10) to twenty -four (24) units per acre
Appropriate Zoning. R4 High Density Residential
Limited Secondary Zoning: R3 Medium Density Residential
Downtown (DT)
Purpose: This land use designation is intended to provide for the variety of land uses that
make a successful downtown. These uses include the civic functions of government,
education, and gathering spaces, as well as the variety of uses that would allow residents to
live, work, shop and recreate all within downtown. The focus of this land use designation
will be to regulate the performance standards of properties and buildings (such as building
materials and appearance; shared parking; and pedestrian focused streets and building
frontages) over the segregation of land uses that typically occur in the other land use
designations within the Comprehensive Plan.
Location Criteria: The downtown area is roughly bounded from one block west of South
Robert Street, to the railroad tracks on the east, and from 143r Street East on the north to
just short of County Road 42 on the south.
61
Minimum Requirements for Development: This land use designation is more concerned
about the appearance and performance of buildings and properties within downtown rather
than the uses that actually occupy the buildings. Land uses that can meet the performance
standards described by the Development Framework for Downtown Rosemount, the Downtown Design
Guidelines, and the Zoning Ordinance should be allowed to develop downtown.
Utilities: Municipal water and sanitary sewer are required.
Typical Uses: Public buildings; elementary and secondary schools; libraries; churches;
gathering places; parks; townhouses; apartments; condominiums; retail; restaurants; bars; and
offices.
Appropriate Zoning: A newly created DT Downtown or MU Mixed Use zoning district;
C2 Downtown Commercial; P Public and Institutional;
Limited Secondary Zoning: R3 Medium Density Residential; R4 High Density
Residential; C4 General Commercial
Neighborhood Commercial (NC)
Purpose: This land use designation is intended to provide areas for commercial businesses
that focus their services to the surrounding residential neighborhoods.
Location Criteria: The size of each Neighborhood Commercial district is intended to be less
than five (5) acres in size. The district should be located adjacent to collector or arterial
streets, but the access to the commercial area should be equally focused on pedestrians and
bicyclists as the automobile.
Minimum Requirements for Development: The development of these commercial areas is
dependant on an existing or developing residential neighborhood, a developed street
network, and a system of sidewalks and trails.
Utilities: Municipal water and sanitary sewer are required.
Typical Uses: Restaurants; retail; gas stations; convenience stores; and personal services.
Appropriate Zoning. Cl Convenience Commercial
Limited Secondary Zoning. C4 General Commercial
Community Commercial (CC)
Purpose: This land use designation is intended to provide retail, professional offices, and
personal services that serve the daily and weekly needs of the residents of Rosemount.
Location Criteria: The size of each Community Commercial district is intended to be at least
50 acres or greater in size. Close proximity to arterial streets is needed for visibility while
individual business accesses shall be provided predominantly from collector, local, or private
streets.
Minimum Requirements for Development: Traffic patterns within the Community
Commercial district are intended to be served through frontage roads, backage roads, and
cross access easements that supplement the collector and local street network. Traffic
patterns should also be designed to adequately serve automobiles, delivery vehicles,
pedestrians and bicyclists throughout the district.
Utilities: Municipal water and sanitary sewer are required.
Typical Uses: Retail; offices; personal services; restaurants; gas stations; and auto oriented
businesses not requiring outdoor storage.
Appropriate Zoning: C4 Community Commercial
Limited Secondary Zoning. C3- Highway Commercial
62
Regional Commercial (RC)
Purpose: This land use designation is intended to provide commercial opportunities for
businesses that have a regional draw; businesses that have a product that residents need to
purchase, rent, or lease ann»ally or less often; or auto oriented businesses that require
outdoor storage.
Location Criteria: The size of districts intended for auto orientated businesses may be as
small as 10 acres, while the size of districts intended for businesses with a regional draw
should be a minimum of 50 acres. Auto orientated business district should be located along
arterial roads, while regional draw districts should be located at the intersections or
interchanges of principal arterial roads.
Minimum Requirements for Development: Frontage and backage road systems.
Utilities: Municipal water and sanitary sewer are required.
Typical Uses: Hotels; theaters; big box retail; post secondary education; vehicle sales and
rentals; auto repair garages; tool repair; machinery sales; contractor yards; and retail.
Appropriate Zoning: C3 Highway Commercial
Limited Secondary Zoning: C4 General Commercial
Two Regional Commercial districts are provided within the Land Use Plan: an approximately
20 acre district bounded by South Robert Trail, Canada Circle, and the Union Pacific rail
line; and an approximately 350 acre district surrounding the intersection of County Road 42
and US Highway 52.
The 20 acre Regional Commercial district is intended for auto oriented businesses. This
district provides an area for the auto orientated businesses currently located downtown, or
the contractor businesses located southwest of County Road 42 and South Robert Trail, can
be relocated.
The 350 acre Regional Commercial district is intended for businesses with a regional draw or
with products that are sold annually or less often. Big box retail, theaters, or hotels are
appropriate uses in this area, as well as an area for existing vehicle sales businesses in other
parts of the City to relocate.
Business Park (BP)
Purpose: The intent of the Business Park district is to develop businesses with a large
number of employees, wages that support an entire family, and constructed of high quality
buildings that provide both beauty and tax base to the community. Establishments within
the business park are intended to have little or no outdoor storage, with the majority of the
business activities occurring completely indoors.
Location Criteria: The size of each Business Park district is intended to be greater than 150
acres in size. The district should be located adjacent to heavily traveled arterial roads to
provide both visibility and access to these major employment centers.
Minimum Requirements for Development: Within the MUSA and with an improved access
to a collector and /or arterial road to serve the district. The street network within the
business park should be designed to accommodate truck and freight traffic while also
providing sidewalks and pedestrian improvements for employees to use during breaks and
lunch periods.
Utilities: Municipal water and sanitary sewer are encouraged. Private well and septic systems
may be permitted as an interim system before municipal water and sanitary sewer are
63
available provided an appropriate septic area is located and infrastructure is installed to
connect to when utilities are at the development's boundary.
Typical Uses: Office; retail and office warehouses; research laboratories; post secondary
education; distributors; and manufacturing.
Appropriate Zoning: BP Business Park
Limited Secondary Zoning: C4 General Commercial near intersections of major roads; LI
T ight Industrial adjacent to industrial planned areas
Light Industrial (LI)
Purpose: The intent of the Light Industrial district is to provide an opportunity for high
paying manufacturing, assembly, or wholesaling jobs that require less intense land
development along with some outdoor storage. Light industrial businesses are expected to
be constructed of quality building materials and for uses that do not generate the external
noises, smells, vibrations, or similar nuisances normally associated with medium or heavy
industrial uses.
Location Criteria: Light Industrial land uses are intended to buffer general industrial lands
uses from commercial or residential. The size of each Light Industrial district is intended to
be a minimum of 60 acres in size and located with access to arterial and major collector
roads.
Minimum Requirements for Development: Within the MUSA and with an access to an
arterial or major collector road. The street network should be designed to accommodate
truck and freight traffic. Pedestrian access shall be accommodated through the city, county
or regional trail corridors.
Utilities: Municipal water and sanitary sewer are encouraged. Private well and septic systems
may be permitted as an interim system before municipal water and sanitary sewer are
available provided an appropriate septic area is located and infrastructure is installed to
connect to when utilities are at the development's boundary.
Typical Uses: Manufacturing; assembly; professional services; laboratories; general repair
services; contractor offices; post secondary trade or vocational schools; public buildings; and
warehousing.
Appropriate Zoning: LI Light Industrial
Limited Secondary Zoning: BP Business Park adjacent business park, commercial, or
residential planned areas; GI General Industrial adjacent to general industrial planned areas
General Industrial (GI)
Purpose: The intent of the General Industrial designation is to provide an opportunity for
employment with wages that can support an entire family while the businesses typically have
a lower tax base per acre than other commercial and industrial uses. General industrial
businesses normally generate noises, smells, vibrations, and truck traffic that can be
disturbing to non industrial land uses. General industrial land should not be located next to
residential developments. Topography, landscaping, less intense land uses, or other forms of
buffering shall be used to transition between general industrial property and residential,
recreational, or institutional land uses.
Location Criteria: The size of each General Industrial district is intended to be greater than
400 acres in size. Access to the district should occur along arterial or major collector roads.
To provide the greatest buffer to the residents traveling the arterial or major collector
roadways from the nuisance generated by the industries, the least intense and highest quality
buildings and structures should be located adjacent to the roadways.
64
Minimum Requirements for Development: Development is encouraged to occur within the
MUSA, but is not required. Due to the large size of each industrial facility, it is anticipated
that the majority of the traffic circulation shall occur on private roads within the industrial
sites. Any public streets constructed within the general industrial district should be designed
to accommodate truck and freight traffic. Any rail service to general industrial businesses
shall be designed with switching and storage yards interior to the site to minimize the
number of rail crossings of public streets and the frequency of train schedules. Pedestrian
access shall be limited to the city, county or regional trail corridors with appropriate safety
and security measures.
Utilities: Municipal water and sanitary sewer are encouraged. Private well and septic systems
may be permitted as an interim system before municipal water and sanitary sewer are
available provided an appropriate septic area is located and infrastructure is installed to
connect to when utilities are at the development's boundary.
Typical Uses: Manufacturing; assembly; laboratories; contractor offices; trucking and freight
terminals; warehousing; and wholesaling.
Appropriate Zoning: GI General Industrial
T.imited Secondary Zoning: LI Light Industrial adjacent to other land uses; HI Heavy
Industrial shall be provided sparingly and only to allow the development or improvement of
the four heavy industrial businesses.
Heavy Industrial zoning is limited to developed areas of the four heavy industrial businesses.
