HomeMy WebLinkAboutAttachments
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Planning Commission Meeting: May 14, 2019
Tentative City Council Meeting: May 21, 2019
AGENDA ITEM: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Approval AGENDA SECTION:
Public Hearing
PREPARED BY: Kim Lindquist, Community Development
Director, Kyle Klatt, Senior Planner,
Anthony Nemcek, Planner, Brian
Erickson, City Engineer, Dan Schultz,
Parks and Recreation Director
AGENDA NO. 5.a.
ATTACHMENTS: Draft Plan and Public Comments APPROVED BY: KL
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to recommend the City Council approve the 2040
Rosemount Comprehensive Plan and Utility System Plans.
SUMMARY
Staff is pleased to present the complete draft 2040 Rosemount Comprehensive Plan for the Commissions
review and recommended approval. All cities in the Metropolitan Area are required to update their
comprehensive plans every 10 years. Rosemount publicly started the update in 2016 with a town-hall style
meeting focusing on specific neighborhoods in the community. There were neighborhood work groups as
well as larger community meetings held to illicit feedback on the City and future growth and development.
The various city commissions were also involved with specific sections of the Plan. The City’s Port
Authority and Parks and Recreation Commission have been heavily involved with the writing of the
Economic Competitiveness and the Parks and Open Space chapters. REST has reviewed the draft
document and aided in weaving sustainability measures and goals throughout.
The prior draft was send to adjoining and affected jurisdictions and comments received from many. The
Planning Commission previously received those documents and the current draft reflects the changes
committed to at prior work sessions. The comment letters are provided. The Comprehensive Plan has
been broken into two sections, the Comprehensive Plan-Land Use sections and the Utility System Plans.
Staff is requesting the Commission take action on both. After the City Council recommends approval, the
entire document will be forwarded to the Metropolitan Council for final approval and ultimately
implementation.
PUBLIC PROCESS
In order to help provide opportunities for broad public input and review of the plan, the City engaged in a
multi-year planning effort with a focus on three distinct areas within the community. The review process
for each of these areas is summarized as follows:
North Central Planning Area: A neighborhood meeting and open house was conducted on May
25, 2017. Information concerning the planning area was reviewed
at the fall 2017 community-wide open house.
2
Southeast Planning Area : Meetings with affected land owners were conducted in April and
May of 2016; a neighborhood meeting and open house was
conducted on June 2, 2016.
Downtown Task Force : A task force comprised of downtown land owners and
representatives from the Rosemount Port Authority and City
Council was formed in June of 2016. Monthly meetings were
conducted from June 2016 through the spring of 2017. An open
house to review updated downtown framework was conducted on
August 8, 2017.
In addition to the specific planning area meetings, the City sponsored two community-wide town-hall style
meetings. The first, conducted on September 22, 2016 provided an overview of the comprehensive
planning process and gave residents a chance to provide general feedback about the issues impacting the
community. It was at this meeting that the City further refined the above guiding principles that provided
the overall direction for the Plan. Towards completion of the small area planning work, the City
conducted another public open house to gather community feedback on the draft Plan and to review the
work of the downtown task force on August 8, 2017
Throughout the update process, the Planning Commission conducted a series of workshop meetings to
review and provide feedback on draft documents. Additionally, the Commission met with the City
Council in two joint work sessions with a focus on the land use planning chapter in May and October of
2017. The required adjacent jurisdiction review was completed in March of 2019 after a 6-month
comment period, during which the City received seven formal comment letters. A public hearing for
review of the final draft is scheduled for May 14, 2019.
1
Nemcek, Anthony
From:Sharpe, Alex <asharpe@ci.apple-valley.mn.us>
Sent:Wednesday, March 27, 2019 9:11 AM
To:Nemcek, Anthony
Subject:Comprehensive Plan
Anthony,
Good talking to you today. The City of Apple Valley did not have comments for your comprehensive plan as you noted
interconnection between the south of the river cities.
Thank you,
Alex
Apple Valley ‐ Celebrating 50 Golden Years
Alex Sharpe | Planning and Economic Development Spec.
952.953.2569 | ASharpe@cityofAppleValley.org
,.ROSEMOUNT
SPIRIT OF PRIDE ANa P/HJtHfE~~
City of Rosemount
2040 Compf~hensive Plan Update
Adja~~fit and Aff~~t~dJYrisdktiQn R@vi~wand CQmm~fit Form
Jurisdiction Nam@:1:7-g /oako
Please check the appropriate box:
~e have reviewed the proposed Plan Update,do not have any comments,and are therefore waiving
/further review.
o We have reviewed the proposed Plan Update and offer the following comments (attach additional
sheets if necessary)
Name of Reviewer:t~tL4 J~~--~~~~-+--~~~~~--------t,Il1khU L
RrnllW~f Sigflarnr~""",·L&.!<1..,•...........;:,.c...Jf;+,~""","__--,-fl...::::~=~A-"-!L--_
Date://-13-1/
City of Rosemount
2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
Adjacent and Affected Jurisdiction Review and Comment Form
Jurisdiction Name:
Please check the appropriate box:
We have reviewed the proposed Plan Update, do not have any comments, and are therefore waiving
further review.
