Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7.h. Empire Township Comprehensive Plan _ , City of Rosemount Executive Summary for Action City Council lYleeting Date: �ulv 20, 1993 Agenda Item: Empire Township Comprehensive Plan Agenda Section: NEW BUSINESS Prepared By: Lisa Freese Agen��p� � Director of Planning �Yj 7�"� Attachments: Proposed Letter, PC Review, Farmington Approved By: Letter, Empire Comprehensive Plan Empire Township has completed a Comprehensive Plan and has submitted it to the Metropolitan Council for formal review and action. As required by the Metropolitan Land Planning Act, the Township has provided adjacent jurisdictions with a copy of their plan for review and comment. A copy of the Empire Comprehensive Plan is included with the Council packet. Plaiuiing staff and the Planning Commission have reviewed the Plan and are recommending that the City send a letter commenting on the plan to the Township and Metropolitan Council. The Planning Commission is recommending that a letter be sent jointly by the Cammission and City Council based on the issues discussed in the July 13 Planning Commission review. Included in your packet is a letter drafted for your review and appraval. If you have additional comments regarding the plan please feel free to incorporate them into the drafted letter. Recommended Action: A Motion to approve the comment letter as drafted regarding the Empire Comprehensive Plan and forward it ta the Township officials and the Metropolitan Council. City Council Action: � r � . .. . . . . . . . . . i�� o osevv�ozcn� PHONE (612)423-4411 2875-t45th Street West,Rosemount,Minnesota MAYOFi FAX (612)4235203 Mailing Address: Edward B.McMenomy P.O.Box 570,Rosemount,Minnesota 55068-0510 COUNCILMEMBERS July 21� �.993 Snei�a K�assen James(Ret�Staats Marry Wilicox Dennis Wippermann C.T.E. Stelzel� C�111T AOMINISTRATOR Empire Township Board s�apn�����x 3385 197th Street West Farmington, MN 55024 RE: EMPIRE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Dear Mr. Stelzel: The City of Rosemaunt has received and reviewed the Empire Township Comprehensive Plan. We wish to commend your effort in establishing a guide for your community which for the most part encourages sustainable agriculture in the Township. We acknowledge that there are tremendous growth pressures in the general regional and we are encouraged that the township is attempting to set standards to deter premature growth. The City is particularly encouraged by the following policies within the Plan: * Nonfarm residenfial development in Agricultural areas not exceeding one farm dwelling per quarter-quarter (40 acres). * Lot Divisions of more than one lot will require platting and lots less that 10 acres will require platting and conveyance by register land survey. We hope that the township will proceed immediately to implement these policies through incorporation into your zoning and subdivision regulations. There were several policies in the plan that the City of Rosemount had concerns and we would like to comment on those items for the record. * Industrial Policv. The plan incorporates an industrial policy which states that industrial development should be limited, but the Township did not clearly spec�ed what was meant by "limited". The City would hope that the township would consider defining those uses better and providing more guidance as to what locations that such uses would be considered acceptable. ' * Institutional Policv. The City of Rosemount would like to encourage the Townstup to take a stronger position with regard to non-University related uses on the University of Minnesota Research Center. The plan as worded seems to accept that if this type of development occurs on the University while the land is still owned by the University that the Township.would not be concerned. The City of Rosemount has been quite concerned about this type of activity occurring on the property and would seek the Township's support in adopting more restrictive policies similar to those in the City's recently adopted comprehensive plan. �ver�l�ingfs �omivcg �C/Gp CcJlosemounl�� � EMPIRE COMPRE�IENSIVE PLAN ` ` Page Two * Establishment of a Rural Center. The City of Rosemount understands the need to consider this area. of Empire Township as a rural center to bring the existing development into conformance with regional policies. However, the City is concerned that the Comprehensive plan provides for expansion of this rural center. Given the fact that cities such as Rosemount, Farmington and Lakeville are within a few miles of this center, Rosemount questions whether or not Empire needs to expand this area in the future beyond those developments that have been approved by the Township previously. * Expansion of Water and Sewer Facilities. The City is pleased that the Township has developed a policy for water and sewer facility expansion, but hopes that the Township will not extend such services unless there is a health issue. * Rural Residential. The City is plea.sed that the township has adopted a 1 unit per 10 acre requirement in the rural residential area, but we are concerned with only a i-acre minimum for septic development and the potential for commercial development considered by the Township plan. Additionally we have ident�ed a couple of areas that we feel should have been addressed in your plan, but were not discussed. * Annexation�oli�. As growth continues in the general region, the Township will continue receive development pressure. As a bordering community we feel it would be very helpful if the township would address through a policy what the development threshold is that will result in the Township encouraging the annexation of land. The plan makes little or no mention of what that policy may be. A transition plan of this nature would be appreciated by Rosemount. * Gravel Minin�. Little is mentioned in your plan about the various gra:vel mining operaxions within the Township. Since these operations have a profound affect on adjacent properties, the City of Rosemount would encourage the Township to develop more extensive policies pertaining to this use. Again, we thank the Township far the opportunity to camment on your Comprehensive Plan. We hope that your understand our concems and will try to address them as you focus your efforts towards implementation. Sincerely, Cathy Busho, Chair Planning Commission E.B. McMenomy, Mayor City of Rosemount cc: Dottie Rietow, Metropolitan Council, Chair Craig Morris, Metropolitan Council, District 16 Richard Thompson, Metropolitan Council, Principal Reviewer Jeff Connell, Resource Strategies Corporation �. , � LAW OFFICES BII� IGGS AND MOk� GAN � • BROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATI02� 2200 FIBST I�ATIONAL HA2:8 HUILDZ2id , SAI1'T PAVL,MI2�"2QESOT.A 55101 TELEPl30NE (6121 223-6000 FaCSIMILE t912) 283•8450 ML��E3POLIS OPFiCE . . . . . � . . � . 2300 1 D S GETTE$ � . �8I2EB'S DIBECT DIAL 1CIIMHEB JL],1�7 13 , 1993 . � . � xU��ug..��-���2 . � . TELEP80A2 101E)334•6d00 . . . . � . � T�C5I2[II.E 16t21 354.a830 . . {612) 223-6666 DELIVERY VIA MESSENGER Ms. Dottie Rietow, Chair Metropolitan Council 230 E. 5th Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Re: City of Farmington xearinq Request on Empire Township Comprehensive Plain Dear Chair Rietow: We represent the City of Farmington. Under the authority of Minn. Stat. §473 . 175, Subd. 2, the City of Farmington requests the Metropolitan Council to conduct a hearing to allow the City and others to present its views on the proposed comprehensive glan for Empire Township dated June 8, 1993 . The City received the draft comprehensive plan from Empire Township on June 16, 1993 so this hearing request meets the 30 day requirement of Minn. Stat. §473 . 175, Subd. 2 . The City is requestinq this hearing for two principal reasons. First, the City beli�ves the comprehensive plan of Empire Township raises significant issues for the broader Farmington area community and for the Metropolitan Council as both strive to determine how to manage urban growth, preserve rural and agricultural areas, and ensure the efficient delivery of public services. Second, the City has � petitioned the Minnesota Municipal Board for annexation of portions of Empire and Castle Rock Townships and believes the Council needs to address annexation issues as part of its review of Empire Township's comprehensive plan. The City will be submitting detailed comments during the last week of July outlining its concerns with the Township's draft comprehensive plan pursuant to Council guidelines for reviewing : local comprehensive plan amendments. The City looks forward to working with you, other Council members, and Council staff in determining how to best to conduct the hearing and resolve the outstanding issues. . � . BRIGGS AND MORGAN ' Ms. Dotty Rietow Page 2 July 13, 1993 . Please contact me if you have any questions or desire additional information. Sincerely yours, BRIGGS AND MORGAN, P.A. B � Y Timothy E. arx Attorneys for the City of Farmington TEM:cf cc: E. Craig Morris -- Council Member District 16 Peter Schmitz -- Empire Township Attorney James Sheldon -- Castle Rock Township Attorney Patrica Lundy -- Minnesota Municipal Board Jay Heffern -- Metropolitan Council, General Counsel Richard Thompsan -- Metropolitan Council, Senior Planner Thomas R. Caswell -- Metropolitan Council Environmental Planner Thomas M. Melena -- Apple Valley City Administrator �bert Ericksan -- Lakeville City Administrator ephan Jilk --- Rosemount City Administrator Larry Thompson -- Farmington City Administrator Charles Tooker -- Farmington City Planner � � City of Rosemount Executive Summary for Action Planning Commission Meeting Date: Tulv 13. 1993 Agenda item: Empire Cornprehensive Plan Review Agenda Sect�on: OLD BUSIIVESS Prepared By: Lisa Freese Agenda No.- Director af Pianning IT'EM NO. 12 Attachments: MDIF--Rural Centers, Empire Plan Appraved By: (distributed previously) ,,L2�P-Q-�I At the previous meeting, copies of the Empire Comprehensive P1an were distributed, but we did not have an opportunity to discuss it. Currently, the Plan is being reviewed by the Metropolitan Council. The City has until 7uly 29th to submit comments on the Plan. I have reviewed the Plan and commend Empire in its efforts ta put tagether a comprehensive plan. The plan establishes a 1/40 acre standard for nonfarm residences in the Agricultural areas which is a positive step towards preserving fannland from premature development. There are some areas, however, that I think the City of Rosemount should be concerned about and may wish to comment on: 1) Establishment of a Rural Center. This designation allows residential development with utilities in the community. Currently the only rural centers that eacist in the metro area are incorporated places such as Lake Elmo, Norwood and Young America. This would be the first time that the Metropolitan Council allow a township this status. The concem that I see with this is that it may be more appropriate to consider annexation of this area to Fannington rather that provide this precedent setting designation. 2) Gravel Mininb. The plan daes not discuss the gravel muung operations and how they fit into the agricultural areas. 3) Institutional. The plan does not take a very strong stand with regard to the potential development of the University of Minnesota for nan university related uses. 4) Industrial. The plan has an industrial policy which staxes that industrial development should be limited but it leaves open a window of opportunity for Ag related industrial uses on a case by cases basis. Rosemount should be concerned be it is really not clear what industry the Township will cansider and where the would allow it to occur. 5) Annexation. The plan does not formally address its policy on annexation as parts of the township become pressured for urban development. If this type of policy were clearly laid out by the Township and the adjacent communities felt comfortable with its cvntents, it may reduce the urgency to consider annexation. Please take the time to review the plan. On Tuesday, I would ask that you make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the areas of the plan that Rosemount should comment on. Recommended Action: A motion to direct staff to grepare a letter to the Metropolitan Couneil regarding the Empire Comprehensive Plan from the Planning Commission and City Council. Planning Commission Action: 0'7-13-93.012 . s t � . � . . � � . . Development and investment Framework the metro centers wiU receive the Council's RURAL SERVICE AREA highest investment priorify. Commercial Agricuttural Area Regiona( Business Concentrations The commercia! agricultural area includes thase 12.The Metropalitan Council supports continued lands certified by local governments as eligible for growth and increased densities in regional agricultural preserves under the 1980 Metropolitan business concentrations and witl give invest- Agricultural Preserves A�t.This approach places the ment priority second only to the metro centers responsibility for defining agricuttural lands on local for the maintenance of inetropo(itan systems g�mments. With Council protection policies #or serving the concentrations. commercial agriculture focused only in areas where there are local govemment plans and protections, local and regional policies support one another. Fully Developed Area The amount of land included in the commercial 13.The Metropolitan Council supports the agricultural area is large, covering about 600,000 maintenance and upgrading of development acres in 1985.This constitutes aver half the farmland and service facilities in the fully deve(oped �n the seven-counry area. area. Reinvestment for rnaintenance and The geographic area defined as the commercial replacement of inetropotitan systems serving agricultural area is subjed to frequent change when existing development in the fully developed tied to the Agricultural Preserves Act because land area will take priority over investment for ex- can go into and out of certification when local pansion in the developing area. . govemments decide to aiter its status. Local govern- ments may replan and rezone certified areas if a Developing Area change in policy is desired,but this change must oc- cur as a public process.For the purposes of this docu- � 14.Urban expansion in the deve(oping area shoutd ment,the commerc+al agricuftural area is defined as { be planned, staged and generally contiguous the area certified as of March 1 of each year. This � to existing development. The Metropolitan date is the end of each Council reporting year re- s Counci) will work with the metropolitan agen- quired under the Agricultural Preserves Act. cies and the Minnesota Department of Transportation to provide metropolitan systems Under the Agricultural Preserves Ad,a local govem- at the time, place and size needed ta support ment passes a resolution certifying(and eligible for growth based on regional forecasts. protections and benefits and limiting housing den- siry to one unit per 40 acres. The certi{ied area is 15.System investment to serve additional residen- then considered long-term agricultural land. The tial land beyond regional forecasts will receive local comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance � a lower priority than system irnestment to serve must reflect this land use and zoning. Farmers own- unanticipated economic development. � ing land within the certified area may then enter the � program. land in the program is referred to as covenanted Jand.7he AgriculWre Preserves Ad pro-. � Freestanding Growth Centers vides protection for the farmer from urban assessments, property taxes at development vatue 16.The Metropolitan Council supports urban- and conflicting land uses in exchange for a lega) density residential,commercial and industrial commitment to continue farming for at least eight development in freestanding growth centers. �a�' Since they are a microcosm of the Metropolitan Area,The Metropolitan Council will make in- Within the commercial agricultural area,alt land has vestments in metropolitan systems serving been certified by local governments as eligibfe for freestanding growth centers based on the fut- the agriculture preserves program. However, the ly deveioped and developing area policies, as Council recognizes two levels of protection in the appticab(e. commercial agr�culturaf area:primary and secondary protection areas. 