The City does not 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 Industrial
zoning district, a Planned Unit Development master plan for the business expansion must
first be approved. The Planned Unit Development master plan shall 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 to
prevent premature expansion of the zoning district. The rezoning of additional property to
Heavy Industrial shall only occur immediately prior to an expansion of the business per its
approved Planned Unit Development master plan.
Waste Management (WM)
Purpose: The intent of the Waste Management district is to accommodate the need for the
management of waste generated by society while regulating the inherent environmental
problems associated with waste management. It is in the public interest to explore all
available options of waste management before expanding the waste management district for
additional landfilling.
Location Criteria: In an appropriate location to address the problems and nuisances
associated with waste management.
Minimum Requirements for Development: Waste management practices that meet or
exceed all county, state, and federal waste management regulations.
Utilities: Private wells and septic systems are required.
Typical Uses: Landfills; recycling centers; and waste -to- energy production.
Appropriate Zoning. WM Waste Management
Limited Secondary Zoning: None
65
Public /Institutional (PI)
Purpose: The intent of the Public /Institutional district is to accommodate the civic,
religious, governmental, and educational needs of the community. Often, institutional uses
are constructed at a much larger scale than the surrounding residential uses. Care is needed
to buffer the conflicts between the uses while maintaining accessibility from the
neighborhood. Performance measures such as setbacks, landscaping, site grading, and
quality building materials may need to be increased compared to the surrounding uses to
provide the needed buffering.
Location Criteria: There is no size requirement for a Public /Institutional district and the
districts are anticipated to be dispersed throughout the community, particularly adjacent to
residential uses. Institutional uses should be located adjacent to collector or arterial roads.
Minimum Requirements for Development: Development is encouraged to occur within the
MUSA. The main access to the institutional use should occur directly from a collector or
minor arterial roadway. Pedestrian access to and throughout the site should be emphasized
to allow the surrounding neighborhood access to the site.
Utilities: Municipal water and sanitary sewer are encouraged. Private well and septic systems
may be permitted for institutions that have an appropriate area for septic management.
Typical Uses: Schools (elementary, secondary, or post secondary); churches; cemeteries;
public buildings; civic uses; recreational open spaces; and public parks.
Appropriate Zoning: P Public and Institutional
Limited Secondary Zoning: R1 Low Density Residential in areas adjacent residential
planned uses
Parks and Open Space (POS)
Purpose: As Rosemount becomes more urbanized, it is particularly important to ensure that
residents have an opportunity to recreate outdoors and in open spaces to connect with
nature. The Parks and Open Space designation is intended to provide a wide variety of
recreational and open space opportunities from ball fields to nature preserves.
Location Criteria: Dispersed throughout the residential neighborhoods. Land that contains
significant or unique natural resources should be considered for open space preservation.
Minimum Requirements for Development: Varies per type of recreational opportunity.
Community parks and outdoor recreational complexes are encouraged to be located along
collector streets and served with municipal sewer and water, while neighborhood parks or
mini -parks may only require local street connections. Non recreational open space may only
require an unimproved driveway to the site.
Utilities: Municipal water and sanitary sewer are encouraged. Private well and septic systems
may be permitted for large parks or recreational centers that have the appropriate land area.
Typical Uses: Recreational open space; non recreational open spaces such as nature
preserves or wildlife management areas; and public parks.
Appropriate Zoning: P Public and Institutional
Limited Secondary Zoning. The zoning district of the adjacent residential neighborhood.
Floodplain (FP)
Purpose: The intent of the Floodplain district is to regulate the land that is inundated during
the 100 year flood event of the Mississippi River. It is in the public interest to limit the uses
within the floodplain to minimize property damage and public safety concerns during flood
events.
Location Criteria: Within the 100 year flood elevation of the Mississippi River.
66
Minimum Requirements for Development: Development within the floodplain is limited to
river dependent commercial operations or the recreational use of the river.
Utilities: Utilities are discouraged with the floodplain except for major transmission
crossings.
Typical Uses: Barge facilities, recreation facilities, accessory uses for businesses and
residences (such as parking lots, lawns, porches, and docks)
Density: No residences are allowed within the floodplain
Appropriate Zoning: FP Floodplain
Limited Secondary Zoning: None
Redevelopment
The City of Rosemount has over 150 years of history and, as a result, there are many
properties within the City that have been impacted by previous development. Downtown
Rosemount, the South Robert Trail corridor, UMore Park (the former Gopher Ordnance
Works), and the industrial east side are all areas that have fifty or more years of development
history. Abandoned and demolished buildings, former dump sites, and other environmental
concerns exist in these areas. It is in the public interest to address, clean up, and redevelop
these areas instead of ignoring them and developing only farm fields and vacant sites.
The City, in cooperation with other government agencies, has an interest in seeing that the
sites with environmental concerns are addressed and redeveloped into their full potential.
The redevelopment of these properties not only eliminates the environmental concerns from
worsening in the future, but also adds tax base, employment opportunities, and housing to
the community. The City will work with the other governmental agencies to assist land
owners in redeveloping their properties that have environmental issues.
Interim Uses
There are a number of uses that are beneficial to a growing community, such as aggregate
mining or asphalt plants, that may create nuisances that are incompatible with residential
neighborhoods. These uses can often occur on property that is years away from developing,
but the City has the interest to ensure that the incompatible uses cease or relocate as
development approaches. In other cases, land owners are looking for a use that can make a
profit other than agriculture before development occurs, such as paint ball courses, golf
courses, or other outdoor recreation operations.
These uses can often be approved through an interim use permit which allows the uses to
occur on a temporary basis, which can be in excess of ten years. The City shall discourage
incompatible interim uses from locating within the 2020 MUSA and shall require that all
interim use permits for incompatible uses can expire when development approaches. A
reclamation plan shall be required of all applicable interim uses to ensure that orderly
development can occur after the interim use has ceased to operate.
67
Land Use Element Goals and Policies
1. Manage the rate of development that occurs within the City.
a. Discourage the development of property that would require the extension of
urban service through undeveloped properties.
b. Deny the subdivision or rezoning of land that lacks adequate infrastructures,
such as collector streets, public utilities, parks, or public safety services.
2. Ensure that Interim Uses allow for productive use of land before development
occurs but does not prevent or inhibit the orderly development of land.
a. Gravel mining operations shall be required to have an approved reclamation
plan that allows development to occur per the Land Use, Transportation,
Utilities, and Parks and Open Space Elements.
b. Asphalt plants and similar potentially incompatible interim uses shall be
adequately screened, buffered, and /or located as far from residential property
as possible and may be required to relocate when residential property is
developed per the Land Use Plan.
c. Discourage Interim Uses from locating within the 2020 MUSA.
3. Create specific neighborhood plans to guide the development expected in unique
areas of the City.
a. Implement the Development Framework for Downtown Rosemount.
b. Work with the University of Minnesota and its consultants and /or
development partners to create a plan for the potential mixed used
redevelopment of the UMore Park property.
c. Create a specific area plan for the development and redevelopment of the
commercial properties along South Robert Trail from County Road 42 to
County Road 46.
d. Create a specific area plan for the development of the area surrounding the
intersection of US Highway 52 and County Road 42.
e. Consider the development of additional specific area plans as opportunities
with large land owners become available or if residential development is
imminent east of US Highway 52.
f. Encourage the preparation of environmental review documents to evaluate
large land areas for environment and infrastructural impacts and find a
solution before development occurs.
4. Provide appropriate land uses to create a diversified economy.
a. Encourage the development of office buildings within the Business Park and
Community Commercial designations to provide a high intensity of
employees and tax base per acre.
b. The four Heavy Industrial businesses within the City shall submit Planned
Unit Developments to the City that illustrate the development plans of their
businesses.
c. The Heavy Industrial zoning district shall only be expanded when a Heavy
Industrial business expands in conformance with adopted Planned Unit
Development.
68
5. Provide appropriate transitions between land uses.
a. General Industrial land uses should not be located next to residential
development. Topography, landscaping, less intense land uses, or other
forms buffering shall be used to transition between General Industrial land
and residential, recreational, or institutional land uses.
b. The area of transitional residential between Dodd Boulevard, South Robert
Trail, and 132n Street West will transition between the medium density
residential to the south and east; the low density residential to the west; and
the rural residential to the north. It is anticipated that this area may exceed
three (3) units per acre in density.
c. The transitional residential area may receive a Municipal Urban Service Area
expansion if the residents request the expansion or if there are septic system
failures that create health concerns.
d. Landscaping, topography, additional setbacks, or other forms of buffering
shall be used between conflicted land uses and along major collector or
arterial street frontages.
6. Encourage the redevelopment of blighted, nuisance, contaminated, or
underdeveloped property.
a. Work with Dakota County Environmental Management, Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency, Metropolitan Council, Department of
Employment and Economic Development, or other applicable agencies to
leverage funds, resources, and expertise to redevelop property with
environmental concerns.
b. Work with the University of Minnesota, the Department of the Army,
Dakota County Environmental Management, and other applicable agencies
to ensure that UMore Park and the former Gopher Ordnance Works have
their environmental issues addressed during any potential UMore Park
development.
c. Use the resources available to the City through its City Council and Port
Authority to redevelop blighted, nuisance, contaminated, or underdeveloped
property.
d. Encourage the creation of development response action plans (DRAP) per
the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency guidelines for former dumps and
other properties with environmental concerns.
7. Encourage and promote sustainable development, green building, and resource
conservation.
a. Consider requiring green building standards or energy conservation practices
for developments that receive public funding and /or assistance.
b. Provide education and resources to residents and businesses about available
energy conservation and resource management measures.
c. Encourage the use of Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
(LEED), Minnesota GreenStar, Minnesota Sustainable Building Guidelines,
EnergyStar, or other sustainable building practices during development.
69
CHAPTER 8: IMPLEMENTATION
Pursuant to Metropolitan Land Use Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 473, this chapter
addresses the Implementation Program requirement of the Comprehensive Plan. Minnesota
Statute 473.858 Subd. 4 requires that the Implementation Program consist of three elements:
(1) a description of official controls, addressing at least the matters of zoning, subdivision,
water supply, and private sewer systems, and a schedule for the preparation, adoption,
and administration of such controls;
(2) a capital improvement program for transportation, sewers, parks, water supply, and open
space facilities; and
(3) a housing implementation program, including official controls to implement the housing
element of the land use plan, which will provide sufficient existing and new housing to
meet the local unit's share of the metropolitan area need for low and moderate income
housing.
OFFICIAL CONTROLS
The City of Rosemount has numerous official controls to ensure that the Goals and Policies
within the Comprehensive Plan are implemented. These controls include Rosemount's
Zoning Map, Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance, and Planned Unit Development
Ordinance. Additionally, there are a number of ordinances and plan that protect the City's
natural resources, such as the Shoreland Ordinance, Stormwater Management Plan, Wetland
Management Plan, Wetland Management Ordinance and Overlay District, and the
Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area Plana and Overlay District. The City will review
these plans and ordinance to ensure to they implement the Comprehensive Plan and will
make amendment to the official controls as necessary.
The Comprehensive Plan, particularly the Housing and Land Use chapters, identify a
number of areas in which the official controls should be reviewed. The characteristics of
each land use designation are described in great detail, including their appropriate zoning
districts, within the Land Use chapter. The City will review its official controls to ensure to
they implement the Comprehensive Plan and will make amendment to the official controls
as necessary.
70
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN (CIP)
Background
Historically, the City of Rosemount has usually had some form of 5 -year CIP in place to utilize
for its capital improvements. There have been times where just a single year's capital
improvements have been addressed and funded. As the City continues to grow, we believe that
the careful development and continuous utilization of a realistic Capital Improvement Plan is
essential to the proper management of the City. As we looked at developing a new 5 -year CIP, it
became apparent that the dilemma that the City of Rosemount faces is one of continued growth
combined with restoration /reconstruction of the older portions of our city. This being the case,
it was almost impossible to develop a plan for a 5 -year period that was very realistic. As work
continued on the plan, we decided to explore the possibility of looking out farther and
developing a longer plan that would more realistically allow us to plan for the City's future. What
has evolved is the following 10 -year Capital Improvement Plan. We believe that great strides
have been made to more accurately plan for the future of the City of Rosemount. This
document is only a working guide that is utilized by the City Council and its staff to prepare for
the future. The first year of the plan will be included as part of the formal budget that is
prepared yearly as part of our Truth -in- Taxation process with the following years developed as a
working tool for future years' discussions.
General /Administrative Description
The CIP provides for specific funding of items, the nature of which is not considered "current"
in their use or life expectancy. These items are generally of a higher estimated cost than $5,000
and will have a life expectancy of 3 years or greater. The source of funding for these
expenditures is typically the general tax levy. In some instances, other funding is utilized. For
example, beginning in 1996, revenues received from user fees are being designated in various CIP
funds for capital improvement /equipment purchases. If these revenues are realized, the
equipment or project will be completed and if the revenue is not realized the equipment will not
be purchased. Individual departments are designated for each item proposed for purchase in this
plan.
Types of Capital Improvement Funds
Another area of change for the CIP is the implementation of three separate funds to isolate and
better track the types of capital improvements being planned for. The following briefly describes
each of the three:
Building CIP Fund This fund is used to account for the on -going capital improvements and
possible additions to government buildings.
Street CIP Fund This fund is used to account for the on -going street construction and
reconstruction projects within the City and all other major maintenance items related to both
paved and unpaved streets including, but not limited to, street lights, signal lights, sidewalks and
gravel road resurfacing.
Equipment CIP Fund This fund is used to account for the on -going replacement of and
additions to City equipment.
71
:::illiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
1 EE111111111111 111113II1E11010000D111
IIIIIHHIIIIlHIOIIIIIIOhIOhI 1
IIIIIIII1111IIIIIIIIIIIIIIILIIIIIIIIL
11111111111111111111111111 i E 11111111 i
IIIIIIIIIIlIIIIIIIIllIIIIIIIIIIIII
1111111111111111111111111111111111111
1IHIHIHHHHIIOIllHHIIOIIHH
HIHhIIIllHhIHIIIIIIIIIOhIIIIHH
1111111111111111111111111111111111111
L. 1IlIIIHIIIIHIIIIIlIIIHH[
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII cg
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII1IIIuiIIi
o
a
IHHOIHHHHHHHHIlIHHIHI
1 II _y
i I 1 1
o iI
v
p W E 4 U m I f i! m i o g i iW'o g
Y 8 w m U w N m r O 8 m W „2E
G 1 4Q
8 r C J C m y
eNit`SO x m!,§ a o o N Km 3 m c'$ g .2�'
1 1! V o i4, o '1 m m l al 1 'd c w$ Evc1 €'Es
gg Oy E E U 2 :8 0 w o I c .g,
r gEtmi33 EC7 •�Q Fd d E 2 '2 m m n�
O mUUU'R L° E g oa E< E w m' m E d 2 E .t LL n
�o p C�3�m n� .�a�o— O�g g¢�m g1 .Q� .nor m'9 �`0
m2It wi E �1 cEo n i 4
k o E E E. i o m. .-1 o S O g (n 2 m c' 8 c m a
m 55. aU.0 E E. i Z i d a' ,5 .8 m i litcl m i gyg W
:F (r t U w w w °M E Ti c Z 2 E y i5 y r
e W F m.o m r m m 8 Q ro t a;i m ee w o U 1 e 2 W F” `m S `m m m
m l- Z w U w 'S an d M 1 8 3 8 i E rg l Q
sag88�, €�mn a m �mm �U_LLLLOSm�'O��iOLLn
1000000000000000000000000000
t 1WIIIWIWWIIWBIIIIIIWB11W1W11WWW111111 R R Q, a
IA A 4 i• iiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiIIIIII
III
11IIIIIHaIuuIIuIlGI:
1111111111111111111111iliggiliiiii
bilN11115111111111111111111111111111111111111i
741111111111111111111111110111111111111111111E
Y 11111111111111111111111E111111111111111111E
v 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
t 1HHIIIIIIHhIHIHIHHIOHhIHIHhIIII1
11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
f 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111i
1111111111111111181111111111111111111111111 E
E 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 rn
1111111111ENEMIENIIIiiiiiiiiIIIIINE
L 111111 1 1
M__. IIIIII
IIIII IIIII
IIII IIII
IIII
IIIIIIII
111111110111111111111111111111111111111111B
IIIIII
:1111111 II
IIIII IIIIII�IIIIIII
��.�w� �IIIIIII I
1
m
fin 2G ffi i E.
5 iE to T E 1 m }a ow •0 m eh o
g 1 m4 26 ag &$ld- m ieai 1 II
'E 'o ggm qg S m .2 8 g 8 .8 o., �HE o i -r C 8 LLa m a m ac m
r Ns ti w L5 -E: i0EEmc wv l -a IT. 2 20.2$' @.2<5 pm t gm w E'm a 3H m c $o t o i$ °�`m m m`m 4 3" CfnN�N' nma' a� iii zww�v cg na m� m33r nc AglArAg E H
Il HHHHI
I IIIlO111ii11111i1g10i11:i1Miiiioiloiil g
Ut-LA Pa dE E EE
waiiiiiiiiliiiiiiiiiiiiii::::::::iiii
L]ijIH ii ii
limimnimillimmil
:11111111111111111111111111111111111
c
,___„1
IIHII IIIIIlIIlIIIIlIIHIIIIIIII�
r„..______.
IIIHIIIIAE1IHIIIIIIHIIIIHIHILJ
��.1_
t,
.1111111iEllliiiiiiiiiElE111111111111B
q
iIIIIIIiiEEE1111111111E5115Pi222111
18 1 's
7. F 1 5 ij q if i
'E F 2S id le�a$s i
�IHWOHIHHI l�l a E u
0.0e-....... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S S f o o o o o o rn
3:Y y
�p 0000000 O
88:2`8',8_88_8_8_8_888888888.8_8_8_8A8_8 0
et_ g� O m O m O O u'i u N, c0 m m
o O O N M O A N 8 e- N< fD O N [7 M S M
M 7 M
E `E' EO U'a-vQ p Ski
O S 0 S S p S E S 8 O 8 S 8
010, O N O M N M
h N S S S a, N N
0 0 0 0 N p
N O O aO E M
:.z
8 8
8 0
AA A
eg
88 8
o g
c
8 8
8 g
0
8
Y F m
N N
8
N 8
O ill
888* :88 8888888 8 Mil 8
O C S LL S n O' N Y N g
88 8 8 8
8 8" A 2 1
w
8 8
4
N N
e L° m m m w o 0 0 0$ o T. 0
O X MLTMMommaaaaaaaaaa aa a a a amaa
C w
322 OIII f
Q s _a awg
g vU Egg
ligli gt
ii> E 1 W-.4 a S rtp E m s gS .2 .b_ e E E r 3 r n E a ci a E" z fi g S
ssIgg Bt otti 5 $2 km cLf8RO$ g I 3 o F o E� xm
w °E 'B z`�Y 222 f r 2 c e s
2
1s+cYcS'c°3ci8 a i eWIaB1 4 52 "11 e rn °,_-m gt
{e�K m tnEgWSit yg y o ,,z`AA p�ffvgEtggs m �SQ gm. •Q �i 'Qm
E�+F
00 gg 5 a= m t'y 8 G C2 L g fA tJ" i C G g 6 g 6. 6 t g C 0_ N W
v c v 'g O v c K o� 8 m e t m E A 8 g Yr c `o L
8'$wwwww�o� EEi�daa�W E�'�rj �sE 0,2 .2 0 ,2
z 1 m g
Z'o g p m e u U2 re m-2 `mgge.m 2
d N B o o 8 o. Q g GS E W 8
0 E H °E
c d 8. p°
0 p o U U m m L^ o m c a Lr
a' �NNN a a F-Ha �ZlA a' W W H f D a a U �N7 �UU t0 V IL O
r
N N N N 04 N N N N 4- 4- 04 04 4- •-n 04 N 4- N N N 4- N N N N• N N
p p p p p p p p p p p p p
4 ,h- N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N,� v
C
7;" -illiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiilli
Z1111111111111111111:11:::::::::111
!IIIIIIIIIIHhIIII[ 1E11i111IIE
II iiiIiiiiIIIIII w
rS 11111111111111111111E11111111111U
L IIIIIIOHIOhIIIIIIOhIIOHI
I
ioInnInunuuIlIonuul1
IIIIHIIIIHIIHHHHIIIIIIIHII
111111111111111111111111111111111
111111111111111111111111111111111i
111111111111 111111111111111111111
IlflhIIlHhIEUIIIHhIIIIIIIIIHhIS
LLL
lHhhIIIIIIflhIIIIIIIIIIIIHhIIi
n111111111EEIIEEEEIEIIIIIIIIIIIIIE
1
44 p .2.2.g_2
r 114 ligR
II i U o E p o
C M M
it i2
e m
2. 'S e N w fi y=
g S i E ~u.