22 _� ,�a � :: Primary protection areas are lands covenanted as residential density on the basis of 40-acre parcels. agricultural preserves. They will receive the greatest This will prevent possible urban-density clustering protection possible from incompatible uses because of a large number of homes on smatl minimum lot the greatest lev�e(of commitment to farming hasbeen sizes, but within the overall density cap.The Coun- established. cil opposes such clustering because it could result in the need for urban services,such as package sewer Secondary protection areas cover the farms in ihe disposal systems. area that have not yet formed agricultural preserves. The Courcil believes the commercial agriculture Existing Urban-Density Development area is a place where agriculture is the best perma- Residential subdivisions, mobile home parks and nent use of the land. Long-term investments in farm clusters of moderate-densiry residential development equipment and in land preservation can be made also exist in the general rural use area.They frequent- with the confidence that urban development is not ly demand urban services but are in locations where going to destroy or limit these investments. urban services are difficult or costly to provide.The Council°s principal concern is the potential need for General Rural Use Area - . the costly extension of central sa�itary sewer and par- ticularly metropolitan sewer service. The Council supports development in the generat rural use area The general rural use area is the area outside the ur- consistent with seroice levels appropriate for a rural ban service area that is not designated for commer- area.l.ocal governments with existing urban�Jensiry cial agriculture. Over 40 percent of the land in the development shouJd address the operation and � Metropolitan Area falls in this category.The area con- mainienance issues of on-site systems to avoid poten- tains a wide variety of (and uses, including tial problems and the eventual need for costly local agricultural, residential and urban-type facilities. investments. There are sizable parts of the general rural use area that host no particular kind of land use-land that Urban Uses is ohen catled unused. Most of the area looks rural, but many of its residents are tied economically to Many facilit�es exist in the general ruraf use area that the urban area and many of its land uses provide ser- require isolated and spacious,locations but serve vices to people living in the urban service area. primarily the urban public These facilities include campgrounds and recreational vehicle parks, Four major types of uses eacist within the general rural regional parks,trails,waste disposal installations,rao- use area. ing facilities, gun clubs, festivals, mining sites and similar facilities.The genera) rura) use area is an ap- General Farmland propriate focation for these facilities. The Council's interest is that these facilities are adequately serv A large part of the general ru�al use area is devoted ed,consistent with local and regional plans,and to io agriculture. The Council supports the continua- the extent possible, that they do not interfere with tion of agriculture and encourages local governments agriculturai activities. to support it by zon_ing agricultural land at one unit per 40 acres. For farms within an area so zoned tbat subsequently sign up for the agriculture preserves Rural Centers program,the Council will reclassify them as part of the commercial agricultural area, Rural centers historically have served as retail ser- vice centers and transportation centers for the sur- Rural Residentiaf Development rounding rural area. However,changes in agriculture and rapid urban expansion have changed the tradi- Rural residential development consists of homes on tional rural service roles of many of these smal) large lots in areas that are hilly, wooded or other- centers to residential areas for urban people and wise unsuited to agricultural production.The Coun- locations for industries with Iittle tie to local cil considers ruraf residential development a perma- agriculture. The latter make use of available labor nent land use and not an early stage of urbaniza- in rural areas and, by their nature, tend not to be tion.The Council supports this rype of use as long dependent on close contad with other firms for their as the density does not exceed one housing unit per supplies or critically dependent on transportation. 10 acres of land. The Council will compute rural 23 . --`--�r, � Development and lnvestment Framework The Council has identified 35 rural centers, with propriate,needed to serve it.Financing of necessary populations ranging from just over 100 to more than support services would be a local responsibiliry. 5,000. Some rural centers, such as Norwood and Areas of existing urban-densiry uses are likely can- Young America, encompass the entire corporate didates for selection as new rural eenters. limits of the community.Others,such as Lake Elmo, � are small enclaves withi�a larger rural community. Rural centers should accommodate additional development consistent with their ability to finance Services available within rural centers vary. Some and administer services, including sewer, roads, have central sanitary sewer, others depend on on- water and stormwater drainage. If additional land is site waste disposal systems.Some have central water needed to accommodate growth, rural centers systems.Some provide the full range of convenience should extend services in a staged,contiguous man- retail stores,while others have only a bar or gas sta- ner. Residential,commercial and industrial develop- tion. Some have small manufacturing or service ment at urban densities should be accommodated businesses;othe�s are almost exclusively residentiaL only in rural centers with central sanitary sewers that The Council does not support the extension of are meeting state and federal water qualiry standards. ! regional systems to rural centers because of the Larger projects should be located in freestanding distance from the urban center and the small popula- growth centers that have a full range of services. � tions of rura) centers. i � Rural locations in the pastdecade have been attrac- RURAL SERVtCE AREA POLICIE$ � tive and some, although not all, communities have f experienced an upsurge in growth, principally Commercial Agricultural Area i residential development. Development trends are 1 down from the highs noted in the early 1970s but 17. The MetropoGtan Councit supports the tong- continue at modest levels into the 1980s. term conti�uation of agriculture in the rural � service area.The Council will use the fo(low- � � Several services are important in adequately serving ing ranking in decisions to accommodate i � additional rural center development, but sewage facilities serving urban residents. € disposal is the most critical. Urban-densiry develop- � � ment in an unsewered rural center poses the risks 1. Primary protection area: Land covenanted ; of on-site sewage system failure, contamination of in agriculture preserves will receive � groundwater and eventually the expense of new on- primary protection. Urban facilities should � site or central sewer system installation. The be prohibited in this area unless there is ' possibiliry atso exists that remedying a pollution strong documentation that no other loca- � problem may require an extension of inetropolitan tions in the Metropolitan Area can ade- � sewer service through rural areas. Lack of sewer quately meet the siting and selection service is a serious eonstraint on the arnount and criteria. rype of development that rural centers can safely accommodate. 2. Secondary protection area: l�nds certified but not presently in agricultural preserves Some parts of the rural Metropolitan Area,especially will receive a IeveF of protection secondary � Anoka County, are receiving large amounts of scat- to agricultura) preserves. Urban facilities � tered urban development. This scattered develop- ���- should not be located in this area untess ment poses service problems and may,at a later date, there is strong evidence that a proposed result in very high local service costs. The Council urban use eannot be located in the general proposes a strategy that offers local government an rural use area. altemative way to structure this development by designating and creating a"ruraf center."These new centers would be Iimited enclaves for urban�lensiry General Rural Use Area land uses, facilities and services within the local govemments' broader corporate boundaries. They 18. The MetropoEitan Counci{supports long-term would not be coterminus with the entire corporate preservation of agricultural land in the limits. Under this strategy,a loca)government would general rural use area.However,the Countil identify an area to receive urban-density residential, wi!( alsa support residentia4 devetapment at commercial and industrial developmsnt and the densities of no more than one unit per 10 facilities, including local central sewer, where ap- acres computed on a 40-acre basis (a max- 24 , imum of four units per 40 acres).The Cour�- center's plans to accommodate additional cil will not extend metropotitan systems to growth provided they are consistent with the serve urban-density residential development center's ability to finance and administer ser- in the general rural use area. Where urban- vices, particutarly sewer servica The Coun- density devefopment already exists, a local cil supports rural center �service im- government should address service issues in provements but not at regional expensa its plan, particularly on-site sewer system operation and maintenance. 2 0. The Council will support a local governmenYs ptan for a new rural center and its requests for state and federal grants,provided the local Rural Centers government restricts urban densities from sur- rounding rura(areas and witl support the ne�w 19. The Metropolitan Council wil(support a rura! center with necessary service investments. � �! E � � � � � t � � i c 25 �,ti � � '�� ��� � � � � � � � � �xLt�t�.'�2 �Xl�xt.� t � � 3385 197ih ST.WEST FARMiNGTON, MN 55024 (612)463•4494 � TO: Cities of: Farmington Lakeville Rosemou�t Coates Townships of: Vermilliori Castle Rock Dakota County Vermillion River Watershed Management Cotnmission ISD#196 Fatmington School District FROM: G.E. Stelzel, Chairman .` � . Empire Township Board DATE: June 15, 1993 SUBJECT: Revised Empire Township Comprehensive Plan Enclosed is a copy of the revised Ernpire Z'ov�,ns�p�Inpreherisive Plan. A copy has also been subtnitted to the Metropolitan Council for fornial review and cortunent, as requtred by Minn. Stat. 473.851 - 473.$72. Comments shauld be submitted to Empire Township and the Metropolitan Council within 45 days of receiving the draft Plan. In the event you have any questions regarding the Plan, please contact either the Town Board or Jeff Connell, Resource Strategies Corporation, 66pp C`ity West Paz'kway, Suite 340, Minneapolis, MN 55344 (942-8010}. . � � . , . EMPIRE TOWNSHIP C OMPREHENSIVE PLAN Approved For Formal Review and �omment June 8, 1993 Prepared By: Resouree Strategies Corporation 6600 City West Parkway Suite 340 Minneapolis,MN 55344 1 � .. 7 • . . . � . . TABLE 4F C�NTENTS Page I. Plan Background 1 II. Existing Conditions 3 � Land Use 3 Population And Housing 4 Natural Features � Community Facilities and Services 8 Transportation lp III. Township C,oals and Guide Plan 13 Rural Center 15 Agriculture � 16 Residential lg Commercial 19 Tndustrial 2� Environmental Protection 22 * Groundwater Supply and Quality 23 * Surface Water Drainage and Quality 25 * Wet Soils and Steep Slopes 27 * Sensitive Soils and Soils �.rosion Control 29 Facilities and Services 34 * Parks and Recreation 31 * Water and Sewer Service 31 Transportation 34 Development Guide Plan 39 *-Agriculture . 39 * Rural Residential 40 * Urban Residential q.0 * Commercial 41 * Institutional 41 * Conservancy 41 * Shoreland Overlay 42 * Floodplain Overlay 42 IV. Implementation 43 4fficial ControLs * Zoning and Subdivision Reguiations 43 * Sewage Treatment 44 Capital Improvements Program 45 Administration 42 i :�� � LIST OF FIGURES F�� Title Following P-�-e 1 Regional Location � 2 Land Use - 1992 � 3 Agricultural Preserves 4 4 Depth To Bedrock 6 S - Surficial Geology 6 6 Floodplain Areas 7 � Vermillion River Watershed ' 7 8 Existing Water Service . - 9 9 Existing Sewer Service 9 10 Transportation Characteristics 12 I 1 Sensitivity of Prairie du Chien Aquifer 24 12 Water and Sewer Service Staging �2 13 Thoroughfare Plan 38 14 Development Guide Plan 42 LIST OF TABLES � a e �� �� a � Historical Population Trends 4 2 Age Composition: 1990 5 3 Housing Type: 1990 6 � x PLAN BACIiGROUND �, . ' A ' . . . . .. . � � . Empire Township adopted its first comprehensive plan in 1977 in response to requirements of the Metropolitan Land Planning Act of 1976. The fust plan emphasized the importance of maintaining the rural, agricultural character of the township. In 1981, minor revisions to the Plan were approved, which strengthened the original plan's intent to preserve the township's rural character and agricultural base. Empire Township is located in central Dakota County (see Figure 1). While still considered to be part of the Rural Service Area. as defined by the Metropolitan Council, it is contiguous to several rapidly developing communities. The area may � face increased development pressure, particularly from the west, in the next 20 years. The township is also located in the Final Major Airport Search Area identified by the Metropolitan Council. These are the two major reasons for the township to initiate a review and evaluation of the existing Comprehensive Plan. This Plan replaces the Plan approved in 198 L Authority and Governaace _ - - Empire Township has authority under Minnesota Statutes 368.01 to conduct planning and zoning activities as an "urban town". The township is governed by an elected Township Board of Supervisors, consisting of three members. The Township Clerk undertakes many of the administrative responsibilities an behalf of the Township Board. The Planning Commission, which consists of five members appointed by the Township Board, advises the Board regarding planning and zoning activities within the Township. _ Issues and Philosophy This Plan is the result of extensive effort on the part of the Township Board and Planning Commission. The Plan is intended to reflect the values and goais that the Township's residents view as important, and to establish a sound direction for the future development of the Township. It is felt to be particularly important that a 1 i ,� sense of community continue to be deveIoped among the township's residents. This Comprehensive Plan is expected to play an important role in that respeet, by providing a basis upon which decisions may be made toward providing the facilities and services necessary to foster a community identity. � 2 * ' �------�--- --- --� � � � � st mrM�s arwu � Figure 1 Regional Location � � � � . IINw(lAI) I . . � Utt�tihti . . � .. � I � RI/RNt i n�K I:Hllvf �_ � . � � ' I � . ' . . . . . � ������� R+rsn ANOKA CO. c.otu�nu5 � � � •NOOY[� M4MLlKC. . ... I�fOtCS�T l{KC I NEW)C1MO�I . �OotSr��K( ' . � I D�TTOM �M Ra � tlMOIIRCS � M��/N( � .