MI B M L^ ffi 5 4 Y E m U
m �i afOi I m A U I
r 4114.1 E m m E m m n. i' W 0 8 0.431§..
m e'' 'n 2 2 -s'8858 7S0
r S2 52 Y 8trK 1 1 1 1 11 1 8
m m t.. E m z i~ r r g o mfr
ka mwKRiRi °NRi c)zre wmw° a F Uli N
-2v
1-. 7 ,-4
wi i: in iuii:iiiiiii: c ::::::iui i
ii ii i niniinnniiiinn iiii '=I��
nMnmi'
I HH lI H H HHHH IH HH I b llll liil�,,,,,,,�eses,ll I,
1 IIIIIIHHIIIIIIHIIHIII I
a .N
uut d= h 52 mt 0 1
1 1
3 l �:6
g I
im f
m ]I IIH H HHh II
Iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii111
8
'.g J N
N it It
sp p
W 8 N CO7 c+ E
N f7
il 8 8 8 0 O O 8
f` aD i'7 O o 8 20
q
Y '9 r'.-as o O
8 8
8 8
8§ 8
o 0 0
8
s 1 O
o
O
-4 O
00
S
§8§ £1111
Lei 0 O O a0 a0 N aC c
f p N
S 8 0 O
8 O ra
41. �A
Y Gp
8 O
N N
c c
CD 0000 =0
.V.. c c a b 8 c
c a a a a v a a
c4 o o o d o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
000 C70- 0- a ea. an- a et. a.dan_a.
5 s 0
4a y S C N
N o- QQ �j4'�j a
co
1 8 N 3 C E 3 C pp p
a) a) m a i y A d a) as N 8 �ppp �p
er j :ro LL a� a� lt5 g O 8 N d N NN !ac a ft I il 1I t C-. .8 t o o
10 C w w �SY
z 4 E E E Oj t9i o� 0 3 0 W y d c c
.g L a) N y O.' U a)
C p G Q Q h 3 d G O_ d —Nam �_I' E
W W W W w c� g R m tg.� pip E Y� 7 8 8 y y
s rno�NC•) a i -a'aaa aaa 8.a as IT r m g as E 2E
8,,, 0 1 O g r U
N N N N N CC U C d' (n d' CC o) d Cl. CC F H U 0 O
pm w
N N N N N N N N-- N N N N.. N N
5 N N N N t. N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N v v
ami iniiuiu :ii i ii: u ::::::oi
E1 1IIIHhI H h II HHhIIII 1
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
1IIIIIIuuIIIHhI
il
1IIIIIIIIIIIHH n niii���iii0��
I
]IflhIlIflflflflflflflflhIIi
s IluEululUE_ mm 1 0,
t,
ilk!'
-iiIiiiiiiiIiiiiiiiwi
Nklim
l w....ippin
_.-1
I II I 2 33 Iti
ee Cr* 1.
s
ii
ii l il
''''4 .1 1 N N;; N;;NN!!!!!!! Iiiiiiiiiii
F liNHIMIN
4 NNNWNNNNIII
l'illUiWWWiliiiRgIllE
tt ,,k0,..„1
Emtiiiii:liiiliiiilili
IIIIIIIIIIIII6
AUEQU1111111111111L 1
¥1111111111101111118
1HIHIHIEJIIIII E
L]lIIIIIIIIlIIIIHhIi
LFIIIIIIIIHIHIHIIU
lIIflhIIIIIIIIIIIb
-�.e IHIHIHHHHhuIi
I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIH
iIIIIlHhIIlHhIIHi F
iiiiiiigiiiui
:u t_ 4111111111L1111111L
F
55
1 1 1
Q 2
F :gi1J- 11 UJ I U '7 2 1 8
g
'MMS ZO's rl. 1 1 i 111
fi`” 3 .5F 7i E 1d o ]�'Q-` t
illillal y 2S N p_ N R N N C7
LA IIIIIIIIIIII01111
I
ra5ANIIIINWIIIIIIIIIII
-4r ii iiiiiiiiiiigillg110111
1111111111111111::11111111
iiiiniiiiuiiiiiiniu
11 Y 1111111111 11119
iiiiiiuiuiuuuiiiiiuuin
11111111111111111111111111
00
1 IIIIII H hIIIIII I VII� �I,
e I i 0 3 c
=s 1 1 11A1 111111,w
d iii 1
R
0 a= 2.
ill 1 1 iiii!
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii11111111 a
1
HOUSING IMPLEMENTAION PROGRAM
The Housing Implementation Program is described within the over arching goals in the
Executive Summary, the Housing Chapter, the residential land uses in the Land Uses
Chapter, and the Land Use Map. Over- arching Goal 2 states to provide increased housing
opportunities and a balance of life style housing. The Housing Chapter describes the
existing and needed housing types, including senior housing and housing at all densities.
The Housing Goals and Policies, particularly Goals 4, 5, and 6, describe the programs and
policies that the City will implement to achieve the increased housing opportunities and life
style housing. The residential land use designation descriptions describe which type of
housing are appropriate in which designation and how they are expected to be developed.
The Land Use Map shows the areas in which the various residential land uses are allowed.
The 2030 Land Use Map shows a mix of low density, medium density, and high density
residential land use throughout the City. Within the Land Use Element, it is demonstrated
that the amount and mixture of residential land uses show on the map with met, and often
exceed, the Metropolitan Council residential density requirements and Livable Community
Act requirements. The City looks forward to working with the Metropolitan Council to
achieve the housing needs within Rosemount, particularly through the use of the Livable
Communities Demonstration Account grants and other programs. The City hopes that
Metropolitan Council continue to support local housing effort through their programs and
encourages the metropolitan Council to expand the fiscal resources available through these
programs.
82
4
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1: Population 7
Table 2.2: Age Groups 8
Table 2.3: Persons per Household 8
Table 2.4: Household Type 9
Table 2.5: Highest Level of Education' 9
Table 2.6: Income 9
Table 2.7: Travel Time to Work' 10
Table 3.1: Population and Households 11
Table 3.2: Residential Building Permits 11
Table 3.3: Type of Housing 12
Table 3.4: Tenure per Type of Community 12
Table 3.5: Age of Housing Unit 13
Table 3.6: Location of Senior Housing 13
Table 3.7: Housing Growth Projections 14
Table 3.8: Additional Housing Units 14
Table 4.1: Rosemount Top Ten Employers in 2007 17
Table 4.2: Comparison of Employees to Employers within Rosemount in 2004 19
Table 4.3: Rosemount Industries in 2004 19
Table 4.4: Fiscal Disparity of Select Cities Payable in 2006 25
Table 7.1: Population, Household, and Employment Forecasts 46
Table 7.2: Additional Housing Units Developed from 2020 to 2030 49
Table 7.3: 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations 50
Table 7.3: 2030 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations 53
Table 7.4: New Residential Land Uses in the 2030 Land Use Map 54
Table 7.6: 2007 2010 Residential Development 54
Table 7.7: 2011 2015 Residential Development 55
Table 7.8: 2016 2020 Residential Development 55
Table 7.9: 2021 2025 Residential Development 55
Table 7.10: 2026 2030 Residential Development 55
i
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 5.1 Community Facilities 32
Figure 5.2 Major Utility Corridors 34
Figure 6.1 Natural Areas Map 40
Figure 7.1 2020 Comprehensive Land Use Plan 47
Figure 7.2 County Road 42 US Highway 52 Corridor Land Use Plan 48
Figure 7.3 2030 Comprehensive Land Use Plan 51
Figure 7.4 2030 Land Use Plan with Roadway Network 52
ii
III
vi■
I a:
0
I 1 0
co
mill c.i
c)
z
co
to
S (c) 7/,
1.1 01 co
a a3 'a
0
1 1 6 c
4
a%
tt,
mi
P or
i
9r
L ..A.6
iftil 4,
MIIIII
ii t 1
,i.
of
or
i
Or
IN-7/A --Allri
h a
024
ji, 1
c t co 8i_l 1.—
0 1
Pig0 I'm
1
e I Mil
3 u. rG
8
iii am
L____.-,- Rol
in
T.
i k■ I.
k
i
.E
.._0,
2
T
t: 1 ophvip 1
g 2 2 dipadhrif
0 2 gi c
3 R
i R s
mac 4.t. 16
we
2
-E• o ,I rr 1 1 4_ .....a .r. t........1
ria,,V7*Al VF,P
cr)
1L- '1111k1.14-14•Ntiii:u* (ir'lli-
ca T2 8
gv H i tor itt.--it, L Q,
...v .ks,
C't I C, va,..zrea, p.