�:�t i N ' CN�Y.IiN COOM�{IiDf � � � CEwf(eYtll[ - r . �l�Ir( . . �—• � � ra• . . MUGO � � ' MiMOVf� " . . � � � � � � icnrcw. uKt[rucs � WASHINGTON�. CO.. . � G�[CNII[l0 .CO�COfAM .M�ILC GROtC OTSEO 11 �M�u9f fNO�IY�[• � �(��'��"� � � �R�RlT1I t��K —•�YI[M MO�TN Z'� � � I Sf�tl+"�tE• � . . . . OCRrOeO � l2 �O�R1� ww�r[�tat I � � HENNEPIN . snotc. . K� � . C0• � •�OORt�w � K�,�, •.... sA�Ni � .� � � CIMIC�� I��IGMtOM Y(If.NTS � I2� . � . � Q10�[If0 � C yT�l Ol7 a�0(M S SI . •ti( � . . � t �� �ltf �� f . MCOIM• ME� � � � I IMDCI(MO[MGC �IiYOUiM NOI �� tSI LITTIC . . � ]O w d ' •M�O� M N y� !OS(YIIIC Si.'�Y � I L_ r�rt[/l��M � . . � � . _ e . win[w0o0 � � ��K� O��f^1wN � � r�tt[r t6 �7 '� a�[o��[.tt�Mo � _—- _ OMG l�R D p �__ � . T- -�- . �w�7 �i . � i � t �EST . . � �•rt�rowx oeoMo � � � RAMSEY CO. .� I+KEI•rrU . . '- � MIMM[TfISi� ' MI11MCiOMRI ST.IOYIf � . . fAIMT►Aflt � �1 llK{lRMO �OIITWOCO ' vi:TEPf�jwY I � Z 14�K �MIMMfA/OLI! . ��� . . .. �.�1 � . �I � � � OEEfM�YCM O�RINS � � fi.Clq2 lC4GM , �� � . 1 . . � 19 r[ii .1fO0eW�� 3 0 . _ ��� S�OMI(lC1YS 1 � Sf. . � 1f70N � (D�NI r��(■ ��_ �� �� � . . ��Ol . �I��Y�M� � � . . � •. I6 . SDUTN � � . lICM�ICtO. �11�0lT' . fi. �MCTI fT M(ND07/ �YN,1jN �Ul _ I - � YICTORI �CN4MM�yStM '��j' M(fGMiS K� � . . � � f+wUL�i ' .vcCOrau ��KFTnr.r. � . . � � [O(N/f41l1( � _ � � •�COMIL _ I . . . . __. . 5�+��Ul . ' . � � .I - I . . - � �LOOMIMG70N . � CARVER CO. ��;SK"4 , �M,[�GROY( ` . '��� [�Ga11 CIGXTS C0TT�6(GtOY[ UENNaAK . __�__.___�_____ . / 2O � . . . TOUMG CM�Swa �ar[nu � OAKOTA CO. M0IWOOD � C��vC� I+CKSON SN�ROtCL . � COIO�Ci �°'��CREH I_� {�Y�G( t �VtMSYIII[ . . .OVr�C aMEN�V I AEtitOH I i `� I . . . . . �y ►t10� �«lL Vall(•� •OfCMOYMT NIN�NGER . M��l�yRG ( � � (- 101��Cvrllf IFSC 1 . M�Sf�MGS -_ . ��--___-t- SaNcaanri5 h -_-__ ' � . . � � . . . oa -__r_ _, � .._vroc■ � � • � I ' I �.. • vEaN�lUOa � �--- , . :f , ,a.vt�,,.., � �S�NOCNEER I SPRINCI�KE I CREDIi laK[VILLC . �� f ❑ . ' . waPSf1�N f � � ' R�VEp � .� � { � � ( . SCOTT CO. I� . . �;Rr�" ax � rcerrluo■� � � I � St.t�v.wEr.�E' IORDaM . � •.� ' . . .� ----1-----�----�- � -- '��-------�------ - � r - �{tl[I4�1XC - � .I a ' .�. ( � Mf d MLRNEI i � � ( QM(Y'T!1[t� Nt+.EIEr BEItE P���tiE I tiEIEN< � I M4rrtow ( ( � fEUart UaE � E��aE.. I . ':.SrtE QOf.K ' I t . (� N[i YilK[f� I . ' ( ' YI[ Ylll[ . . .I I � � � ' 1 NIKVTON � � OnUG�ff � � � . � I � • --___�______�__�f/wH���GVfI . lR0 � � ( . - � . � 'LT- 1 — - —1---- -r---�---�--A;�,00s�«- - --� �p ��___� i � ' t�NDOt�M � . .. ��1'� .,��E s io �S -- Z-�■+�ZS � r,affNv.ti (e: . rt''n . , r � � � $�,�T: , �__ _�� J TWIN CITtES METROPO�iTAN AREA I St1�wG 1��K 9 YOYND � 17�aLCOM NUGMii 25 C[N t�K( .. . . . 2 o�owo t0 ep��IMfOAI[ 16�M(NDOf• Z6�1lGNO00p A4fOK A� � � � - � ] Y�MN[TOMt4�(��N . 1) f���tNG UK[/�RK 19 I,iITC�I[ a��w�rre ee.n � �� —County Boundary � � � . � ioeR�aa♦ 12 Y.f GovT. 2p.GaEv CLOuO 26��7tORT � . . S CtCLlflOt lI MllliO► 2I LANDf�II O�OMQ � � � � � 6 G�([MRO00 �I�COLUM�1�N[IGNTS 2$O(L(w'000 29""`•"" � .Municipai Boundary �. � � 7 1�OOOl�Mp IS Si.•MTMOMT 30 O�R f��R MCIGNff ��MQEH � .. . . . z7 nre srnMet � 3t t�ctt�wo sMoe[s - --TOW�IShip BOUfiddf}� e M(OICIMC(4R( I6 1�tl0[RDIU . 24 MANfOY[OI 32 S7.Y;�T'f lOIMi � � . . � � � � � � . , , EXISTIN� �ONDITI4N S ♦ � i The basis for development of the Comprehensive Plan lies in the trends, patterns and characteristics of the Township and its residents. It is important to understand "where we are" and "where we have been" in order to know "where we should go". This section of the Plan provides basic information on the Township that is needed in order to make correct decisions regarding development within the Township and services needed to support the direction desired by the residents. Land Use The primary land use in Empire Township is tilled agricultural land. Second,ary uses include untilled agricultural land (e.g., pasture) and single family residential. Figure 2 identi�es land uses in the Township, based upon a survey conducted in 1991. Commercial and industrial uses are very limited at this time,dispersed throughout the township on small parcels. Existing commercial or industrial uses are generally related to rural/agricultural activities. A significant portion of land in the township is under the ownership of the University of Minnesota, designated as the Rosemount Research Center. The property, which consists of about 4,64Q acres, is primarily open or agricultural land. The University has owned the property since after Wortd War II. It is anticipated that the land will remain under University awnership. The township does not have land use authority over property owned by the University;however, about 300 acres in Empire Township is scheduled to be purchased by Dakota County, contiguous to the County's proposed Resource Recovery Facility in the City of Rosemount. In the event this land is purchased, or other land is sold by the University to other parties, Empire Tawnship will have�the ability to exercise land use controls on the property at that time. As stated previously, land use in Empire Township is dominated by agricultvral use. Since the passa.ge of the Metropolitan Agricultural Preserves Act (Chapter 473H) in 1980, Empire Township has actively participated. It continues to be a 3 i ��� J ._� —t_1�� a.�� . . � O� �_�// � . i '_` . � � .� 6 � . � / Q ,/� � . � . . , . s � � \ i - ---... ______ ...�,..,�,� I � . � . — � 2 : - -. �..r:.-.,-:�......_ . � F . v�+eiw+. a�w..e.c.. � i + � � j AYK�</M� ' i - � _ _ , � i i � . ; � fr � � ! � 7 �+ A (+� - - "_' . � I � � . i LJ •t�... n .. _. _ �� Q � . I . . � ' . � .... ��� . / � � � � . . .. � ___'.' / ❑ _.�. I � � � � ��.. � --t �_...� . ;. o " � , --- - — � . jo�cna�a � _� ___--- � ��� ,a / �p �, � � � � --- � �s --- �- -. .._ �� , � — —•_._...- 1 i \ ❑ � . � ------ ---l-�------ � i 1 0 ---I ..,..4,.h.�._ """""`°`s"`..�...,...v � �, r i 9 � _ _/� ,�..� 1 :o . _ � �y_ ____ -- �` � � ; � • � - -- `� /� —� zs �. << ' � �1,. _._.- �3 � -- �--- /'� _ . � � � � --� � _ � � ----- .. .__ _ . ; r% � . . . . . _ , ... ... ... .. i/���, �� j J�J .. i � i � _ / .: , .��, _ - - -- , . , � I i �// � %!?9._.___. � � . .�t�"� � ,:� . . $7 . "- � 2� --�' -'--'25 O .. � � �I..J _. .. i � % . _r � : -- � ; � : ..................:. � .. . , � : . i1 <,. 4..._ J '� O ,�� :.. � � ��'�.Jf�(��DOJOO , '� � ���r ��❑�����0 . ;� , � � � . � � . . � �.. �:tD �i . . - � . .. _. _-: I3'-------'---. .:54. �� . . .. .i �. -. _ .�.. _. _.. _.,_ �5 . �� � - ��O�- � ...� i � -„--�-�U�- �- �---..._. I .o ,, ��- ° S: o ,. EMPIRE TOWNSHIP � Agriculture/Undeveloped oAtcorA couriTtr. MirrNEsoTA a Farm Dwelling Figure 2 � Non-Farm R�sidential Land USe - 1992 � � Commercial ( C7 C� . . . . 0 y=� 1�� . O Public/InstitutionaI � Private Recreational ! . policy of the township to encourage the use and improvement of its agricultural lands for the production of food and other agricultural products. Most agricultural land in the township is certified as eligible under the Act, having been planned. and zoned at a maximum residential density permitting no more than one unit per 40, acres. Land currently certified eligible for agricultural preserves statvs, as well as land currently participating in the agricultural preserves program, is identified in Figure 3. Population and Housing . Empire Township is located in the most rapidiy developing Gounty in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. While the township increased its population by nine percent over the past ten years, Dakota County grew at a rate of over 30 percent . from 198Q.to 1990. Cities adjacent to the township, particularly Rosemount, Lakeville and Apple Valley, have grown at rates in the past ten years of 40 to 60 percent. There has been fairly steady expansion and growth in the township; however, there are expected to be increased pressures for mare growth in the township in the next 10 to 20 years. In 1$70, Empire Township has a pogulation of 995 people. The population showed a decline until the 1950's. At that time, the population began to show a steady increase to the present. Population and household trends and forecasts for Empire Township are shown in Table #l. Forecasts are from the Metropolitan Council. TABLE#1 Historical Population and Household Trends Empire Township YEAP 1870 1920 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 POPULATION 995 646 473 714 1,136 1,22b 1,340 1,500 1,700 HOUSEHOLDS 3b0 426 S00 590 4 , „ . �' �----- .,,...�,� . I=I / �� � i — ` � • � ' � / / . � � � �'t, . 6 � � • �/ ( . -- —__ ._..\ _ •w.w�.�. .....a.� I . _. . . .� . �� . ! � �j]'�- ::^....._. ./ " E � � IiMw�� 4�y+tKv i . � j w�t�+[n C�rRw ' ' / ' S ' • � � R� . � /� � / a���� � i �� � � ; � � i I � _ � _ ' . ' I � - -�- - :, .. . _ ; � � - � i ;� . _ -- �, � . r— ---,...°� _ ._ ----- � ; ,' : O � � � . . / �._.._ . `_�y_..'._..___ //��_�i_ . .i. � � f � . ' � , / ' � � ,.uevy4r. ��w..�.we:yo.a,.c, . /� .� ,� . -.-_ —� . . � � 2__z--_ __--r- .... �; _ z,z. � �� : }I y •---��// `- --- - ....�r� . �L�..S � ��. . ` „�!���... � _ , _ � ; _ , .... . _ /., /. �,1�,�'i'� � -- / - r .-r...!"-� i I _s `,,,-•1� � ' ///� ?n� _ iZ9 . _ � . � . . ' ' j5 F��.- s -- ���J: � z7 , --2 ---.---n �,. , , - , . -� �, . ,,...... . ,�' -, ..__._--f. .J-�� •� �; � _ � '�' " j�eUUU , --�cJf� DL70�UD : -- .,T C�a�O'i1OD t . . .. _ ./___.. .. sa � „� �(.:EDUClOUL7 ' , ". , � . ----- -- � ----u ?�CJ�LJ[� � _. � .....��_."""I i o � , ,` , . ,� � t� . �'.'1. ' � , LEGEND Figure 3 � Designated Agricultural EMPIRE TOWNSHIP Preserve DAKOTA COUNTY, MiNNESOTA Agricultural Preserves �.��.., ��^ �r f� �s�e N^CtKdfR CQ H/�MHI110 OER. � . , Employment in the township in 1990 was 167; forecasts for the year 2000 are 230, � and 260 for the year 2010. The age composition of residents in Empire Township in 1990 is shown in Table #2. A comparison is also made with Dakota County as a whole, based upon percent of the total. TABLE#2 Age Com�sition: 1990 Empire Township % of Dakota A�e CategorX Male Female Total Count 0-5 80 61 10.5 11.1 6-1� 118 109 17.0 13.2 14-18 47 58 8.0 6.6 19-24 49 47 7.0 8.0 25-34 122 111 17.4 21.4 35-44 103 99 15.0 17.2 45-59 - 103 105 15.5 13.4 60-69 37 30 5.0 4.8 70+ 27 34 4.6 4.3 Total 686 654 . 1�0.0 100.0 As indicated by the data in the table, Empire Township has a larger percenta.ge of residents in both the lower age groups and the higher age grougs when compared to the County. This reflects the fact that younger adults tend fo be attracted to urban areas and areas that offer higher density housing (apartments) that are typically not found in the rural areas. This is illustrated.by Table#3, which shows the housing type in the township, in comparison to the County as a whole. As indicated, a large majority of the housing units in the township are single family when compared to the County as a whole. On the other hand, multi-family units represent a significant portion o�the units in the County, but are almost nonexistent in the township. 5 . t� TABLE#3 H-°us� �-T—YP�' 1990 Empire Township TYPe of Units - � Mobile Sin�1e 2 3-4 5+ Home Other Empire Twp. 92.7% 2.1% 1.2°I'o 0.3% 2.8% Q.9% Dakota Ca 71.5°l0 1.6% 2,0% 20.61 3.7% 0.6% ' � There were 44� housing units in 1990 in the township, with almast 9� percent owner-c�ccupied. This compares to about 74 percent for the County. Future housing units in the Township will be predominantly single-family. Oniy four percent of the units were counted as vacant; a similar percentage to the County. 'The a�erage home value was reported as $g(,(pp� �,�,hile the County was $95,900. Average rents were $444 per month in Empire Township and $SQ3 per month in the Cotznty. In summa.�'y, Empire Township would appear to be a fairly typical rural community with a stable population and housing base, Natural Features Empire Township has a variety of natural features, including some exeellent farmland, roiling hills, floodplains and wetlands, and wooded areas. The Vermillion River valley floor is low and flat. The elevation difference from the river to the surrounding farn�land is slight,resulting in higher water tables and extensive wetland areas, As the valley floor begins to rise, there are numerous short steep slopes with accompanying outcrops of St. Peter Sandstone. If there are no outeroppings, there is usuauy relatively shallow soil caver over the bedrock, as indicated in Figure 4. The surface geology is shown in Figure 5. Both the bedrock and surface geology are important to identify in order to understand the occurrence and movement of groundwater in the township and county, as both are important sources of groundwater. The depth to bedrock is also an important consideration affecting land uses, including determining exeavation costs, designing sewer 6 i � I I � II --�---.- ---------'---__-..--- - ------ -------- I -- ������w.+ . . . . . . ._. . . ha.�++1'ha'r�_ �,• .y.{ X..a....�ae ' .. � ( 'l�s='aP.::�a"^'^. . . t � ►n �•za-re ry`t � _-� w-+.us+-r� v-�-': i 'F��--: _ ��}��. ax�fFn. ��" ;�^a I GkW-: iraMr. :ttfi -W1rsk�'�"9� i.e .,jef ::`y:-p..M. .+i!!�'�ia« �_ �9fs. � .. +7�. s++ww�sr.�..� b•- �y .--�[ •.tz�^a�s?-y�! +4c+rt'C C+4Fre�_"vyrr�.• �=�M�. l�'�� � ..�n<-+._""4�t�]r�iA '�n� ��e v;"'�s'i!1[-.� _ K�SDi�'r a�si ��� t '}wbs.o.F" -..Yr�K.�� v,"9d.....�. � 1 `�•�a^ ��Y ��4 yG`�i4a . : .�w' SPk � ;�'��`'''�,;,>t,,,.,�� �s .,,,� .v�s.:-aee„�i;-- - --��.>�e�- ' - '�`i�,.- _ �� R ( ._ �'_� , �,.� "'. � ' f �i i=�-�.-�'�r.� - � b:_a:��.�. � __ . �� �z�w.ai! 3� _ ' _ _ ' ._ _. � ���n -:,. . .. _ . , , rri .? '-. R 3 '_ ` _ _ r:6':..+'1k�is2=� . "�",�,�.'� .a. - _ _ - . . - �`.`:.���y _ - - - ' - -_-.. --� -- '�'�",a__-�. -. - --- - . i T i x�-r�rt � � �_� '== _ - - �. _ _ . _ - ' - - :�;� - - - - I, '<�,*:`� - -. ._ i _ _ _ i — - - _ � � r � . � ; , m � � � -� � . ,, m , : : m , � .. _ ; f � .._ _ .: _ m � � , _ mi , � - - ==- - ,,, ; � I � , � . � - -- - e -- - _ - -- . • _ � - � • : - � • . ._ �� i 4 �f 1' � 58 81 I =_ _ . i --_:;�_� .: 62 - �.� � - - . ! �=_�._�.._r. � ���::. � -- :;;:;:� � 66 l \ 31 I 1 7 � 14 5 �� LE6EN0: SCALE: 1 inch = 5000 feet �Non-s i ac i a� Organ i c Depos i ts �FtoodPiain AI luvium �Des Mo i nes Lobe M i xed G I ac i a 1 Outuash �Super i or l.obe G i ac i a l Outuash �j�,j,�(; S �Pre-Late W i scons i nan 61 ac i a t Dr i f t, Outuash, and T i I I �"OId 6ray" Cafcareous Tili �e��''o`k Surficial Geology SOURGE: Dakata County Plannin9 and Program Management, Oakota County, Minnesota, 1991. y � systems and planning landfills. The surface geology in the township is dominated by either Superior Lobe or Des Moines Lobe Glacial Outwash. The Des Moines Lobe consists of Ioamy sand and gravel that is generally poorly-drained, while the Superior Lobe is primarily gravel and sand that is well-drained. A third type, the "Qld Gray" Calcareous Till is - primarily sandy to clay loams that are generally weli-drained. In addition to the surf'icial geology and bedrock concerns that should be addressed with regards to future development; Empire Township has other areas that have potential development constraints that will require attention. Floodplains in the township are identified in Figure 6, as determined by the Department of Housing and Urban Development's Flood Insutance Rate Maps. Regulations regarding shoreland and floodplain areas that supplement the township's zoning regulations are in effect and administered by Dakota County. Areas of jurisdiction include all identified floodplain areas in the Township. __�_ Empire Township is a member of the VertnillionRiYer Watershed Management -' Cotnmission, established in 1984 to address surface water issues within the ' watershed (Figure 7). The purpose of the Commission is to provide an organization to preserve and use natural water storage and retention of the Watershed, as set forth in the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act . The Commission is also responsible for insuring that jurisdictions properly and consistently implement local water management plans. Where issues concerning more than one jurisdiction cannot be resolved through efforts at the local level, the Commission will act to settle such issues at the request of the jurisdictions. Empire Township does not currently have a surface water management plan. The Vermillion River Watershed Management Commission has prepared a Plan that addresses surface water management needs throughout the watershed. Empire 7 x « . . ----_--"�:�.. � . $1 j 1 � ; , ; � ; ; - : - _ � - -- __ � �: 6 6 �. �� 3t 79 g1 72 74 c� NOTE: Fiood ploin locotions orig inated frorn Flood Insuronce Rote Mops publisheG by the U.S. Depvrtment , of Housing and Urban Deveiopment. SCALE: 1 inch = 5000 feet Figure 6 Floodplain Areas SOURCE: Ookata County Plonning ond Progrom Manvgement, (�okota Gounty, Minnesoto, 1991. a � . . � . . , . � . . . ` . ' ` . .. . . . I :y"':+a •,` �"`.