‘M 1 VA t. a
Madam si WM itieh zglilL,
1 1 I
Ta I I
A algall1■ L ,147,,V W. i
16
.1 "g I 7011" •-•"'2'.2 MAI
-F, ",q, 7 1 43
77, i
al c2 -,,1, -E 0. 4g2, rumplompapt., '4'
8 V VOW" I Ili willir 4 11W I g=galit'r,-
cL 073 2 E F ;4 14 111111 .81.1 7-1EMM:741‘Nii-
7 f E_ C' 2 'g. in_is allii .1 1 I W q.
CIL g :1 l' I,
NW t I. I ne "'M lik.1111 gQ
L- HIMMI-1111 A OF
E (5 E,c Ei f_ c i N iftw B 4&,: in r10 ffinill.k z .5-4
ft.4 si .4 91 1 Lilly 11%inif
t)
o
-14 i k rii.". i V 'd
MME
fn 92 a (5' aligftl m _taftofir:g t 7:k p N,.;.v., Ak405
0 V= 1; PM. 1 Vit,51 -0 4M .3 --r .....,415141
-lbw. ?....r.
am co
czi
II..• 0 1- 0 0 0 r dj at g
c VII
t I I FL1NTHJLLS
RESOURCES DIANES.KOEBELE
Pine Bend Refiner .DIRECTOR
Y NORTHERN TIER PUBLIC AFFAIRS
P.O. Box 64596
r Saint Paul, MN 55164 -0596
65E437.0560
Fax 651.437.0868
October 19, 2007
Eric Zweber
Senior. Planner
Community Development Department
City of"Rosemount
2875145th Street West
Rosemount, MN 55068-4997
Re: 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update 0
Dear. Eric: 0
Last fall, as the City of Rosemount finalized its amendments to the City's industrial zoning
ordinances,. Flint Hills Resources, LP urged the city to rezone and re -guide the property owned
by Flint Hills just north of 140` Street.and west of Blaine Avenue (South Parcels) to the Heavy
Industrial (HI) District. The enclosed-map highlights the South Parcels. At that time, Flint Hills
was told that the appropriate time to re -zone the South Parcels was after those parcels were re-
guided in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update. Now that the City has begun the process of
updating its comprehensive plan, I write to you on behalf of Flint Hills Resources to request that
the South Parcels be re- guided for Heavy Industrial use.
As we discussed at length during the procesq of amending the City's industrial zoning
ordinances, Flint Hills understands the City's desire to limit future development of the Pirie Bend.
Refinery to an area east of Rich Valley Boulevard and Blaine Avenue. Flint Hills has likewise
been assured that the City understands Flint Hills's,rieed for adequate space for the
development of the Pine Bend Refinery. To keep the Pine Bend Refinery east of Rich Valley
,Boulevard and Blaine Avenue, Flint Hills must be able to expand onto the South Parcels, and
thus renews its request for appropriate re- guidance of those parcels for Heavy Industrial use.
The South Parcels are currently guided AG Agricultural and in one case GI General
Industrial, They are currently zoned a mix of AGP Agricultural Preserve, GI General
Industrial, and AG Agricultural. Flint Hills proposes that as a part of the 2030 Comprehensive 0
Plan Update, the South Parcels be re- guided for Heavy Industrial use. Following that re
guidance, Flint Hills will submit a rezoning application for those parcels,to bring their zoning
into conformance with the updated Comprehensive Plan.
Eric Zweber, Senior Planner
October 19, 2007
Page 2
Finally, as I have followed the City's comprehensive planning process I noticed a discrepancy in
the Land Use Map. Based on comments from Flint Hills and a recommendation from the
Planning Commission, on July 19, 2005 the City Council approved a resolution to guide most of
the land east of Akron Avenue and north of County Road 38 as.Agricultural. The only
exceptions to this designation were two narrow parcels on Akron Avenue that were designated as
Rural Residential. Distributed at that night's City Council meeting was Co. Rd. 42/Hwy. 52
Draft Land Use Map With Proposed MUSA Change, which was consistent with the Planning
Commission's recommendation and with the Council's ultimate decision. That map, however, is
not the one that appears on the City's website on its 42/52 page. That map shows the first two
'rows of parcels along Akron Avenue as entirely Rural Residential. I wanted to call this
discrepancy to.your attention before the comprehensive planning process was too far along to
avoid any confusion.
Please contact me at 651 437 -0560 or Don Kern at 651- 437 -0762 if you have any. questions
about the proposed changes. We are also available to meet in person to discuss them. Thank
you for considering our comments.
Very truly. yours,
Diane S. Koebele I
Director, Northern Tier Public Affairs
Flint Hills Resources
Enclosure'
cc: Kim Lindquist (1,v/encl.)
Jamie Verbrugge (w /encl.)
Scott Lindemann (w /encl.)
Don Kern (w /encl.)
Walter Rockenstein (w /encl.)
e
P T c""� 5 8� €'vw I E �i. 16a� CCC�J lei I y 111J JJJJ Q m to
aG°E5 1 �"A\ f S 3 3
Y1.L g',!-.,,,-7,:.--- 3 a_� o Y S �F,u %r s0 9 SE. (1)
7
r a 3 cei i r..ranu -✓1 J /j s f, r x 1 S '2. o
'd, o a r i l f
/f fl= :4;,--__ r, c y°
ii,r,,,..:e.:.;.1 4 r! 'ci
s,.' '+'B,eGt,. a�,�p�t� u a .w v t. f i� —4-r s ;M N m
t
F m 4 k 4 ra n *A e r ,1 1 1
a ii+ r j� all s iI T za V'�'"t9s F! A t A g D
v_ D D
8 R t r 't5 Sw a P a g''��'
i 5 t' a S r�® x' �t ^tI g m i 1 c l ig
N �FT t f3 X45 4R 1 I d 'y f i' e
cif e 3`
4 K C
r y ,t ,may n s s h" r x `m
Y Ix. x 1+r .',"'J a t s y� a o g
f S r "s` z„ u a a re r it, x t
4,40y, 1 ra a y a A S :ow y m a 9
0%.* s Y T a r o k p} a :k X 7 T*.w 3 k�'' m
s i j r_ V sib oz I
'k s, ,x, z x5'7 t v
h--t b s E Y A i n O m y N
}t M1' .j d ?x
N
3 w45 nA GGh�'y 0„?..„ 3 a
4 Y' m
PM*1 61 c� n m'
f M1M 3 L\ C d t 4 p
I T Y -'v d '�Y S m
,6„, F_ ar ia,.` 3 3 'T i 's•" r n j6. A2 t S. e m a o
'Y
`ti P r J e t s ^i 1 °;rt a s 1 ti o
i t l' u ux/ -af v rt,a 1 t we' "0. s nt A i e
e t t4 d� c` ^s� e
g,'t s�b� �j5 Q �k H m
e �N A {44 04h-i k 4 j a w
:,s». P Ka� S r e ,44,-„,,,,,,,,,/,,„.4.14,, h i °aor x a
a t y es I l O
y x:4 f 1 h o
fi rte` s t ;s ,^tis. a q.LA �i7 4 �t 4R
o
m F k u I Oi
c 4 'rf^ 1 pI
u y �s s i' £e "S”' r f
na
o
m
11 OCFindustries
i:.
DEC 1 Et 2007 1
CF Industries, Inc.
Pine Bend Warehouse
5300 Pine Bend Trail
December 11, 2007 Rosemount MN, 55068 -2560
651- 437 -6191
Mr. Eric Zweber
Senior Planner, Community Development
Rosemount City Hall
2875 145th Street West
Rosemount, MN 55068 -4997
Re: 2030 Comprehensive Plan —CF Industries, 5300 Pine Bend Trail, Rosemount, MN 55068
Dear Eric:
Thank you for speaking with us at the Rosemount Comprehensive Plan Community meeting. We
appreciate the City's effort to keep us informed about the comprehensive planning process. How our
property is guided and zoned is very important to us and our planning for future growth and development.
During the re- zoning process last year, we understood that the City would be undertaking this planning
process and we are grateful that you have let us know that now is the time to address the land use
designation affecting our property. On behalf of CF Industries, Inc., I am writing to you to respectfully
request that all of the property owned by CFI in the City of Rosemount be guided as HI Heavy Industrial
under the 2030 Comprehensive Plan.
We believe that guiding all of CFI's property as HI Heavy Industrial would accomplish a number of
important goals: (I) accurately reflect how CFI is using its property, (2) recognize the importance of CFI
and its property on the agricultural community in the City of Rosemount, the State of Minnesota, and the
entire Upper Midwest, and (3) allow CFI the flexibility to expand its operations in the future to support
the growing reliance on the Upper Midwest for food and energy.
We appreciate both Mayor Droste and Director Lindquist taking the time to tour our facilities and
learning firsthand, the nature of our land use and operations. For others who have not yet visited our
facility, we welcome the opportunity to provide a tour. In the meantime, Appendix A provides a
summary of information about our use of our facility and the regional significance of our operations.
Additionally, we have carefully reviewed the 2020 Comprehensive Plan and we think that a number of
the policies in the 2020 Plan support guiding our property HI Heavy Industrial. Attached as Appendix B
are excerpts from the 2020 Comprehensive Plan that support our request.
We look forward to working with the City during this planning process. We welcome any questions that
you may have and we sincerely thank you for your time and consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
CF INDUSTRIES, INC.
Scott Dohmen
Manager, Pine Bend Warehouse
cc: Tom Mollet
Bill Droste
John Shardlow
APPENDIX A— BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The Facility is a unique, intermodal bulk commodity transport and warehouse resource benefiting the
greater agricultural community:
CFI owns approximately 382 acres in the City of Rosemount between Pine Bend Trail
and the Mississippi River.
The Facility has operated since 1966 and owned by CFI since 1972.
CFI transports almost one million tons of bulk commodities annually, consisting primarily
crop nutrients, from river -bound barges to surface -bound transport by truck or rail through
the Facility.
The Facility includes, barge terminals, several large unscreened outdoor structures, several
miles of conveyor belt systems and rail yards.
Although CFI does not refine or manufacture crop nutrients at its Facility, it does receive,
store and distribute almost one million tons of crop nutrients including anhydrous
ammonia and liquid urea ammonium nitrate (UAN) each year. Anhydrous ammonia is
classified as a hazardous chemical.
CFI operates and maintains a large industrial refrigeration system to enable the storage of
anhydrous ammonia. This refrigeration system includes two 30,000 ton storage tanks
(storage silos), six ammonia compressors totaling 1,000 horsepower, an outdoor cooling
system (condenser), several pressure vessels, a 30 million btu/hr heater used to warm the
anhydrous ammonia before loading it into trucks, a process safety flare that burns off
anhydrous ammonia vapors if the pressure gets too high in the storage tanks, and hundreds
of yards of above and below ground piping to move the ammonia, UAN and natural gas
throughout the Facility. CFI receives anhydrous ammonia either by railcar at the six spot
railcar unloading platform or by barge at the waterfront barge terminals. UAN is received
by barge at the waterfront barge terminals. Anhydrous ammonia is loaded into trucks at
one of the eight truck loading stations and UAN is loaded into trucks at one of the two
UAN truck loading stations.
The Facility occasionally operates 24 hours per day, seven days a week.
CFI utilizes over 4,000 feet of outdoor conveyor belt systems, two 70 ton conventional
cranes at the barge terminals, one 12 ton mobile crane, 200,000 tons of covered storage, 9
large loaders, 6 bucket elevators and 5 storage tanks (silos). The Facility also has
approximately 14,000 feet of rail track with 11 switches, 3 1,000 and 1 2,000
horsepower locomotives that handle the movement of approximately 5,000 railcars each
year and on average, 130 trucks per day.
Fertilizer is critical to the Nation's ability to develop ethanol and biofuels and CFI is a leading distributor
of fertilizer in the upper Midwest.
1 of every 4 Midwest farmers applies CFI's fertilizers in their field. 1 of every 5 North
American farmers uses CFI's fertilizers.
CFI distributes nearly 1 million tons of fertilizer to Minnesota, Wisconsin, North Dakota,
South Dakota, Canada and as far west as Montana each year through the Facility.
1 million tons of fertilizer would be the equivalent of
40,000 Semi Trucks
10,000 Rail Cars
670 Barges
Recently CFI has been working with Heavy Equipment transporters to allow them to use docks at the
facility to get their equipment to Upper Midwest states. One such transporter indicated that CFI and the
Facility were a competitive "Alternative to the Panama Canal."
CFI is a strong local employer, providing safe high wage/living -wage jobs that contribute to the Citv's
economic growth and tax base.
CF was named "One of America's Safest Companies" by Occupational Hazards
magazine in 2003.
More than three fourths of CFI's terminals and warehouses have more than 10 years
without a lost time accident.
12 of our 24 facilities have completed more than 10,000 consecutive days (27 plus years)
without a lost time accident.
The Pine Bend Terminal employees recently completed 15,000 consecutive days without
a lost time accident. Nearly 42 years, since the facility opened in 1966.
CFI is a Rood corporate citizen that gives back to the Community
CF Industries has joined OSHA (MN OSHA in Minnesota) to complete the rigorous
requirements for OSHA's Voluntary Protection Program and attained STAR Status at 14
of its distribution facilities.
CFI supports local educators with Classroom Minigrants each year totaling about $3,000.
Teachers are awarded grants averaging $300 for innovative programs that focus on
agriculture, the environment or water quality.
In 2006, CFI provided three days of Ammonia Suppression Training in Holden,
Louisiana for 34 firefighters, including 2 each from the Hastings and Rosemount Fire
Departments. Rosemount firefighters James Ford and Scott Helguson participated in the
training in 2000.
CFI's Distribution Facilities General Manager Fund donations have helped the first
responders in the area get needed equipment such as a computer, new pagers, High
Elevation/Water rescue equipment and provided annual support to the St. Paul Chapter of
the American Red Cross.
CFI employees actively participate in and support local activities such as the State FFA
Convention, Mississippi River Relief Big River Cleanup and Rosemount Parks
Recreation Leprechaun Days.
c
APPENDIX B
2020 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EXCERPTS
The following are excerpts from the 2020 Comprehensive Plan that support guiding CFI's property HI
Heavy Industrial in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan.
Page 9. One of the five main policies for the City's development strategy is to increase
large /heavy industrial development opportunities in eastern Rosemount.
Page 22. "Goals and Strategies" survey revealed that 25% of the residents prefer
industrial development, 24% prefer commercial, 15% prefer residential, and 12% prefer
retail. "52% favored pursuing additional heavy industrial development in the Pine Bend
area."
Page 24. "Goals" for the economy are to "foster economic development that provides
opportunities for livable -wage jobs to local residents and also builds overall wealth
within the community."
Page 25. "Strategies" for achieving its goals include: (1) creating a east -side
development plan that provides detailed guidelines for industrial development in
relationship to highway access management, local street systems, public sewer and water
services, general lot configurations, building/site design, etc., and (2) market the City's
capacity for industrial development opportunities.
Page 34 "Policy It is the City's policy to:
1. expand the Urban Service Area in eastern Rosemount to service regional -scale
industrial and waste management/processing land uses;
2. allow for the expansion of industrial development in the Pine Bend area where
municipal utilities are planned or private services are adequate;
3. require that all industrial uses within the MUSA be connected to public sewer
and water services as such services become available;
4. require that planning for industrial developments minimize environmental
impacts, land use conflicts, and visual accessibility from surrounding properties
and public streets and highways;
5. maximize land use compatibility by requiring larger setbacks, buffering,
screening and landscaping at the edges of industrial areas and along major streets
and highways; and
6. cooperate with appropriate regulatory agencies to reduce or remove industrial
uses, which are not in conformance with pollution standards.
Page 64 "Industrial Plan Background Rosemount is one of a few cities in the Twin
Cities metropolitan area that has a number of visible "heavy" industrial uses, including
Koch Refining, CF Industries, Continental Nitrogen, Endres Processing, and Spectro
Alloys.
Page 64 "Industrial Plan —The Future "The City desires to strengthen the industrial
sector of Rosemount primarily in the eastern "Pine Bend" and the business park areas."
Page 65 "Mississippi River Corridor Plan "The City also supports the continued use of
the River Corridor for industrial uses."
Page 85 "Existing Land Use" within the Mississippi River Corridor. "Land use and
development within the Corridor is directed by a number of regulatory controls, including
the City's zoning, shoreland, critical area and floodplain ordinances. The largest single
type of landowner in the Rosemount Critical Area is industry. This industrial area
,represents a continuation of similar land uses in southern Inver Grove Heights and is an
essential element in the economy of Rosemount and the region. Industrial activity is not
extensive throughout the industrially -owned land along the riverfront; rather, it is focused
primarily at three barge terminals and associated loading/unloading, storage and
distribution systems. Koch Refining Company and CF Industries control approximately
75% of the riverfront land. Koch Refining receives and ships petroleum products from
one barge slip and C.F. Industries transports liquid and dry fertilizers at two separate
barge slips for on -site storage."
Page 90 "Transportation "There are several major transportation facilities serving the
Rosemount Critical Area. These facilities include roadways, railway lines and spurs, the
river, and pipelines and conveyors.
1. Roadways. Three public roadways are located in the Critical Area: State Trunk
Highway 55, Pine Bend Trail, and Fahey Avenue. Highway 55 is heavily utilized
by commercial and passenger traffic and serves as a major route between the
Twin Cities and Hastings. Pine Bend Trail and Fahey Avenue serve local needs.
Within the City of Rosemount, Highway 55 is also part of The Great River Road
a national scenic and recreational highway that is being designated from the
headwaters of the Mississippi River at Lake Itasca to the Gulf of Mexico.
2. Railways. Union Pacific (UP) Railroad operates a long spur extending south
from Inver Grove Heights to various industrial users, all of which are operated on
an irregular schedule.
3. Mississippi River. River barge traffic is very important to Rosemount's river
based industries. Commercial navigation is limited to the main, nine -foot channel
and ancillary routes to the three existing barge terminals. Koch Refining
operates one barge terminal. CF Industries operates two barge terminals.
4. Pipelines and Conveyors. Pipelines and conveyors are utilized by industry to
transport barge shipments from barge terminals to storage and manufacturing
facilities. These facilities are privately owned and operated.
Page 93 "Critical Area Land Use Plan Industrial "The large area designated industrial
serves two distinct purposes. It primarily allows areas for expansion of existing uses, and
it provides limited areas for new industry to properly locate within the Corridor. New
development and expansion of existing industrial properties, including warehouses,
storage bins, pipelines, conveyors, and associated activities will be allowed subject to the
Critical Area Ordinance."
f1
OCFindustries
CF Industries, Inc.
Pine Bend Warehouse
5300 Pine Bend Trail
Rosemount MN, 55068 -2560
651 437 -6191
3 May 13, 2008 MAY 1 3 2008 fi
City of Rosemount Planning Commission
C/O Eric Zweber, Senior Planner
2875 145 Street
Rosemount, Minnesota 55088 -4941
RE: Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation and Mississippi River Critical Area
Land Use Designation Boundaries for CF Industries Property
Dear Chairman Messner and Members:
In response to the direction we received from the staff and commissioners, we have
begun the work necessary to prepare a Concept PUD for our property. We have also
begun the necessary research to understand the information needed and the process by
which modifications to the Critical Area map boundaries can be modified.