►v��' ••.-- �,, \I . .� .. .. � � � . � . � . . . . .. � _;.� — � . . ~+ � . . . . � �����' (/r •ti, ' \ � - •_.;.... ��:., i - `�''� '`' � ,� � , . ,�\: , �'^c"'* �`�.,,_„'� �� �-" r ; � �i �\ MfIMOuyt � +WfI Iir . �%�`4i \ � . � � �. � � .YK[ �i�l• . . . .� �� ��`•�" '� '~—�� - � ..� . + � , .„...� •�' �, � .,,..,....� � . • -�w.. � �� � -- ----------------- ----- --- ���.. ------------------ � � --�----- � `•., _. �� ._ ;'� ! i � �'f+ -�- �' �i �� �'. . I `� �.• :` ' -- — "�'" f f.. / • J ��' -----._, � _ K,..�,�. ,� � _ � J ... , � \`�` .....ti� . ',, �...� —r- ��.. � " ' ..___..__.. ,i� i .M„W. ��.. \ ,..� � ` ; ^-�. r':,.....d.. �. I { ��, � i '�;t��,_.-' ��,��^�./ ---- ,a . � ; �+..+ _ ...�...�A. __ � � rr�I-' �;/� i � , - � -- r -�- � ------- - --- `---------- - - �----- J-.-------------��r-�--• ` I ���-- -- --- - � �! � _ � �.,^_. % Z � � r � � .�„"'-''.• � � . .� \ .i,. e, �w � . . � . . � eew.s I... � � � . � � . � � ���..� �t� � ���f�� .�n� tJ . . l �,. � . . iy. . . . . . . lr-- � '.� � �... ....n��.. —. � `i.Wi . .�.... � . � . � � ..n� •«. . � . . . ._— \ . , . . . . � � � . n� ��I• ' ,' �j ":,,,,�_----'-' �t � --- _ n.e . . ( . . . . . . . . . . __ � �.eceNo LEGAL ; ; � �9.�W.�.n�.d e�,�a.,, WATERSHED BOUNDARY . . . � � ,/� � � �.,AIII..� � � . � NptTN .. � . . . . � � . . . . . . . . . . . . � . . , ,M , � Figure 7 � �. Vermillion River Watershed Source: Vermillion River Watershed M�nagement Plan . ` � Township feels that there may be more specific issues impacting the township related to surface water management that the Township may wishto address in the future. Therefore, the township will continue to evaluate the programs and projects proposed by the VRWMC, and develop positions and options appropriate to the long-term objectives of the township. Such options will be supported through documentation and policies consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the Township. . . : Community Facilities and Services At the present time, Empire Township's public facilities and services consist of a town hall, a bike trail on TH 3 from 194th Street to the Farmington city lunits, and :water and sewer service that supports selectec}areas of development in the Township. As the township continues to grow, it is expected there will be a need to invest in facilities such as park and recrea:tion areas, as well as expanded water and sewer services. Providing sufficient infrastructure to support anticipated development in the township is an issue that is further addressed in the next section of the Plan: _ At the pre,sent time, police protection is provided. by the Dakota �ounty Sheriff s Department. Service is provided by 24 hour patrol and emergency cali service. This service is presently adequate for current and anticipated growth in the township. _ Fire protection is provided by the Farmington Volunteer Fire Department. Service is anticipated to be sufficient to meet future growth in the township, Park and recreational faeilities in the township consist of tennis_courts, a picnic area and shelter, and ball fields located at the town hall. A wayside rest area is located at TH 3 and 170th Street, at the state weigh station. There is one privately-owned goif course in the township. 8 . , . 'I'he township residents are served by schooLs within the Farmington and Rosemount School Districts. There are no schools located in the township. Students are bvsed to the appropriate schools in either Farmington or Rosemount. Central sewer service is currently provided to residents in developed areas along TH 3 south of 190th Street. Existing lines connect to the Empire Treatment Plant,�~ operated by the Metropolitan Waste Control Comrni�.�ion. Central water service is' provided to homes in developments alang TH 3, between 190th Street and 205th Street. Existing water and sewer services are identified in Figures 8 and 9. There _ are currently no private wastewater treatment plants in Empire Township, nor are they allowed in the Township. In 1992, approximately 225 households were served by public sewer and 170 households served by central water service. Hov.seholds and estimated population served by each MWCC Interceptor line are as follows: 1992 1992 : : Population - `_ Househoids Served _ Served Apple Valley/L,akeville Interceptor#74-09 500 � 166 Farmington Interceptor#71-03 17$ 5� 578 225 Estunated sewer flows to both l�I�VCC interceptors in 1990 was about 58,000 gallons per day from households in Empire Township. Tota.l projected sewer flows for both interceptors to the Empire Treatment Plant are 26-28 nullion gallons per year for the year 2000 and 29-32 million gallons per year in the year 2010. Empire'T�wnship is currently in the process of accwnulating funds in anticipation of the need to construct a water tower to provide water service at a fiiture date to ` the area south of the Vermillion River. Funds are currently placed in a dedicated � 9 , r � -__� _ _ — nn s 5 — — .�_ o�x�iS ` O�S•O� O�o-OI O�o•tri A�O Ts O�o.p� ��. _ _.___..-• ---. � 1 6e o�o�zs � :i�! --' ------- n�n.; l° nie.t. , . +!} . _ ' - --.�. __--------�--- � . ` O�O-oL f a•.. i ��. � o�o•rn o�o oz :;,• :.r ii o�o-zv � a�. ��, 7 rf,r Z . . 4 � 1 � � __ -- -- — _ �P�.SO �---�.��W�a !� a �� . .�w �y// l.. OI0.14 OIO.)�f . . . . �� ::n c�o.Sq 3 ��_ o,es, �; /. o�o•eo o�o•,s ` 'e "^ » o,�, oa..> > '�;:� �/ . . �' 4•».. ,� ' _ . � — ` / e'e•+� � eee+� . . . �_ „ a..'���: �`��` p�o.u. -' Vfp� - �„o,,.,, o�o.,, ..J ��v _ � - � . . o�o..t. e . ,. �>.., �e R�� _ o� �S • t� ao•to� / . .�• _ � `e . o�o-oi °'cs ' _ . / / ot�•:s . ' ��� CIL•OL . O�o•o.� :6�q we�� ! �� .r�• � �. . . � �',J:. '�e.e�.. � __.:�o�o.o� � . �� � --_.7/_ �_,._a:e. . _ . . - � : . . . r.rr '� .. on-zo o�o.t� � rno.Z7 �� � on.at �:'; ��ri'i � --�— --- - - - ----- � _ f/ ,./ t r , „ ... o,o.�o a,� �� o��-o, �,/ o.s... ,r o�o.o., ,..,, � / 7 , ,- _� �9 . 1/�..o _. � u aa•s, \ �� `y OrO.sp ,y . y a�•�S � o�p.rt i �" n��.�p.�. . •* so�o.se rt, ,� o�s-r� \ _ . � ,...,e.. —�--- '�'..� .. ' : � . .. . .. � oro-s� .�'� � t... e.e.ee me-e� ��p.1O . � / � i f�/lta; ^' de.= . . . . � . .. on•6t rd��f. st�I, '� �,1�-Sv . . f `- weu I . . � �� +J + : ( � . � . . . � a�sr �� _ ".�� .,/ co •o �_ •s._ �, J.., . �c»n� ..o' s, � !� � "n ' a� oio-eo� � . «au rno.oi U'� wlW q CHrlGO . ���❑� �•�� .��1 j O�O S. . �010.24 . ao•ei I -?1H ��--� CIO�]ClD " o,o.o, . . � 1 ��❑L1U a����.�J � o�o-te� ao-os� - . � oio-z� � . � . � wo�t � ��`i c�c-7�� a000aoz :�,-- � ����//�/// -_ - __ ���� UlL.I� ��._:__.. o�o•xi ` . . . .. . ' . .,7J..'_'---- �.. � ----) ---- - '--'- �l . C�O��� 0�0-)9 . . .. V/l 1 � e�o•ss ow•so ao-si 1IL_J '� O�0-75 O�0•�t -�-- - -- l� T C:y .s Fa.r.�..1�... J/(�� a.�: o ts... (J�a� ��rl ai.�o �-soio.n � . _��_.__��7rr— �--=��J ��a� st., � iee• n. . �� �e.�e` ro�o.,� � II ill � � _ .M,>.. rr n.. lu ,, Figure 8 Existing Water Service . '--"� Wafermain _ ��� Line Size � ' � Existing We11 \ • . � �. 1 . '_ — — — � —s—��,.�_ � � � n�l.Zs� � � . . O�L•25 �\ ` O1�•OI � � � OIO.OI OIO•24 OI�j�7S OI�p.QI � � � . . ' '._ , �,� O�p.25 .. . . ::�f — _ e,o•. ��� � O�o-to jr! � � � . Oi0•OL � . � � 1 , , .M1Kw. . . � � O�O•29. . Ot0•OL � . , �mw OIO-L1 � � . E '� � . ' w�_.� ^t1cF�� ..n . — _ . � , , aN to ::"«� .� �— �"' ``S.. _.._. � . . ^ , ,r � � o�e�e� �• Oro-a4 o�0-TS o�o-to 0�0+�5 ; ;:: /� O�p.;. Oip.sp `'� ^. . r.s� w . �,�• . � Qu�` ? '�.7✓ �� ��• � `' ` �.. �.,0, ••• : ao•+� � pMiLL1CN » �~ oee., � oiono � . . � • �.� Ot0•i/ � . . . � �w0•�N j t �M . O�O•!L '�• ... � . . . .e.n � �� .. ' .. . CS « ao•cs o�o�=� � � - oz,.=s o,o.o, i � . j e,e.. � ' ' � •o�o-o. � ' � � .., J••e.� ao.o� at•oc J , :'aese.<. -�- --= «e.: � a�.zq ' o� 'N o•ta �.� � r - — — ;.;r. o�o-zt �'�.�L �rt ... t`i� Z�� , ---at• v�. a . . . . � .p•% ,/ ' O�O•DO � of os !-o) : 8 m..es O�p.pv . �� �, p �9 j � , ,�y ae.,, . �.fP."90 w . � 1� _ e....e o,,.,s O�O.rl $ t F a�. o.e. Ol�.tv I ..; .s }O�o-St N. f4 Oi0-S/ \�1/ C.�r or t.e...»aiev ea.�e� . , no.f� � • • •• 0�0.10 � . . . . r /E ,� .i ee�e.w a�- ew,s�I pi�-S♦ . . . . � . / o�y�6i� .•Ee�jti� N , � � �II ' e�� :! I _ _ � ac�!) . . '�.�• CO •D •i � tw" fr ;5�. 7r i'�. py.rr� 'li Pp .. �OWDO� ae-tl OIO-41 . � . . �� f o�o•z� ow.co ��� � ��� j��l ( � °ip'2e � r, �� s. . oio•a ' ,n� ,� ❑��OIJ � � a�aQ��aD..� o�o-te o�o:oi ow•z� . o�o.c � S _1_ C�CJOOCJ��r_ � , _ . �_ � °,,.,, ., — � �--- _ ._ . - r� o,o.,q ; � -- o,o.,, — — oro.�s o�o�-so o�o.si o�o.is o�o•e� -- ❑ � � C.ry .s i's..e�ryr...� ❑ a:: a ao o ao o M..�� .�. ts•. .. STr� �ee.n, me.r� . . -1(�_'_'j( re s� . (� �� �— ii, 11l Figure 9 Existing Sewer Service -- --- Existing Line O'� Line Size � !•\�f'j • � I Existing Lift Station �� � � • RESOURCE STRATEGIES • CORPOR�.TION . � . . . � '^^C:s•i'TEiio�arS►r . . - � � � . . . S�itPf:•�0 � � . � � � � . . � � •.uN��Eaor,ln,�.ty � � . . . . � . SS:.�a . � � account. Needs analysis and feasibility studies will be conducted that will identify a timeframe for providing additional water capacity in the Rural Center of the Township. The Empire Wastewaster Treatment Plant currently experiences excessive inflow/infiltration of groundwater and surface water. Empire Township has adopted an ordinance that prohibits discharges into the sanitazy sewer system, and provides penaities for violations. Transportation � ' Road functional classifications and other transportation-related characteristics in Empire Township are shown in Figure 10. Minor arterials (CSAH 66, TH 3 and TH 50) are intended to connect major development centers. Spacing is generally about five miles apart in rural areas, Collectors, such as Blaine Avenue, connect neighborhoods and small business areas, l'hey generally provide service to local areas and connect minor arterials, other collectors and Iocal streets. Spacing in deve�oping areas and rural areas is generally one to three miles. Local roads in the ' . . � township provide for property access and serve immediate access needs. The County Road Turnback Program was established by Dakota County to insure that roads within the County are maintained in the most efficient manner by the most appropriate jurisdiction. Turnback candida.tes are evalua.ted based upon the following criteria: . * Traffic Volumes -- Roads which accommodate a low level of Countywide use, as shown by: - Volumes lower than 4t30 Average Daily Trips in rural areas, - Volumes lower than 1,000 Average Daily Trips in urban areas, * Route Continuity -- Roads which area: - Very short in tota.l length (less than 3 miles) 10 - Discontinuous segments {less than 3 miles of direct rnovement). - Lacking a connection to a County or State arteriaL * Spacing -- Where the distance between parallel County roads is closer than: -Two miles in urban areas. \ - Three miles in rural areas, depending upon the nature of the roads in thel area. * Access -- Roads whi.eh serve access needs that are limited to local intersectioris, and where the functions of serving major activity centers, metro highway systems or a farm-to-market service are not involved. : The Turnback process is based upon agreement by the County and the a€fected local jurisdiction. Following are the general terms included in a Tumback agreement for townships: 1. The County and Township agree on compensation and work necessary before turnback. 2. The County will provide a descriptian of property. 3,-The County agrees to maintain the road for two years aft�;r adoption of an. of�cial Turnback resolution by the County Board; therea.fter, all maintenance and other responsibilities are the Township`s. 4. The Township agrees to hold the County harmless and understands that the County has met all obligations for the road. Potential road turnback candidates in Empire Township, as identified by Dakota County, are shown in Figure 10. Target dates for tlunbacks have not been ' � specifically identified.. Traffic cou.nts (1988 data) are shown in Figure 10. Prajected counts, as identified in the Draft Dakota County Transportation Plan, are aLso indicated. Based upon the County data, there do not appear to be significant traffic count increases 11 � , anticipated for most roads in Empire Township in the future. These issues are addressed in the Development Guide and Policies section of this Plan. 12 �i s . . � . . . . . . � _ -...-.Y,=-� � 4 I 1 '. . . - -—- //- — _ _" ��`'.L s= ---� —�-^ _.. � . _ ,^ „ _.. _... �.� ._ .. .. - •• : ' " -- / --•- �\ __- .. rM -� -�--- - -- ---�� �—� _ ---- - -...._ �---- .,-•.--�..._\� _» �;• ...j �,.... � ,M .._.: .. yY O �.� , ... p - ZD , m .� � _`;` .... --- ._.. �,.� _ e- ��. � ' , � _����o — - --- -- - _.. . � � � _ . .. , � �--- -- -�— •-- __ i �, � _ .... � . - - - • . ` : y�-a ---- ---=� t.„ _ �/� . � - —- -�_,- ---- —-- — — — .�.,�._ _ . � - ,, i �.,,. r... .... � . / � " �" '' wy��"� �_���_ �_����1", -.���Ka'_��i _���' �'�"' �/�i/_t��.. ._ . -' �- ` ^^ = -` ---- -h-- ------ - •— ..,.. /,/ - -- -•- — -,F-- --- --�-__ :-�• Y f/ t _`-,; .— �1_.. ��.. ' e.. _ . .... ..... .r •. �i .... . I1E.'r:�i _ " • -" __ —__ -!� ^ 4 �� — - � � - .;�- - �� _ -— - - _— — — -� �. .,., �� i �� ' - �� ---.__ .. �"„�,� ,,�,s ;� " - . . , . . _. . � : f.. : - � - .----- — ,��� t �. _ _; .._ .�- a�= a... - _ .. . ... � � .. ... � � .ti.s'- .... �-- •• t' , _ . ._ �- •--- --� � t 3p O 1- -- � �� a ��i 'f�6s ''- -- - � �-- ' -� ' � � "�.^ �_ - ,i r - r ., ,.�� -- �— — ---�•- \ --� �.--�!'��r� _, .<.. ,.. �-:---�M y' — _.-�_� - _.. � -- -----� . P � J� `� , �� �~ �+ «� . ...+ ` . 1 . ..,� `� . `� ....__. .. �-: � � �f�� !-- � /63 - _ __ — - - _ � �__" -1� - '",...^� `FIULHJ( �_._ .... _» .. • ... _!'l`_' ' _ .._ «_ -�;�.J �, ----- ----- �- --l- ��___ �� �-�l_ ._.. �p • a:�E� ui.. . _1 ---- �r _�i_ruu "-� — _ �.. ._ _.. .._ - �.. �� ��i �t�-IIlUUULJ .,, .._ � „q' �'_I - I 0. _ 4'�(�-1 - ..... ._ --� -� _ - -::- _ -, --_ - - _ -----.� , __ j --�N.II�N_.tt. � 00 3550 25 O .... ;�- Z , 1 p """ ' ` . 