We believe that we are a week to ten days from having enough information to meet with
city staff and the Metropolitan Council Sector Representative, Patrick Boylan. From our
conversations we understand that you are only open to exploring the land use designation
adjustments we have requested in the context of a PUD Concept Plan. We understand
that direction and we are very actively proceeding to complete the necessary research,
site analysis and site planning work to prepare a PUD Concept Plan.
The Mississippi River Critical Area Act does include a role for the Metropolitan Council
in the review and consideration of any amendments to Rosemount's Critical Area Plan.
The logical and most efficient time to complete that review is during the six month
review period for the Metropolitan Council and adjacent jurisdictions. It is our intention
to work diligently to process the PUD Concept Plan in as timely a manner as possible,
but you will obviously not be in a position to make your fmal decisions about our
requests before your comprehensive plan and supporting materials will need to be
submitted to the Metropolitan Council. We respectfully request that you flag our request
and the pending PUD review and the Metropolitan Council's role in that process as open
issues to be resolved within the six month review period.
Page 1 of 2
In closing, I want to assure you that we are confident we can prepare and support a PUD
Concept Plan that will provide the City of Rosemount with the assurances you need
regarding the suitability of the future industrial development on our land. We are also
confident that we can demonstrate our commitment to the long term stewardship of the
high valued wooded area between the developed portion of our property and the Spring
Lake Regional Park, as well as the rest of the natural resources on our land. Finally, we
are confident that we can make a compelling case for the minor modifications we are
proposing to the Critical Area boundaries, while strongly supporting the purpose and
intent of the Act itself.
Thank you for your continued cooperation.
Sincerely, gine"?
>gelki
Scott Dohmen
Manager, Pine Bend Warehouse
Rosemount, MN 55068
651 -437 -6191 ext. 11
Page 2 of 2
April 3,2008
Honorable Mayor Bill Droste
City of Rosemount City. Council Members
City Administrator Jamie Verbrugge
Eric Zweber Senior Planner
Planing and Zoning Commission
Re: 2008 -2030 City of Rosemount Comprehensive Plan
Property Northwest of Intersection of So.Robert Trail
and McAndrews Road (54.31 acres)
We,oppose the planned zoning of A -1 of the North Central Sanitary
Sewer Study,considered RR Rural Risidential. We, feel that the
location of this propertyclose to the City of Eagan, which'is
developing just north of the Gun Club Road. This property
should be at least at TR Transitional Residential or a planned
mixed use zoning.
Considering the rapid growth of the City of Rosemount, this
property is ideal for TR Transitional Residential land use,as it
is closer to the cities of St. Paul and Mpls.,with out bringing
all traffic thru,the City of Rosemount.
We, feel that the best use of this land for developement in the
near future, should have sewer water available,to protect the
existence of wet land and surrounding sensitive environmental
area. By, allowing more govermental control of the wild life area
than large acreage lots. Where as, if this property was zoned
as TR Transitiontial Residential or high density or mixed use
it would make it a more favorbale tax base:
This, propertyis presently served by So. Robert Trail (Hwy. 3)
McAndrews Road and Dodd Blvd. Robert Trail and McAndrews Road
are collector roads and have a controlled intersection. With,
the proposed Light Rail Transit along So. Robert Trail, this
area would be a great area for near future developement.
According, to a North Central Sewer Study Map and meeting dated
December 9, 2003 by the City of Rosemount,this propertywas included
as being included in this study. However it seems it has been
dropped in the latest 2030 Comprehensive Plan.
We, would appreciate any additional thoughtto include this
area, in your rezoning and wish to thank you for any additional
consideration to include this, property of 54.31 acres in your
2008 -2030 Comprehensive Plan for sewer and water.
We, realize some residents are opposed to extention of sewer and
water, because of cost.
But, a consideration of best use of land,economic development,
employment opportunities and tax base for the City of Rosemount
in the near future, should be a prime consideration in the
2008 -2030 Comprehensive Plan for the City of Rosemount.
01.... of l r..�rrccr.r.r.r7crino
Please submit all correspondence:
To: Irene Beberg
7411 152nd Ave. NW
Anoka, Minnesota 55303
Sinserely,
Phone: 763 427 -4979 a
Olg�reise
THUET, PUGH, ROGOSHESKE ATKINS, LTD.
ATTORNEYS COUNSELORS
222 GRAND AVENUE W., SUITE 100
SOUTH ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55075
TELEPHONE: (651) 451 -6411
FAX: (651) 451 -9956
THOMAS W. PUGH PAUL A. THUET
PAUL W. ROGOSHESKE* 1916 -1987
JOSEPH E. ATKINS WILBUR L. GOYER
JOE C. DALAGER (OF COUNSEL)
October 1, 2007
*ALSO ADMITTED TO
PRACTICE IN WISCONSIN
Mr. Eric Zweber
Senior Planner
City of Rosemount
2875 145 Street
Rosemount, MN 55068 -4997
RE: Lawrence L. Lenertz, Jr.
Dear Eric:
I just wanted to take a moment to thank you for your assistance in helping my client and I understand the
status of his property in Rosemount.
As you explained in your voice mail message for me on September 25, 2007, nothing has changed and
nothing is proposed to be changed with respect to Mr. Lenertz's property. You confirmed that his
property remains GI General Industrial. You further stated that there are no changes being proposed at
the City's October 9, 2007 Open House, which you said is really just a chance for you to get together
with residents to make sure everyone knows what's going on and ensure there are no problems. If my
understanding is incorrect, please let me know.
Thanks again Eric.
Very truly yours,
THUET, PU.. ROGOSHESKE ATKINS
4 E. Atkins
c: Larry Lenertz, Jr.
June 14, 2007
Eric Zweber, AICP
Senior Planner
City of Rosemount
2875 145 St
Rosemount, MN 55068
Dear Mr. Zweber.
The subdivision Le Foret is cited in your proposed rezoning as outlined in the 2030
Comprehensive Plan for the City of Rosemount. As president of the Le Foret
Community Development, our homeowners object to this area being rezoned as
Transitional Residential. Le Foret was platted in 1978 as having 13 lots with each lot 2.5
acres more or Tess. Currently, 10 people own all the lots. It is stated in our covenants
that owners may not subdivide property into smaller lots. All operate on well and septic.
We do not desire to have curb and gutter, street lighting and other city provided services
other than those currently provided.
We believe we clearly fulfill the definition of the Rural Residential as outlined in the 2030
Comprehensive Plan. As stated by Barth Development Corp. when it deeded the real
property known as Le Foret to the City of Rosemount, June 12, 1978, Lots 1 through 13,
Block 1 are intended to have a distinct rural character with single family detached
housing.
We recognize that properties located further north in EverMore have been highly
developed with a much higher density. The properties to our immediate north are similar
to those in Le Foret with the exception that houses are located on smaller acreages.
Likewise, we have accommodated the major development to our south and east by
granting various drainage easements, line fences, etc.
There has been VERY little transition of families in Le Foret during the past 20 years.
We purchased our home at 4450 138 Court West in 1984. Since that time, there have
been only four families relocate to this area. This is a stable community with a distinct
rural atmosphere, and we want the zoning to reflect this rural residential way of life in the
future.
Therefore, we believe that Le Foret subdivision should be zoned Rural Residential.
Sincerely,
ames A. Sample
President of Le Foret Community Development
4450138 Court West
Rosemount, MN 55068
PS: A copy of this letter has been distributed to the homeowners in Le Foret.
Mar. 9. 2008 7 :44PM BBl ERA MCMENOMY No.9014 P. 2
June 20, 2007
City of Rosemount
Kim Lindquist
Community Development Director
2875 145 Street West
Rosemount, MN 55068
RE: Comprehensive Guide Plan Update
Dear Ms. Lindquist:
We would request the City of Rosemount guide our property for commercial when
updating the Comprehensive Guide Plan. Please see our letter of 01 -24 -06 attached for
your review. Rick Pearson said after the 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendment was
passed the cotmcil agreed to consider the request for the 2008 update.
Please forward this information to the appropriate staff, commissions and councils for
consideration when preparing the new plan.
Please keep me advised of their opinions on a designation of Commercial rather than
Business Park. I would like to present my opinions, if objections exist to the commercial
designation.
Thank you for your anticipated cooperation. Y can be reached by phone at (612) 701 -5233
if any questions or concerns arise.
Sincerely.
d-1%,4aMonem3.....
Creative Solutions for Land Planning and Design
[ta
Hoisington Koegler Group Inc.
May 23, 2008
Mr. Eric Zweber, Senior Planner
City of Rosemount
2875 145 Street West
Rosemount, MN 55068
Re: Rosemount 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update
Dear Mr. Zweber:
Thank you for meeting with Joe Samuel and me recently to discuss the Rosemount Comprehensive Plan
update. As you know, we are involved with the University of Minnesota as part of the Design Workshop
team in creating the master plan for the eventual development of UMore Park. Since our meeting, we
have had an opportunity to review the latest version of the draft plan as found on the City's website.
Based on that review, we are requesting consideration of a few minor word changes to the text in two
chapters of the plan that directly relate to UMore Park.
Chapter 7: Land Use Land Use Designations
The land use section contains a variety of category descriptions of which one, Agricultural Research,
directly applies to UMore Park (page 8). The text in this section of the draft does a good job outlining a
general framework for the eventual development of the UMore Park property and the steps necessary for
changes to occur (most notably a comprehensive plan amendment).
The subsequent paragraphs in this portion of the Land Use section adequately describe the need for a
comprehensive plan amendment prior to the time that development takes place. Accordingly, our request
is to simplify the description noted above by removing the second sentence. Therefore, the requested
language change would be as follows:
Minimum Requirements for Development Land uses that support the educational and research missions
of the University of Minnesota are exempt from local land use regulations.