1 ••- 1 1 '' � . _ . • . . � . .. . � � Figure 10 EMPlRE TOWNSHIP DAKOTA COUN7Y,MINNES07A �■s Minor Arterial Transportation Characteristics • • • • Collector ,�._..,,- ��J � ■� r Potential Turnback �0�� �o 0 19$8 Traffic Volumes . � TOWNSHIP GClALS AND GUIDE PLAN The Empire Township Comprehensive Plan is a long-range policy document that will serve as an official document and as an advisory tool for elected. and appainted officials, as well as residents, in managing growth and development in the township. This section of the Plan contains statements of township goals, objectives and policies that will be followed to guide township gmwth and development. The Development Guide Plan and a Thoroughfare Plan are also included. TOWNSHIP GOALS and POLICIES The goals, objectives-and policies outiined in this section of the Pian are intended to be the foundation for a number of programs,actions and growth decisions implemented by the township. Goals which the township feeLs are important to identify in order to establish a basic direction as to where the township sees itself in the next 10 to 20 years are as follows: TOWNSHIP GOALS A. Development - _ , * Preservation of the rural character of the township,while meeting tbe urban development needs within the designated Rural Center. * Continuation of agriculture as the primary land use in the township. * Orderly and balaneed development that is consistent with the tawnship's rurai c�aracter. * Compatibility among different land uses. * Availability of housing types and densities for all ages, income leveLs and ethnic backgrounds * I}eveiopment of a commerciai service focai point for the township B. Environmental Protection * Conservation and protection of unicque and sensitive natural, historical and pbysical resources 13 * Minimization of environmental impacts resulting from development while encouraging opportu�hes to enhance the township's tax base C, Transportativn * Ease of movement in a safe manner through an effieient and accessible transportation system - D. Facilities and Services _-- * Balance and cliversity of community facilities, serviees and - opportunities for those living and working in the township E:Governance * Representation of the township an issues related to county, regional, state and adjacent communities that have the potential of impacting t�te tong-term goals of the township * �ound, responsible fiscai management based upon a stable, baianced - tax base _ , _ , _ * Informed residents that have the opport�nity to offer input and have access to township government activifies Policy areas that the township has identified.as important to address are: * Rural Center ' * Agriculture * Residential * Commercial * Industrial * Environmental Protection * Transporta.tion * Facilities and Services 14 RURAL CENTER Over several decades, the southwest portion of Empire Township has developed in a relatively urban manner, including a limited number of commercial uses and smaller residential lots served by public water and sewer. Historically, the area has not been recognized for its "urban service area" characteristics because of its locatian in the Rural Service Area as defined in the Metropolitan Development andl Investment Framework Guide. Empire Township has, however, been responsible ' in providing the necessary urban services, such as water and sewer, to residents in the developing urban area. Empire Township feels it is important to recognize this particular area of the Township for its "urban service" qualities, while still maintaining a rural-oriented focus for the Township in the future. Designation of this area as a Rural Center, according to the definition and policies established in the Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework, will allow the Township to continue providing the neeessary level of services to the urban-density land uses found in this area. The area designated in the Township as Rural Center is identified in the Development Guide Plan (Figure 14}. _ ___ The designated Rural Center consists of approximately 940 acres, or about four percent of the total area of the Township. Approximately 1$I t 170 acres} of the land in the Rural Center is currently deveioped, primarily for residential use. Undevelopable land (e.g. flood:plain areas) accounts for about 13°b (about 120 acres), while the majority remains available for development(69°b, or about 650 acres). _.. Current developments approved by the Townshi will result in an additional 90 P acres being developed with sewered residential lots over the next 10-15 years. Figure 12 indicates the area to be served by sewer, as approved by the Metropolitan Council, to the year 2040. 15 'Figure 14 identifies proposed long-term designated land uses in the Township. All urban-related" land uses requiring urban serviees will be contained within the Rural Center, as indicated in Figure 14. Following is a brea.kdown of proposed land use types, by approximate acreage, within the Rural Center: Designated Land Use �PProximate Approximate -- Pro�osed Acreage Current Acrea� Agriculture ^ . 310 507 Rural Residential ! _ 110 -15 - ,_. Urban Residential 358 270 Commercial 20 6 Institutional 22 �2 Undevelopable 120 120 T�TAL 940 940 AGRICLTLTURE ��je_�tives 1. Promote Iong-term agricuiture on iands having commercial agricultural value. 2. Continue agricultural preserves in areas with strong agricultural potentiaL 3. Prevent 1and use conflicts that discourage agricultural investment or ' encourage development speculation. . Agriculture is critical to the eha,racter and economy of Empire Township. It repres�nts a Iarge majority of the land use in the township, with about one-half the eli ible certi� g ed land current ly artiei atin in the P P € Agncultural Preserves program. Although rural areas are best suited for agricultural purposes, the greatest threat to 16 farming operations is encroachment of non-farm development. Problems assc�ciated with incompatibility between agricultural and urban land uses include service complaints, assessments for urban services, higher taxes an farm property, and noise or odor complaints.It is the purpose of this Plan to encourage and guide non-farm residential development away from prime agricultural areas, into areas of the township that offer or are scheduled to offer nece;ssar3' support services, such as central sewer and water. Township land use regulations will also be enforced to support farm operations on prime agricultural lands in the township. Examples of land uses apprapriate for the agricultural area are animal boarding facilities, sod farms, crop production, and recreational open spaces. Cc�mpatible uses include single family residences at a maximum density of one dwelling per 40 acres and other operations nonmally associated with fanming. Policies * The township will support and encourage incentives that will maintain and increase farming operations in the township. * Non-farm residential development will not exceed one non-farm dwelling per quarter-qua.rter section. * The township will support voluntary enrollment of land in the agricultural preserves program. * The township will not allow development that requires public services and utilities in the agricultural area, and will discourage development that promotes speculation in agricultural areas. * The township will promote "best management practices" for farmiand in the township, in order to insure that soil erosion and water quality standards are maintained. 17 RESIDENTIA►L 'ect'� 1. Create and maintain living environments that are compatible with the natural environment and consistent with the rural character of the township. 2. Insure that the existing housing stock is maintained in a safe and healthful manner. 3. Protect residential areas from adverse and incompatible uses. - - 4. Insure a vari�ty of h�using �ypes and densities that promote diversity, consistent with the Township Development Guide Plan.: Residential development is presently concentrated in the southwestem part of the Township and along roads in the township that afford convenient access for residents. In addition to agricultural areas that are more suitable for farming, there are other areas in the township that are not desirable for residential development. These include areas with steep slopes, wet soiLs and floodplains, and bedrock either . exposed or with little soil cover-. The natural resources found in the township place - _ some limitations on development, and must be taken into consideration when evaluating future development propasa.ls in the township, Concentrations of development along major roads, such as TH 3 and CSAH 66, present potential safety hazards. There is a need to insure that access is limited, where necessaxy, in order to accommodate posted road design speeds in a safe manner. Also, residential development in a concentrated manner on smaller lots pos�s potential problems from the standpoint of highway access and groundwater contamination. It is recognized that it is important to pIan for appropriate residential development in the township in order to prevent the need. to provide premature urban services that result in higher tax rates for agricultural Iand. Policies * In areas not served by central pubTic water and sewer, single-family 18 r < housing will only be considered for residential development. * All homes in the township not served by central sewer will be required to be served by a primary drainfield system in conforrnance with Minnesota Pollution Control Agency standards. Assurance must also be provided that a replacement drainfield can be provided on the site shoutd the original ' system fail. Lot sizes shall be a minimum of one acre, but of sufficient size to insure that sufficient area and adequate soiLs exist for an alternative drain�eld site. * In the designated Rural Center, lot sizes served by central sewer service shall be a minimum of 15,000 square feet, designaterl as "Urban` � Residential" in the Development Guide Plan. *Development along major roads will be restricted,and will be subject to the Dakota County Access Spacing Guidelines, as identified in the Dakota County Transportation Plan. When appropriate, service frontage roads in newly developing areas may be required. * Dividing of a parcel of land into more than one lot will require platting. Building permits on lots of ten acres ar less shall only be issued for iots that have been platted and conveyed by a registered survey. * The Township will require Development Agreements for all subdivision developments to insure the goaLs, objectives and regulations of the township are met. * The Township encourages housing availability to all persons, regardless of race or religion. COMMERCIAL : Objectives 1. Insure that the convenience shopping needs of the township's residents are addxessed in the future. 2. Maintain the rural character of the township while supporting agricuitural service-related businesses. 19 . .� With the growth in the township, there is a desire to insure that an appropriate level of convenience shopping opportunities are available to township residents. Issues such as accessibility, provision of public support services, and compatibility with adjoining land uses need to be considered. There is a desire to create a central commercial focal point for the township; this can best be accomplished by identifying a specific area for future commercial development within the designated Rural Center of the township, and by controlling future development along majQr roads, such as proposed CSAH 46, TH 52 and CR 66. Policies * Areas appropriate for eommercial development to meet the convenience shopping needs of township residents are designated in the Development Guide Plan within the Rural Center area. Intensive commercial land uses that are more appropnate to urbanized communities are not considered compatible with township objectives. * In order to insure compatibility with other 1and uses, the township will - consider the foll�wing in evaluating commercial development proposals: - Access to the location rnust be conveniently provided by the existing road system, supplemented if necessary by service frontage roads along collectors or arterials. - Traffic studies for the proposed area of development may be required. - The proposed development wi11 be eompatible with surrounding land uses. �_ � - A market study for a specific commercial proposal may be required. - Sewer and water services must be provided to the satisfaction of the township. - Commercial strip development shall be avoided. - A deta.iled site plan will be required for considerafion by the township, to inclsde, but not be limited to: 20 f X - A drainage plan - A landscape plan - Proposed access points - Parking requirements -Signage and lighting requirements � � * The township will require Development Agreements for �:11 commercial �µ developments to insure the goals, ob}ectives and regulations of the township are met. _ . INDUSTRIAL , Objectives l. Ensure that impacts upon the natural environment and other land uses are minimized. 2. Maintain the option to take advanta.ge of opportunities to attract industrial development to the township that is appropriate to the rural character of the township. Industrial development in the township is very limited. Typically, this type of development is associated with more urbanized areas 6ecause of the demands for __ sewer, water, fire protection and road capacities. For these reasons, it is unlikely that Empire Township will experience any significant industrial development in the future. The township recognizes that there may be industrial uses that are appropriately located in a rural environment. In the event that an industrial use is considered in the township, the township has established policies to be used in guiding that decision. Policies * Agric�lturally-related industrial uses that result in the manufacture of products associated with the agricultural area will be evaluated on a case- 21 x � by-case basis. * Industrial uses may be required to submit a detailed site plan to include, but not limited to: - A drainage plan - A landscape plan - Proposed access points - Parking requirements -Signage and Iighting requirements _ * Industrial uses must demonstrate the ability to provide sufficient water and sewer facilities required to meet the needs of the proposed use, and address stortnwater runoff issues. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION � Objectives l. Assure compatibility of development with the na.turai environment. 2. Conserve the township's unique and essential natural resources. — 3. Provide for the protection of the township's residents and property from- naturar and manmade hazards. : There is a considerable amount of vacant 1and in Empire Township; much of it subject to various environmental constraints to potential development. The township has taken extensive efforts to maintain the rural character and integrity of the township through policies directed at agricultural land preservation and Iow density development, where appropriate. There are additional environmental _ factors that need to be addressed in order to insure protection of the natural resources in the township, surrounding communities and the County. These include: * Groundwater supply and quality * Surface water/stormwater drainage a.rid q�ality - * Wet soils and steep slopes * Sensitive soils and erosion control 22 y . Groundwater Supply and Quaiity The impact of actions within Empire Township regarding groundwater extend beyond the township's boundaries. Contamination of groundwater in the township from herbicides, fertilizers or inadequate onsite septic systems can greatly affect ' the quality of water retrieved from wells in other communities. Alternatively, indiscriminate use of groundwater supply in more urbanized areas can impa�t the _ availability of groundwater used for private we1Ls and irrigation in Empire Township. Dakota County is in the process of completing a graundwater plan for the C'ounty, required by the Groundwater Protection Act of 1989. The Plan will address issues such as land use impact on groundwater, water wells and wellhead protection, groundwater recharge areas, individual sewage systems, groundwater monitoring, and relationships between groundwater and surface water. It is expected the Plan will provide the framework to protect the County's groundwater supplies into the future. The Prairie du Chien aquifer is the most unportant source of groundwater in the area. Figure 11 identifies areas in the township that have different degrees of susceptibility to groundwater contamination. The ratings are based on_ _ __ _:_ _ characteristies of the soils that lie over the aquifer. Susceptibility is based upon the ability of the soil to absorb contaminants, transform them into inert substances, dilute them to be inactive, or control the rate at which they flow to the aquifer. As indicated in Figure I l, a great majority of the land in Empire Township is highly susceptible to groundwater contamination in a relatively short period of time from when potential contaminants are introduced into the soil. This is an area of concern for the township, and supports a need to adopt strong policies that will provide protection of groundwater in the township and the region. Dakota County has adopted Ordinance#113, related to onsite sewage treament. The ordinance requires licensing of onsite sewage treatment installers, pumpers, hauiers, designers, and inspectors. The ordinance is currently in the process of 23 v Y ^ being revised and updated by the County. The Township endorses the current ordinance provisions as relates to onsite system regulations. Pol�cies * Onsite sewage systems will be reguiated through performance standards in the zoning ordinance, requiring a permit for installation. A sketch map, site information and type of system will be required. Standards for installation _ = and maintena.;�ce will be based upon curr�;nt M�'CA Individual Sewage Treatment Systems Standards, � * The Township will monitor and participate in activities related to amendments to Dakota County Ordinance #113, and will conform to revised provisions related to inspection and maintenance requirements. * The township wi11 encourage the Building Inspector to maintain adequate training regarding updated ins��lation techniques and regulations regarding individual sewage treatment systems. * Existing individual sewage treatment systems that need to be expanded or _ ___ . - - _-- replaced will be required to meet the most current MPCA standards, pnly alternative systems identified in the most current MPCA standards will be allowed iri the township to replace failed existing systems. * Empire Township will participate in the Count�s Groundwater Protection Plan, and consider adoption of policies resulting from that Plan that may be appropriate to the township. * New water wells drilled in the township shali be installed in confomlance � with Minnesota State Code. Abandoned weils wili be required to be capped and grouted, ui conformance with Minnesota State Code. * Empire Township will continue to monitor activities at the regional and state Ievels regarding groundwater supply and qvaiity issues. 24 r � � � � . . � . . . . � � . � . . . . � � . 58 , , 81 . -.-�:.-�= _ _-_. :;�:-~ - :`::�::_.--'�- -- .---:_�._.--��-��:�-� - _-,��.: _ ., .._-��::::- `- _ . - :_�:.,�..�-,�-__ - . � � .. ' =9A, . ^M . . . . . . - �� � V� . � � . . .. . . . - � �. _����:5�'� ... . . . . . . � . _ `�� _ _ . . � .�.;��'s. �.,:.�--� . � - . ��----^r�-.`.--`— � � . . � � '�,�.,, .. ��_� . . -�>�r=-�-'�'',��.�.,: �s: 66 . __. 66 f 3 - . . __ 79 _ 8i . 31 72 )2 i4 5p _ 50 LE6EN0: SCALE: 1 inch = 5000 feet (�Very Lou Sens i t i v i ty, over a century .Lou Sensitivity, decades to century � �Lou to Moderate Sens i t i v i ty, severa t decades �-,l�e l � �1loderate Sensitivity, years to decades �H i gh to Moderate Sens i t i v i ty, up to 10 years �H i gh Sens i t i v i ty, weeks to years Sensitivity of Prairie du Chien Aquifer �Very H i gh Sens i t i v i ty, hours to awnths SOURCE: Dakota County Planning and Program Management, Dakota County, Minnesota, 1991. v 4 Surface WaterJStormwater Drainage and Quatity A considerable amount of Empire Township is covered by surface water of some type, dominated by the Vermillion River floodplain or its tributaries {see Figure 6). Seyeral wettand areas are also found in the township, as well as wet soils, which will be discussed in the next sectian. Dakota County has primary responsibility for � enforcement of regulations to protect the Vermillion River through administration of the Caunty Shoreland and Floodplain Management Regulations. The County regulations will conform with the tnost current shoreland rules esta.blished by the Department of Natural Resources, and the Individual Sewage Treatment Standards - - � of the Pollution Control Agency. Major concerns as they relate to surface water quality and drainage are improperly located and regulated feedlots, and chemical pollution and sedimentation from runoff resulting from inadequate erosion control, dra.inage practices and regulations. Nonpoint source pollutants.can be traceci to two primary sources: land develo�ment and agriculture practices. Urbanized land development generally increases the volume of runoff, as well as the concentration of pollutants in the runoff, Detention ponds are a means of mitigating these impacts. Even well- designed ponds will not reduce the increased volume of runoff following urbanization, nor will they tota.11y remove the additional pollutants following urbanization. AgricuIture is also a contributor of nonpoint source pollutants. Nonpoint source � poilution occurs as a result of intensive land cultivation and husbandry practices, and appears in three basic forms: soil erosion; agriculture supplements such as nutrients, pesticides, and herbicides; and animal waste products. Each of these sources, when allowed in water bodies, smother aquatic life, change the aquatic environment by limiting light penetration of the water, and result in the 25 transmission of toxins to area water bodies. Empire Township, it has already been mentioned, is a member of the Vermillion River Watershed Management Commission. As a participant, the township has the opportunity to insure that water management issues in the watershed that may have an impact upon the township will be addressed in a coordinated and equitable . manner. Policies _ . : -`* Ernpire Township will prohibit development adjacent to surface water areas that may cause pollution from runoff or discharge that is not within limits established by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. � * The township will cooperate and coordinate actions with Dakota County regarding the enforcement of the County Shoreland and Floodplain Ma.nagement Ordinanee. � The township will require, as part of any proposed subdivisions, that the natural drainage system remain intact. * Approval of subdivision design will require dedication of drainage easements and ponding areas adequate to channel runoff generated by a 25 year storm of one hour duration. * The natural drainage system in the township will be protected and used to the extent possible for storage and flow of runoff. Wetlands shauld be used as natural discharge areas. Presettling of runoff wili be required prior to discharge to_wetlands. * Temporary storage areas and presedimentation gonds will be required to accommodate peak flows of water runoff. Newly-constructed stormwater sedimentation ponds will be required to meet pond design standards ofthe_ National Urban Runoff Program (NURP). * Empire Township will continue to actively participate as a member of the Vermillion River Watershed Management Commiccion to insure that the 26 , interests of the township are addressed in a coordinated and equitable manner. * Empire Township will use MPCA's urban "best management practices" {currently titled "Prote�ting yVater Quaiity in Urban Areas") for all new or redeveloped, land developments in the township. * Empire Township will grepare and adopt a local water management plan and incorporate stormwater managenzent practices into its Township zoning ordinance, consistent with the requirements of the Vermillion River Watershed Management Plan and state law,�by December 31, 1993. Wet Soils and Steep Slopes Wet soils and steep slopes are generally not suitable for any type of sie�r�lapment. In addition to the fact that they are environrnentally-sensitive areas, they also are impediments to development from the standpoint of construction cost and safety. Steep slopes are very suseeptible to erosion if not properly managed, which may result in foundation damage. Sewage systems aiso function poorly on steep slopes. At present, steep slopes in the township are found primarily in agricultural azeas, and arefairly limited. Wet soiLs have poor characteristics for structural support and are unsuitable for onsite sewage systems. They serve the function of storing runoff'from storms or snow melt; if they are developed, more severe flooding of the watershed is likely. Wet soi�s are predominant throughout the township, primariiy located along the Vermillion River and other small drainageways. In addition to development concerns associated with wet areas, they ser�,e as habitat for various unique.or endangered species. While there do not appear to be an such s y pecies in Empire Township, wet areas should be protected as permanent open space with no development ailowed. The Wetlands Conservation Act of 1991 provides the Township with responsibilit Y 2'7 for administration of the Act, which includes review and approval of applications for altering wetland areas in the Township. Until July l, 1993 an interim program is in place that places a moratorium on draining, burning or filling of any wetland unless the Township agrees to accept responsibility for administering the Act. The Township has entered into an agreement with the Soil and Water Conservation ��:. District during the interim period to serve as technical advisor to the Township regarding review of applications for wetland alterations to includ� determination of wetiands, wetland certification, wetland size, area of impact, review of replacement pla.ns, and site review to detemune if a replacement plan is properly . implemented. _ - - Policies * Slopes greater than 18�'o are unsuitable for development and will not be considered for development. * Development proposals on slopes greater than 12°lo will be reviewed and�- strictly regulated under the Township Z.oning Ordinance. * Dedication of steep slopes for pmtective easements will be strongly encouraged as part of the subdivision review process. * The Soil Conservation Service and the Soil and Water Conservation District will be requested to review proposed subdivisions in steep slape areas and wet soils areas. * Err��ire Township will conform to the provisions of the VVetlands Conservation Act of 1991 in order to ensure the protection of wetlands in the Township, consistent with the Act. * Dedication for the protecrion of wetlands will be required, when necessary, as part of the subdivision approval process in the township. * VFJet soil protection zones and regulations will be included within the Township Zoning Ordinance. � * Empire Township will serve as the Local Governmental Unit regarding 28 � � , administration and enforcement of the Wetlands Conservation Act of 1991. * The Soil and Water Conservation District will be requested to review all applications for alteratior�s xo wetlands in the township, and provide recommendations to the township regarding technieal requirements. Sensi�ive Soils and Erosion Controi Erosion results from inadequate farming practices or insu€ficient protection of exposed soils during construction. It r�ults in the l� of valua.ble tc�pcoil and clogs drainageways and cu�verts; causes sedimentation that reduces water quaiity, and reduces storage capacity of ponds and lakes. Converting land from its natural state or from agricultural uses to more urban uses results in an increase in stormwater runoff. Careful planning and regulation reiated to conservation of soils, . water, and natural vegetation can reduce erosion, runoff and sedimentation in developing areas, lVlineral (sand and gravel) extraction in the township is presentl limited to one relatively small site in the narthwestern part of the township. y Extraction sites may potentially produce erosion, sedimentation, and groundwater probiems if they are not adequately planned and regulated.. The township has not experienced a�y probtems from such activities; how�ver, performance standards for this use are appropriate. Policies * The township will require an erosion controt plan for proposed development that provides preventive measures for erosion and sedimentation. * In developments that require removal of topsoil, sufficient arable soils shail be set aside for respreading over the developed area, The soil should be restored to a depth of at Ieast four inches, and be reseeded as soon as possible. * Development proposals on slopes of at least 12-18% will be required to include measures for preventing erosion during and after construction. 2s * Development in the township will be encouraged to conform to the natural limitations of the topography and soil so as to create the least potential for soil erosion. * The township will encourage the retention of natural vegetation as part of ..:� any development. � * If erosion is resulting from an agricultural operation in the township, the, Soil and VVater Conservation District should be consulted regarding .,. . possibie corrective or preventative measures. Standards and recommendatians of the SW�D will be applied to address appropriate corrective and preventative tneasures. - * The township wil! pursue development and implementation of a master tree planting plan, in eooperation with the Soil and Water Conservation . District. Standards for planting of trees in new developments will be established and enforeed. * The tcwnship will esta�lish performance standards for mineral extraction operations within the Township Zoning Urdinance and Mineral Extraction Ordinance. _ FACILITIES AND SERVICES Qb jectives L Provide public facilities and services that support the needs of the township's residents and are consistent with the staged development identified in the Deveiopment Guide Plan. 2. Provide infrastructure supporting facilities and services to support urban- related land uses only to the area designated the Rural Center in the Development Guide Plan. 3. Provide for assurances that essential public services wiil not be disrupted. 4. Provide facilities and services in a cost-effective manner, consistent with sound fiscal principles. 30 . i� Empire Township has developed in the past with an emphasis on maintaining the rural character of the area. The approach has Iimited the need for the Township to provide any significant level of public facilities and services to support the needs of the township's residents. Current facilities include the town hall, a small park, and limited water and sewer facil�ties serving developing:areas in the western part of the township. As the township continues to grow, it is important to plan for the provision of community facilities and services to meet futuren�s�iat result from devetopment. Although the to��vnship does not anticipate, nor is it supporting, extensive growth in the future, there are several areas of public facilities and services that will need to be addressed from a policy perspective. Par�s and Recreation The township's single recreation facility is located adjacent to the town hall, providing tennis, picnic, volleyball and baseball facilities. There has been an identified need by the Parks and Recreation Commission to provide recreatianal facilities in Empire Township as development continues to occur. In the future, the township should prepare for an increased need anri emphasis on open space and recreational facilities for residents. Policies . * The township will require, at its option, dedication of land or cash in lieu for parks in future subdivision approval requests. . Water and Sewer Service The existing water and sewer service areas in Empire Township are shown in Figures 8 and 9. Service is cu.rrently provided to residential areas and limited commercial development in the western part of the township, In the future, it is expected that priority for services will be provided to existing developeci areas in the township, then extended to areas program�ed for urban residential development, consistent with the Development Guide PIan. Figure 12 identi�es a 31 . � conceptual staging strategy for water and sewer service in the township, based upan the anticipated direction for development as indicated in the Township Development Guide Plan. The projected sewer flows for MWCC interceptors#73-01 and #74-09 (identified. in Fig�re 9) are 26-28 MGY in the year 2000 and 29-32 IVIGY in the year 2010. Based upon anticipated development activity consistent with the Development . Gui��P��,�rnpir�Township's share of increased sewer flows compare�l �o Metropolitan Council's grojections are as follows 1992 Sewered 1992 2000 Sewered 200U 2010 Sewered 2010 � Households MGD HotLsehol MGD Households GD Empire'I�vp. 225 .058 373 .084 390 .115 Int. #74-09 lb6 .043 314 .070 320 .094 Int.