Chapter 7: Land Use Interim Uses and Land Use Goals and Policies
The Interim Use portion of the land use chapter and the draft Land Use Goals and Policies address
activities such as aggregate mining that may occur on portions of the UMore Park site (pages 18 -19). The
compatibility of mining activities and urban development including residential development is entirely
dependent on the degree to which such uses are buffered from one another by physical barriers (berms,
plantings, etc.) and/or distance separations. Interim uses and development may be incompatible in some
circumstances but may be perfectly compatible neighbors in others. We request the following
modifications to the existing plan text which seeks to remove any prejudging of the compatibility of such
uses, leaving the issue of compatibility open for determination on a case -by -case basis.
123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, MN 55401 1659
Ph (612) 338 -0800 Fx (612) 338 -6838
Mr. Eric Zweber
May 23, 2008
Page 2
Interim Uses
growing community, such as aggregate mining or
There are a number of uses that are beneficial to a gr g
asphalt that nabs_ incompatible with residential neighborhoods. These
P om developing, but the City has the interest to
uses can often occur on property that is years away fr approaches. In other cases, land ensure that the ;,,co„ tible uses cease or relocate as development u c before of he cases,
occurs,
owners are looking for a use that can make a profit other than agriculture f
such as paint ball courses, golf courses, or other outdoor recreation operations.
These uses can often be approved through annntertm �permit lld'scouraget�ncsompat?ble interim uses
temporary basis, which can be in excess of years.
from locating within the 2020 MUSA and shall require tt all interi
m use permits m
required of all applicable interim
can expire when development approaches. A reclamation plan
uses to ensure that allows orderly development can occur after the interim use has ceased to operate.
Land Use Element Goals and Policies
1. Manage the rate of development that occurs with the City.
a. Discourage the development of property that would require the extension of urban service through
undeveloped properties.
b. Deny the subdivision or rezoning of land that lacks adequate infrastructures, such as collector
streets, public utilities, parks, or public safety services.
2. Ensure that Interim Uses allow for productive use of land before development occurs but does not
la
prevent or inhibit the orderly development of approved reclamation plans that allow
a. Gravel mining operations shall be require
or Util�ies, and Parks and Open Space Elements.
develop to occur per the Land Use, Transp
potentia i ncompatible interim uses shall be
b. Asphalt plants and similar �isornf�a far om residential property as possible and may be
ale uatel screened bui eyed and/or located as f fr
required to relocate when residential property is developed per the Land Use Plan.
c. Discourage Interim Uses from locating within the 2020 MUSA.
3. Create specific neighborhood plans to guide the d eveiop entexpected in unique areas of the City.
a. Implement the Development Framework for Downtown
b. Work with the University of Minnesota and their
the UMo Park e development partners to create a
plan for the potential mixed used redevelopment o f
c. Create a specific area plan for the development to County Road 46. of the commercial properties
along South Robert Trail from County Road
d. Create a specific area plan for the development of the area surround the intersection of US Highway
52 and County Road 42.
e. Consider the development of additional specific re m pa ns east of opportuni
niities with
5 large land owners
become available or if residential development eminent t •environmental review documents
f Encourage the preparation of
to evaluate large land areas for environment and infrastructural impacts and solution before
development occurs.
Mr. Eric Zweber
May 23, 2008
Page 3
Economic Development Element UMore Park 8
the that a UM. re Park e The last The Economic Development Element contains a section t a need for a addresses U1Viore Park k Comprehensive amendment
ast
(p above.
sentence of the last paragraph in that section references
Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR). The AUAR is also referenced in Goal 3(f) and an
Given the fact that the entitlement and app royal process for any future development is still undefined, we
at the language reference "required environmental reviews" in lieu of the specific AU AR
reference. Accordingly,
request that the changes would entail the following:
g
University hooses to proceed with development, the City n�esubmit e a Comprehensive
ov
Plan
amend the e dment and an d ty required en envi
amen
the proposed development for approval by the Metropolitan Council and other applicable ag e s the
e a reciate your consideration of the suggested changes and are prepared to offer tlu
letter i
We pp 27, 2008. If you have any questions on this matter or need any
record at the public hearing on May
further clarifications, please contact me. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Mark Koegler, ASLA
President
Cc: Mr. Ken Tyra
Office of the General Counsel
University of Minnesota
Mr. David Sellergren
Fredrikson Byron
EXCERPT FROM MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING
APRIL 21, 2008
7.a. 2030 Comprehensive Plan Community Hearing. Senior Planner Zweber stated the
City has completed the major elements of the draft Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Zweber reviewed
the major elements and instructed the Commission that it is not expected to take any action on
the Comp Plan tonight, but instead continue the public testimony to the May 27 Planning
Commission meeting.
The community hearing was opened at 6:58p.m.
Scott Dohmen, CF Industries, 5300 Pine Bend Trail, approached the Commission. He presented
a letter to the Commission from CF Industries. He thanked the Commission for attending the
tour of their facilities on April 8 Mr. Dohmen further stated that while CF Industries
appreciates the Commission's decision to move the development line to the east, they would like
to do an assessment of the first grove of trees in the hopes of moving the line even further to the
tree line bordering the park. He further stated that CF agrees that a PUD agreement would work
for their development and thanked the Commission for the hard work they have put into the
Comp Plan process.
Irene Beberg, daughter of Olga Treise, owner of property located at 12391 Dodd Boulevard, in
the Rural Residential area by Hwy 3 and McAndrews Road, approached the Commission. Ms.
Beberg stated she feels that leaving their land rural residential without City sewer and water is not
the best use of that land. She stated that if the MUSA line could be moved to include their land,
they could sell the land to development that would give the City a better tax base such as senior
housing, office park, or even a grocery store. Ms. Beberg mentioned she has several neighbors
that are interested in selling their land but cannot without installing new sewer systems. She
stated that she was assessed when County Road 38 was installed and then she agreed to let the
City use the wetlands on her property for drainage. She would appreciate it if the City could help
her and her family out with their request to provide them with City sewer and water.
Chairperson Messner asked Ms. Beberg how much land she owned and how many acres did she
deem buildable. Ms. Beberg replied that her family owns approximately 60 acres and probably
only about 21 acres are buildable. She further stated that several lots on the east side of Highway
3 have problems with their septic systems but since their lots are one acre or less, they do not have
any space to build a new system.
Don Kern, Flint Hills Resources, approached the Commission and expressed his thanks for the
Commission working with Flint Hills on Comp Plan issues. He stated that even though Flint Hills
would like to see a broader scope of Heavy Industrial in the southwest area of their property, he
believes they are on the right track. Chairperson Messner asked Mr. Kern if he has seen the new
language in the Comp Plan with respect to existing businesses. Mr. Kern replied that he has
reviewed it and it looked good.
Commissioner Schwartz asked Mr. Zweber if staff could verify the problems with the septic
systems on the lots east of Highway 3 as mentioned by Ms. Beberg. Mr. Zweber replied that staff
compiles that information periodically from owners and therefore, will be able to provide that
information to the Commission.
Chairperson Messner asked Mr. Dohmen of CF Industries to explain the tree assessment he had
mentioned earlier. Mr. Dohmen approached again and stated that they would like to commence a
study of the first grove of trees since they are a poor quality of trees and not of much value. The
trees on the east line bordering the park are better healthier hardwoods. CF would like to clean up
the center grove of trees and move the development line to the east tree section. Chairperson
Messner clarified that the quality of trees is not the only issue with the location of the
development line and that he would like to see some kind of concept plan from CF before
considering a further movement of the line. Mr. Dohmen replied that he agrees and is willing to
work with the City within the next month to have a concept plan ready for the next meeting.
There were no further public comments.
MOTION by Messner to continue the community hearing until the May 27, 2008
regular meeting. Second by Schultz.
Ayes: 5. Nays: None. Motion approved. Community hearing was continued
1
EXCERPT FROM MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING
MAY 27, 2008
6.a. 2030 Comprehensive Plan Community Hearing. Senior Planner Zweber reviewed
comments from the parties that spoke at the last meeting including Don Kern of Flint Hills
Resources, Scott Dohmen of CF Industries, and Irene Beberg, a partial owner of land at the
corner of Highway 3 and McAndrews Road.
Mr. Zweber also stated that the City received a letter from Hoisington Koegler, one of the
planning consultants working with the University of Minnesota on UMore Park. The letter
addresses a couple of issues, including the environmental review for UMore and interim uses.
The community hearing was continued at 8:10p.m.
Scott Dohmen, CF Industries, 5300 Pine Bend Trail, approached the Commission and presented a
map of the CF Industries site and where new warehouses may possibly be built for future growth.
Mr. Dohmen stated that he understands the setbacks governed by the critical corridor and they
agree with the draft Comp Plan. Mr. Dohmen stated that one in four farmers in the Midwest use
products from CF Industries. He is asking the Planning Commission to work with CF to move
the tree line further to the east in order to expand their production.
Irene Beberg, of Ramsey, Minnesota, co -owner of property located at Hwy 3 and Hwy 38
approached the Commission. She asked the City to consider moving the MUSA line further north
and allowing 2.5 acre lots. She stated their family could donate some land for a walking trail and
the home site could be used for a park or recreational area by the lake.
Mark Koegler, Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc., the subconsultant to Design Workshop, the
primary planning consultant of the University of Minnesota regarding UMore Park, reviewed the
issues discussed in the letter sent to the Planning Commission regarding ag research, the IUP
language and whether or not an AUAR may be required. These issues were generally agreed to
by Mr. Zweber.
There were no further public comments.
MOTION by Schwartz to close the community hearing. Second by Howell.
Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion approved. Community hearing was closed.
MOTION by Schultz to recommend that the City Council release the draft 2030
Comprehensive Plan for the six month Public and Agency Review Period.
Second by Howell.
Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion approved.
As follow -up, Mr. Zweber explained the final hearing on this item will be some time in the
future with all of the proposed changes. This item will go to Joint Work Session between
Planning Commission and City Council on June 18, 2008, to discuss issues. Following on July 1,
2008, the City Council will review this and release it for six month review.