# 71:-03 59 .015 59 .014 74 .021 Met.Council 225 .460 300 080 340 .090 Base� upon the above comparison, it is clear that:Empixe Township must place some restr-ictions on development of sewered lots within the designated Rural center, in order to remain within the Metropolitan Council's projections for sewer flows at the Empire Wastewater Treatment Plant. No additional sewer capacity is available to the year 2000 for the Township beyond that already allocated by the Metropolitan Council. Also, the Township has experienced some inflow and infiltration (TjI} problems in its sanitary sewer system. I/I flows reduce the capacity of the township's sewer lines, and aiso consume available capacity at the Empire Treatment Plant. In order to address potential problems associated with IJI, the township must consider actions aimed at reducing the I/I flows into the sanitary sewer lines in the Township, and place Iimitations on any further development that may require sewer connections to the Empire Treatment Plant. 32 _ � . ., ,- � •,\ � �,. ..� � .,., ,.� ,..,. -, ,.,. . ..,,, ,,, �, +�..w .r �in.)5 � r� r�n.. � ,.�n . . � ' ` nin.nf r,., srt ..�n.,,. . . ..t � _ ^�n r r � � � ' � I•� e��• . �, � � " l . . � ,� . . �•�t� �--- "� .. .... . � �" t; � �� Year 2000 ..in 'n . �,,.i .. . .i. .c . . n�n.. .. 1;:_ ry Sewer Service Area ` ' �:•. _-:ry �►_ I ,.,., �.. vEr•Mt t�+er . y —� . � '/ "�.'' ..,...•n .�M1 ' f� ^� . .�_r �--`�f.�.✓1. �_ �_�/ � � � �n�f � , l.{� . —� � ^ ____ .� _. . �� .^� �r... ��.. •i ) �, � I�n , I Iq 4i . .__ � _�_ .. I' , ' U � n` . / 'i �,,,,;T•+f ,,,, t�I;I � ..... � . r�r.ns r�c.e � `v (� J't ` ... - � 'vn.n� �� 1f .� _/'� .�.�.. � . 1 : � n��.79 ' � Mns� . �,�,: i�1.... „ ; �,,,, � � . _ ' ' r�" � •��'' �!'� ..t• . -- � � ,-� �.� �. � . - ..,., �., ,,...,., . . �tl�, ' Mn.ny � r� . ,� J- ; ..., ��� �� . /�, .,. � ' � � 'Y����r _.. ."'_ ��;, � � - - _..-_ _ ., � ....... ...�.r- . ,- � ,/ � � ,.,.,.. � ..... �, �.� � �,. ��.., _ � t ...,_ �� >., r��_<, ,% ... . �.,.._ .. ., �_.;:, -^� — . -�-- - -- ..�... �' `') 'I � /� nl� . � h11 t0 � � � 1 �� J � . �. I� . • � 1� � !� �� .) I � 'I' ��II.J �J '(S�• �r' "" _."�." . ' _ _ .'<,_ " '_ .'.___ . _ . � � 1 �• .•-.,_.,..t .- ,� r___1 r—__. � ���.�, . ( p�n.i y � - � ---�'.- �C��ll�(J - � ` '��lr��►�.JE��1��� _ _ _ - �,�.�, ---- uu�.�i_�ul i -.��� l��J��(���LJIJIJ �' .� _ Mn.t� n..._..s ru..v.. �. . �c,r t ` ' '� : ( �I_.1L1JU(JUIJUfJ' ��, ---- , ( I ( , - - - � �,�..,, - -- - - - - 7�i --�-- ---- fl:'I> > .,,.,.,, ,,, :, � r , ,,,�.,< ,.. � :. �IJ ! ;' . � . . . . � . o*� ��..:s� . nin.,S P�O.e� .. . . . . .. . -.� u�� � -��C.�7 ..,! -/n..-.1.:'rw. - � � � . . .. . . . . . . 'f-��_� � I J�� U - � �- _ . ----�11�1�__� �.�i._I i � � . �...,. �- V �y .:... .. .� U � :,,. � . w . �.� . �r ur - _ _ . _..._, _ ._.---- !��}—'--- 'a�• ,. . 1 � - -- ---• -----���-- �a r.i ---._--- --,� �� ��, r�gure 12 EI1��II'IRE Z'UWNSHIY VVater and Se�ver Uakota County, n�iN Stagin� C�ncept ^ Existing Line � �; . . . � � �/F:'�:;� � . � . �" Line Size � '� r�i � Existing Lift Station � EtF.St711RCF "' "' I�ZWCC Intercepfor S r�t.��rt:r,ir:s Cc�R COR�\T IUN �"""""' Uesignated Rural Center ,•. .r „•,..,. � First Priority Service Area •„�� �• ..,..,.,.,..,, .,., Second Friority Ser�•ice Area � � Pol�cies * The township's priorities for providing water and sewer serviees will be based upon initially meeting ne�ds in existing developed. areas of the township, followed by staging of services to future developing areas within the designated Rural Center area, as deemed appropriate and consistent with the Township Deveiopment`Guide Plan. * �xpansion of water or sewer facilities within the designated Ruxal Center :: � area wil� 'oe conside�ed �y�he Townsnip un�er �he foliowing conditions: • Upon petition by at least 20% of the affected landowners to potentially be served, or � _ - • In the event it i� determined by the Township that the health and welfare of residents may be affected. • Conformance to limits imposed on the ma�cimum number of buiiding pezmits that may be issued to insure conformance with the regional grojections for sewer flows by Empire Township to the Empire Wastewater Treatment Plant. * Priar to committing to any future expansion of services, the township wiil conduct a feasibility study to determine_the ability of landowners ta pav for the requested improvements, and prepare a utility staging plan that wiil identify a time schedule, estimated costs, sources of revenue, and financial impact upon the township and individual residents for expansion of water and sewer services. * Private wastewater treatment plants will not be permitted in Empire Township. Sewer service will be provided through eonneetions to the centrai sewer system or ansite sewage treatment systems, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. * In addition to enforcing the I/I Ordinance that prohibits discharges into the sanitary sewer system, the Township will 'amplement the following actions to reduce I/I flows into the township's sewer lines, as deemed approgriate for the particular situation: 33 � - • Inspect sanitary sewer manholes by December 31, 1993 and repair cracks, holes and other deterioration. Replace ill-fitting or damaged castings and covers. • Locate and disconnect catch basin connections from the sanitary sewer system. • Clean and televise sanitary sewers by July 1, 1994, as appropriate, in order to improve the hydraulics and locate cracks, holes and other deterioration of the sewers. Repair can be accomplished by grouting , or insitu forming: • Flood the storm sewers or ditches in a localized area and televise sanitary sewers to locate major infiltration sources and possible cross connections to the sanitary sewers. . * P+�linimum design standard�s for I/I on the construction of new sanitary sewer facilities are 100 gallons/day/inch diameter/rnile. All facilities are air tested to insure compliance. The specifications for pipes,joints, and manhales are as follows: Descri tion � S�ecificarion Join_ t Tvne , Vitrified C1ay Pipe and ASTM C700 > Wye Branches ASTM C425 Reinforced Concrete Pipe ASTM C76 ASTM C361 PVC Pipe ASTM D3034 Elastromeric Gasket Cast Iron Soil Pipe ASTM E-8 ASTM C564 ASTM A-438 Rubber Gasket ASTM A-126 Manhole ASTM C-478 Gasket TRANSPORTATION Objectives l. Development of a safe and efficient street and highway system that supports the Township Development Guide Plan. 2. Maintenance of the transportation infrastructure in order to protect the public's investment. 3. Protection of critical airspace, as defined by the Regional Aviation Plan, 34 r . from vertical obstructions to aviation. 4. Insure that mobility is available to township residents by encouraging and supporting a choice of transportation options. Empire Township is on the fringe of an area that is continuing to experience rapid� growth and development. As a result, there will most likely be an increasing � demand fcr new roads and upgrading of existing roads in the township in the futur�. ?�:b�.are 13 identifies the'T ownship '�'�ar��ohfare Flan. 'I'h�s P�ar� is �ased upon an a..�,sessment of existing and anticipated needs, and consistency with Dakota �County's proposed Transportation Plan. - _ As shown in the Plan, several new roads are proposed or in the planning stages that will impact future development in the township. Increased growth pressure from the north and west of the township wi11 result in not only additional roacis serving areas of Empire Township,but will aLso create pressure to open areas for development in the township. The township will use the Thoroughfare Plan in conjunetion with the Development Guide Plan, as well as the policies found in this __ Plan to serve as guide with xegards to future decisions on transportation and _ . . development issues. Empire Township recognizes the importance of safety to its residents from the standpoint of transportation systems. For this reason, the township is committed to providing bike trails along major traveled roads in the#ownship, to the extent available to the township. The township recognizes the role of Dakota County as the major provider of bikeways and their planning, particularly in the raral areas of the County. The Township Thoroughfare Plan identi�es several priorities for bikeway construction in the township that would meet the resident's needs into the future. _ Empire Township is potentially impacted by airports in several ways. First, the Metropolitan Council is responsible for preparing the regional aviation system 35 ., , , plan. The Council reviews and approves airport long term comprehensive plans and local comprehensive plans for consistency with the regional plan, including its policies for protection of the regional airspace. Second, all of Empire Towriship is located in the region's critical airspace where incoming and outgoing flights travel. The township's planning polieies are intended to protect low altitude airways in the regional airspace from tall shuctures, Third, Empire Township is located in the final major airport search area for the potential relocation of Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSp), pursuant to the Metropolitan Airport Search Protection Act of 1990, applications for changes in zoning, zoning variances or conditional use permits are subject to review and -approval by the Metropolitan Council. Fourth, Airlake and MSP are part of the regional airspace system. Airlake is located four miles southwest of Empire Township, and MSP is located ten miles northwest of the township. The Metropolitan Airports Commission operates, maintains and improves these facilities. Policies _�_ _ * Empire Township will work with Dakota County and adjacent communities to insure that a coordinated and efficient thoroughfare system that is compatible with Empire fiownship's Development Guide Plan is implemented. * Empire Township will discourage planning or construction of roads by other jurisdictions that are not found to be consistent with the Township Development Guide Plan and Thoroughfare Plan. * Performance standards for building setbacks, minimum access separations, intersection setbacks, driveway setbacks, and clear site setbacks at intersections wiil be established and enforced in conformance with requirements and minimum guidelines established by Dakota C�unty for arterial, collector and local road classi�cations. 36 � ' � Driveway entrances will be a minimum of 16 feet in width, but no wider than 26 feet, depending upon the use. * Minimum right-of-way dedications for proposed subdivisions will be as follows: Minor Arterial 110 feet Collector 110 feet � i.acal 1Zoads 66 feet * .�r�w towr�sh:p roads �ri11 b� cons�ruct� to a �i.�i:n�,�m capac;ty af seven tons. . X �mpire Township will eontinue to work with Dakota Cotznty and other appropriate jurisdictions to coordinate construction of bikeways identi�ed in the Towr.ship Thoroughfare Plan. � The township will develop a plan for implementation of a program for providing sidewalks in the township. New developments will be required to construct sidewalks, consistent with the approved plan. � Tall structures over 500 feet in height will not be allowed in the region`s critical airspace. Empire Township will evaluate proposals for tall stru�tures and/or towers under 500 feet on a case-by-case uasis. The basi5 _ __ _ _ _ for approval of such uses will include compatibility with land uses, consistency with federal and state regulations for na�igable airspa.ce, consistency with regional plans and policies, and confonnance with applicable requirements of the Township Zoning Ordinance. � As the airport planning process proceeds, Empire Township will provide comments regarding the impact of airport relocation plans on future - development in the township: . * An applicant proposing constructian or alteration of a structure that would exceed a height of 200 feet above ground level shall notify the Cammissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transporta.tion at least 30 days in advance, as required by Aeronautics Rule 14, MCAR 1.301 S, Subd.ivision C; and shall present a certified copy of such notifieation to the 37 � y � township at least ten days before issuance of a Township buiIding permit. 38 � � � .... � ... _ /y7 � ._ � a, . � . ...�.' .;� � \ ...., � -- �-.• , ._.. :• .... ��!__ ��._.�...- .�ti _......;.._ .._._.Y .... � r. �� _ , � .., - ? -II� I f !�-1 ♦�'�'O� f-,�`. .I' 1• �.j� — I_� _ _ _' ... . _ ;� .... �_ �.. � �=� .�._ .... _.. .1 _' ,'r�� ...h��I � _... .::: � .. , � . ,.._ _... ��� a'.._ 1 .� ��y � . . � __., �� - r "�'� . , — - � --- - - - - -- ...__._. �� r ..... - . ___ -- - ---- - ------ �j' -o , _._ .__ -- � r Yc � - .. � - - .- �. -- `..�...- ---r -- ^_h ..,. - �� �t - �$ :-M --.. _a•-- --' �- � . + .' ----� �r _-.__ S •`� _ •" :.. . , r�, - 1 -- —�' i t ,.. i �,, ., _... y� _ _ --- e... �.,.. _'- f/� ~... -•�•�- , . . . _� �r� � . t �-� • • � -� ��' `�`� �J Q.q3 � ��€ t _ : . - - " -� � �_ ��-- -- � —�,- --�-- — -- - -� ��i �� ,. -� s ^�,' _ • f- �. _,,, . - - �-- ..., ,�. �\ �,, �,: . ( � � �: .�,L:�--- '.. � 5,-.i_._ fit�od' +3,0o y� � ._.. .... ��� _ i" � ����C;3- --_-- --- -� '. .. ,� ' �� --- ;;r"'� �. __ �� _' . ' " " ... "` - �_ -- � ----�--- \ '' �nJ �F� 'J, ' ��:f --_M -: .., -- -- - -._ _�� '� . - -- ~ \ � ' � .. �r. ..... _.) �'.. � i �{�^I....'�(.FM - �^-„ � ^ _- - . . - _ _^ i; ) j`��r r? ,�� � ��s- -�- -�► + � f� _ `_ �^ 1�:_ . �� l� �-�^„ _� .._ .. _ .. �1-r_�J �: •._ .�'_-"��' ;��; �1�p_;� ' 11 �n�il•�J��!I Y_K.N i-- � � ----�.__ 'i. .__ , � -- ..... ---�- --- ll 1(IIAJI h 1LN - -... .... _. _.. ..., - ---- ..� -.. .... 'I . 'f i �.Iff�A il lI p_II 6 --- ;��� � � Ei�f((� �� � .� j��_ -- - -- -- . _ , - � - 1 �_ . - ��=,1= -K_ � . f liN� il li �l � � I ........ 1 I oQP - oo �► _ '_l� . j;j.._~ .. - . - :. I -, .,_ , � . . ». ,._ : � Fl�re 13 -._ ~_ . � : � Thoroughfare Plan EMPIRE T"OWNSHIP DAKOiA COUNTY,MIP�NE50TA '��� Existing Primary Network � � ! t Secondary Roads _ Q�:�' �1-/ r��Proposed Improvements (Year) 0 O O Projected Traffic Counts (2010) . > -� �� The Development Guide Plan identifies in a graphic form the location and e of g r o w t h t ha t Empire Township wishes to see in the future. It is based u n anal ' po ysis o f t he bac kgroun d data, the Township's goals and policies, and environrnental characteristics. It is the intent that the Development Guide Ptan be used as the primary reference for making decisions on development by township officials and those wishing to develop in the townshtp, '1'he Plan will be implemented through enforcement of Township ordinances and consideration given to adopted policies found in the Comprehensive Plan. - ' The township has identified seven general categories of tand uses that would be appropnate for long-tezm growth in the futut.e. ���,e: . • Agriculture • Rural Residential • Urban Residential • Com.mercial - ` • Institutional ; : _ • Conservancy • Shoreland Overlay � • Floodplain Overlay These classi�cations are identified in the Development Guide Plan ma Fi ure 14). P C g AgricuItur� �� The Agriculture category identifies those areas of the township that are ex ted to remain m agricultural use far a lon -term � g period. No water or sewer service wili be provided. to these areas, since the intent is to keep development of any type that is not consistent with the rural character of tl:e area to a minimum. Single family residences will be allowed at a maximum density af one non-farm residence per 40 39 . • ♦ � � � . . � � � . . � � � . acres. Single family, nonfarm homes must be located on a minimum lot of one acre with frontage on a public road. In general, commercial uses should be restricted to the designated Commercial area in the Guide Plan. �ommercial or industrial uses in the agricultural area may be appropriate in some instances, but will be considered on a case-by-case basis through a conditional use permit to determine if such a us� will be consistent with +he rural, agrieulttu-�1 character ef the area, or are �onsiderec� �� be uses accessory to the existing use.. Sueh uses, if allowed, will t� terui:�� z� c�:�3er�n to t�� goliciPs in ti�e •^�m�rehens�v� r lan and 3.r�cr:nai�c� sta.ndards in the Township Zoning Ordinance. �ural Residential The Rurai Residential area is established to allow deveiopment at a greater density thari fhat found in the Agriculture area, but will still allow agricultural activity to occur. They are basically areas that will, in the long-term future, (beyand the timeframe of this plan) be available for more urban-related development but, �or the purposes of this Plan, will not be eonsidered for urban services. Density of single family development wili be a maximum of four residences per quarter- auarter section. �Iinimum lot size shall be one ucre, and lots must have frontage ori a public road. Commerciai uses will be considered in these areas on a case-by-case basis. . Urban Residentiai The Urban Residential area is established where development is expected to occur and be serviced by public water and sewer (within the designated Rural Center only}. Single family development will be allowed on Iots of 15,000 square feet, once public water and sewer are provided. Until water and sewer are provided in accordance with an approved water and sewer staging pian by the township, standards for the Rural Residential areas will apply. 4�0 � .. : . � C� mercial A Commercial area identified in Figure 14 has been designated in the Rural Center area of the township in order to direct those uses and aetivities to one area of the tawnship in an orderly manner. The Commerciai area will be:developed only upon the availability of public water and sewer service to the area. Performance standards consistent with the policies found in the Comprehensive Plan will be established in the Township Zoning Ordinance. . Insti�utional The Institutional classification includes the University of Minnesota Research Center. The intent of this classification is to provide a pianning category for lands - that are expected to remain under their current institutional ownership into the long-term, and which the township does not have any direct land use authority over. It is possible, however, that events may occur that will result in the development of some land within the Research Center. If the ownership remains the same, there will not be a change in the classification. _ _ If any land is sold to`an owner other than �he University of Minnesota, the Comprehensive Plan should be amended to reclassify the land to a use that is consistent with adjoining non-institutional uses. Conservancv The Conservancy classifieation includes wetlands, steep slope areas, or other environmenta:lly-serLsitive areas that the township feels are in need of protecrion. Generally, these areas are nat readily suitabie for urban development. Agricuttural production is the most appropriate use in the Conservancy areas, Residential uses at a density of at least one residence per 40 acres will only be considered on a case- by-case basis through issuance of a conditional use permit, subject to speci�c performancP standards found in the Township Zoning Ordinance. 41 , , , `, � , i � . ._ i -.. I� �..:-_ ; _«_ _ .. -_ -_ _ _ __ _ ti_ _ __ ---�.,�;,; .. .. � .`,, ..» .... 1 / . � °' __. �� ,. / \ .> ---- ... _ _ . ._.�._ _.._ , , ` ......_.. _ _._ _.._ ._ , �� !. .,-„_... �,� .,,. ; ...� /�„ ..... �..., �.•, � .� � ...�s,�-- : \ • - = --- - ,r �__��- �t.�� _ - _ �.,r:..� ._ - - . -n�_ � �1� � ... ... ' J'� � � �.. ., ------,._ � �� � �� �: �.. ,� �, . ...m . . . �� , .� M , , .__ .... _,. . , . , ... . -- - -.- - -. -----_ _. , . -- - .._ , ,_ _ . � . _ .._ t�: , .... , - ... .... � � ..� . . �_ � .. 1 --� ------ -- � �r � �� �• � �... � "i+ � _ � � � � • . ; ----- ...� ... �---- ------ — — -- ---- � __ _ _ .;, ,�. l ' .,... a... , . ..,��, � � � �, !, .._.__ -- --- •—�� � .e� � �� .... a� �,e. . � �� �: - � -- -- _-- -- — - --�- - --- - - _ .- -- ..,. - � - },- . .� ... � ..>•, _. .. .. �. _�_ � . , _ _ a.� r _.--- .... - ---- ----�-- -- --- - � . . ` M<.. ,_.. Rural Center Boundary \ `� -- - -\1�.-- ----- �..._ .,f;.�..r ,c--- - � \ .a...— — --. _ .. ... a... l J .�� � _ „ _ � �;'; .-z;�: ,_,., --- — _ -_.� --r -,��- ' sT-- �,- � — 1;y�� v� ::�_�;. »� � �: �, � �� . _�M. r �� `_ .,v''..�'w; � / ..„ �« ..f�r:;. -�M �•- -- ,,,, � _ � 1- .�.., . ;„�._��r�_ - l��� -�_�-t �s:;- . - �. ,.a ! ti;�,•' ��- _ - »» „ � "_ t. i��. - --- .. ... _.. � y,•'��-. s�.•...._ ... --- - •' _..L � — -- •„ -- ..' .. � 'y�f• "" .. , � .. .. ._ ... — -- • .! , � . � .. - .• . « . . j ....... -• esx ---t _ - .. . . � ��� �.�tis . >�.. -. -� -- �_: - . . - ---- � -._ �. . .Z .. _ „. _ � . . . .. � . i . _ . . . �.-- � .. .. . „� . �,sn eM;., : -' � �. «, _ � �jI_.. . . . �_.�. — s F � .�_�� ( _1�i:- . .- fs.. �'�=1 ' ^',;,�,�� ..- -._ •�I'1 � � �.".�- : .._ - .g.. _., ,�..... rtl 11 II II1 ' '�I_ r..... 11 ' '�1'n_lt• �� Il If N.IU • , --- -- - �` _ 't_ — ..�. .... !1 � 1 J( Illf ll b N )[1 1_ ... e... -;.._ � w Y;i Jli {II _)(EfAIiJINIIJ'b ;_ - ----- .< -- -- - • -- --- -- ==- -- -�- � Ii� . �,--- 5. :,: „ _ �� �:� a� i�.N 1� ;�_ ..::..._, - . . . .� _ _ ._ ..... ,�:�:�: i " I - .,, ' ..- __ ��u` � ��-� � u i�l�� - - ., . - _ �-� . ' _. „ „ _ ..__�.- ���:�+�� -z� --.h: .- -- --.E�=.--..._ �rl- - .� -- - i n ,� ' �.�.., • �. .... __ _ � � � �,......, ., � � : � _, _...:�1. �._�`_.�. Figure 14 �,�.,��e.,2�„oo�o�o,o .�:... • EMPIRE TOWNSHfP DAKOTA COUNTY, MINtaE50TA � Agriculture L�.� Rural Resideiitial Developmellt Gulde PIaIl f•::Y UrUaii Residenfial x»�.... �� � Commercial �L�"'�� � Insfitutioital � Conser-�ancy � ' "- Shoreland Overlay �w� r,_ _ ,_.. ,_. „ ._ . , , Shoreland Overlay District The Shoreland Overlay District consists of areas that are under the jurisdictis�'t of the Dakota County Shoreiand Zoning Regulations . Shoreland are��e those that lie within 300 feet of the Vermillion River or its tributa�ies-, as identified in the County Shoreland Reguiations. Responsibi�ity for administration and regulations in this District lie with both the.Tovr,Tnship and Dakota County. The more restrictive regulations wili apply in ail cases. . Floodpiain Overlay District The Ftoodplain Overlay District consists of areas in the Township that are designated as being within the boundaries of the Floodway and Flood Fringe District, as identified by the Federal Flood Insurance Study for the unincorparated area of Dakota County. Responsibility for adminislxatiQn and regulations in this District lie with both the Township and Dakota County. The more restrictive regulations will apply in all cases. 42 «� .�""�; � �.�, ....... �.......... ...�..... ..,.....,..�.,�....:, ..� ,"�..�...�."'�"'�`,�: ....,..e � i..�.w., r..�.'rw'.�^M:`, xc�3)3�:s; � � �«�::".w"� ?'r�,ito:}f� � � 1 1 • • � �w..i.u�"'r"...`...�: . ��^t., �� ��� Mi�ililir► r '��w� � �w �A�� �, INNI�IIYM��Ir\ YY�M.�\ ��' MM��MIA11`1. II�/w��� � � �� r����� � 1111�1�M.wfA �w��"�``� �µ'�,'�r w wwrur•.� �yy'y�yjj��1{:.•sr•• w�1�11W�MAw�ww IN•�A1 '�N�'l.WJy1�`ff�l�}: r wIMIM�1i�ilR %r�� •'•i:��i'_�:LV.Ty`�'�,...�.v.r�.� �t . � _ MIM1�N ��Ilw�w�w �t"'� J{i'� �W�IwMwOV►wwrA ���� '.�fr'!��� !� �� °w1pMwM�M��w '!Y.if%`.Q'} M �ww�r` _:� �+C{.:CXt r M� wwr'�yN '..:7Lt�_'h� �f:':� v`�►v�ir w ��ti•rr.Mi r: �ww..w� w�wwri�'.w' � ..Jrf::i:`r: t4 �' �'i} 7t�31.. • � ��M.M%M� :1 �'1))}�J1J. j "�M� i��f�. �....:� �f! �� � � ��wMww� V�w.� �sti,4}}5}�5}f fJ:� ',f}{ �A�� .wr..�.u.,�.,rw�r,wawM.,,� �w• ..:ry ~?`':�.. f��: ��w �, r.::4 f:lJ:f:r•.�1 wiwiw'wiw��wMwrwMwa vr��►: �` �-;_:..�Y. • �J�'l�t f.'.':.'f. i • ��M �: :��'S}rf�'.�,G4'�.��ft}rJyf �� r� r_r.r....+...r��.�i. �- 1::':Y:V•'.Y:'�yK': J� w1Miwr111w��srww��� L'.f'.:.{'.::l:r.'�Y��{.l'J ���rw- M.�S"::.�r"�s}'�ff�ff �� �.'��� �':•�I��,l'ti:��••'.'4lff� _tj,�1`' " M�►waiwiww rliwn k� :t{ 4?'sYr-'r� ty+"'�� �'� �ww����iiw •�',j}tiLr�tit�}:4fr • ++wnrrwwrwwwi..wnwn�. wwMww�w�,M, � ♦ � ��'`.�r�"��''s ?::.Ct�.S:�f•i.:? .�+s �ww►���A�WU +�iMAI� f_• .�.���n:'� t,r� �y.. w�www� I11�V�� 1� i•rl` .i � �J-�� ��� �..?r`•:'{�.i,.�.�.''.{..cr � � • wwriwu� v.v�r._w:S�ti('V�.Y.S! � �M�i►'IY�►.�i�� "Y{�,�l� �M�111�1�11O�I�IV -}.,h'�]��j'���' � �1MM�� S_. , . ��� ` � .....�......� ws t�e�=z [..ZFI��f.fi���_ • s , '��• � �1}����7LAIq� t � ,..t:,��,�• . s:* ��ARett37� ��� �'��FL�KI� ��� if��f�5'(,.•;�.�Y:h'r..l:.•.•.''• � �::P� .%v:.Y�r} '.Y.�:::.l.'..•f �// 4]ti•;{• �,�}1�':.'�' �i a n4��1.�r ��'��' � � i�i �A_1LSYJ:'1~y�•"':' .�l�� � : . �:-:f .h���� ~ l':: 4 r��,f�tl,f�. �. � rr•��r•'�f�hf t�."�7L , _� � : . �':f2-��..�,�. ;:};�,=�•� , ' . ■ �i•i'1:L'�T.••"�'.. � � �' � ll ■ ■a ■ ■ ■ �I� � ■ ■� ■ ■ . . : . . � ��i � ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ �N. 1 �r� • - • ■ ■ ■ � ■ i ■ ■ � 1 . �� „ �� ... . � e � . . . . - � � ........ �ers�r�■ ' � e i � ' � � , "` � � � � � e t . � � � . . IMPLEMENTATION ; ;, � , This Comprehensive Plan has been prepared with the guidance and knowledge of the Planning Commission and Town Board of Empire Township. It will be adopted following review by the Metropolitan Council and surrounding, affected jurisdictions, and only after citizens that wish to provide input have had an opportunity to comment as part of a formal public hearing process. Empire Township believes that this Comprehensive Plan will provide a strong basis upon which to revise and implement its official controls in order to protect the heaith, safety and welfare of the residents of the"Township. Following is a description of the methods by which Empire Township intends to implement this ' Plan. _ ZONING AND SUBDTVISION The Township is in the final stages of completing major revisions to its exisring zoning ordinance. The changes being made to the zoning ordinance will reflect revised policy directions as identified in this Comprehensive Plan. The Township intends to implement its Plan primarily through the revised zoning ordinance. The ordinance will have provisions which reflect.the type, loca.tion and intensity of uses described in the Development Guide Plan and other sections of the Comprehensive Plan. The Development Guide Plan identifies those lands where agriculture and other uses will be permitted, and circumstances under which certain restrictions may be placed on land uses in the Township. Provisions such as performance standards and conditional use requirements within the zoning ordinance will serve to limit environmental and other impacts on conditional uses. All development allowed as a conditional use will take place in accordance with the policies found . within this PIan. Empire Township is the sole authority responsible for the enforcement of the Township Zoning Ordinance. Subdivision of land within the Township will be pertnitted only as regulated by the Township within its Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations. Residential 43 �� 1 � i development will be allowed in conformance with the provisions and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, consistent with the Development Guide PIan. The Township Zoning Ordinance will esta.blish performance standards that will address residential, commercial and industrial development requirements in the Township as relates to densities, setback distances, and lot size. Dakota County aLso administers the County Contiguous Plat Ordinance (adopted pursuant to Laws of Minnesota, 1973 Chapter 416), which places requirements on residential — development in unincorporated areas of the County and adjacent to County- designated roads. - - ' Revised Zoning and Subdivision Regulations will be reviewed and adopted by the Township by December 31, 1993. SEWAGE TREATMENT On-site sewage treatment will be the only method of treatment in the low-density, agricultural area of the Township. On-site systems will be regulated by performance standards referenced in the Zoning prdinance, in conformance with most current MPCA regulations (presently Chapter ?080) and County regulations (Ordinance #113). The Township Ordinance will reference MPCA and County standards and requirements for installation, inspection and maintenance of on-site systems. The Township will issue permits for installation of systems, based upon an application containing site information and type of system to be installed. Applications and documentation of final inspection will be kept on file by the Township. Maintenance of the system will be the responsibility of the owner, but standards referenced in the Zoning Ordinance will be enforced whenever existing systems are documented to be a threat to residents health,safety and welfare. Dakota County is in the process of considering revisions to Ordinance #113. Once 4�4 � r completed, Empire Township will incorporate, by reference, those revisions into the Township Zc�ning Ordinance. Empire Township has designated a Rural Center within the Township, in which urban types of development have historically occurred. Within this area, public sewer service is currently available to most households with smaller lot sizes (at least 15,000 square feet). The Township will continue to provide sewer service on a limited basis within the Rural Center, allocating sewer connection and building permits to remain consistent with the projected sewer flows identi�ed by the 112etropolitan Council for the Empire Wastewater Treatment Plant. The Township has also adopted an Ordinance that prohibits discharges into the sanitary sewer system, which will result in reductions in inflow/infiltratian flows to the Empire Wastewater Treatment Plant. CAPITAL IlVLPROVEMENTS PROGRAM Empire Township will be preparing a Capital Improvements P1an (CIP) that will -- identify the timing and location of public facility and service improvements in the ----_ _ __--_ Township on a five-year basis. Facilities and services to be included in the Plan are water and sewer facilities within the designated Rural Center, community park and playground facilities, and Township road improvements. The CIP is anticipated, to be completed by December 3l, 1993. ADMINISTRATION The provisions of the Zoning Ordinance will be maintained and preserved through the term of this Comprehensive Plan, unless formally amended. Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Any amendments to the Comprehensive Plan or Zoning Ordinance will be submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review and approval, as required by State statute. 45