We have reviewed the proposed Plan Update and offer the following comments (attach additional
sheets if necessary)
Name of Reviewer:Date:
Reviewer Signature:
February 11, 2019
Preliminary Review – Rosemount MRCCA Plan, Chapter 11 of 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
DNR staff have reviewed the preliminary MRCCA plan and evaluated it as if it were being reviewed for approval. A check mark in the “Assessment” column
indicates that the proposed provision meets the minimum requirement and is acceptable. If there is no check mark, comments explain what changes are needed
to be acceptable for the final plan to be approved. There is no need to respond to these comments unless you have questions about them.
Minimum Requirements Page
number, or
policy
number
Assessment
=acceptable
N/A=not
applicable
Comments
Introduction
1. Brief history of MRCCA and MRCCA goals A1-A2
Consider detailing MRCCA goals as presented in Minn. Stat. 116G.15, Subd. 1. The
discussion around Tier II standards are not an accurate reflection of the National
Park Service’s Tier II plan standards (higher standards). It is not clear what this
narrative is accomplishing, and is not necessary for plan approval.
2. Map showing MRCCA boundary in community A4
3. Public process description Please add a discussion of your public input process. I was not able to locate this
section.
4. Summarize progress on goals since 2030 Plan A2
Districts
Map & Describe
1. Map each district that applies in community. A4
2. Describe each of the mapped districts for your
community using the description and management
purpose specified in MR 6106.0100, Subp. 3 to Subp.
8. The district description is shown under Item A and
management purpose is shown under Item B in each
subpart.
A3
3. Explain how future land uses (and potential
redevelopment plans) fit the purpose of the MRCCA
districts and identify potential conflicts (especially
important for communities anticipating the need for
implementation flexibility in MRCCA ordinance or
future district boundary amendments)
Please add this plan component.
Policies
1. Guide land use/development consistent with
management purpose of each district.
Please add this policy. Perhaps policy #1 on page A-16 can be rephrased to more
closely align with this policy.
Implementation Actions
1. Amend existing or adopt new MRCCA ordinance
overlay district compliant with the goals and policies
of the MRCCA Plan and Minnesota Rules, part
6106.0070, Subp. 5 – Content of Ordinances.
Please add this implementation action
2. Amend zoning map to reflect new MRCCA districts.
Please add this implementation action
3. List any actions to be taken to pursue implementation
flexibility (if any areas were identified as needing
implementation flexibility during the planning
process).
Please add this implementation action
Primary Conservation Areas
Map & Describe
1. Shore impact zone A5
2. Wetlands, floodplains, and confluence w/key
tributaries
A5
3. Natural drainage routes A6
4. Bluff impact zones A7
5. Native plant communities and significant existing
vegetative stands
A8
6. Cultural and historic properties A9
7. Gorges n/a
8. Unstable soils and bedrock A9
Policies
1. Protect PCAs (List those specifically found in your
community) and minimize impact to PCAs from public
and private development and land use activities
(landscape maintenance, river use, walking/hiking,
etc.).
A9
2. Support mitigation of impacts to PCAs through
subdivisions/PUDs, variances, CUPs, and other
permits.
A9
3. Make restoration of removed Native Plant
Communities and natural vegetation in riparian areas
a high priority during development.
A9
4. Support alternative design standards that protect the
LGU’s identified PCAs, such as conservation design,
transfer of development density, or other zoning and
site design techniques that achieve better protections
or restoration of primary conservation areas.
A9
5. Make permanent protection measures (such as public
acquisition, conservation easement, deed restrictions,
etc.) that protect PCAs a high priority.
A9
Implementation Actions
1. Ensure that information on the location of PCAs is
readily available to property owners to understand
how PCA-relevant ordinance requirements, such as
vegetation management and land alteration permits,
apply to their property for project planning and
permitting.
A10
2. Establish procedures and criteria for processing applications with potential impacts
to PCAs, including:
• identifying the information that must be submitted
and how it will be evaluated,
A10
• determining appropriate mitigation
procedures/methods for variances and CUPs,
A10
• establishing evaluation criteria for protecting PCAs
when a development site contains multiple types of
PCAs and the total area of PCAs exceed the required
set aside percentages.
A10
• developing administrative procedures for integrating
DNR and local permitting of riprap, walls and other
hard armoring.
(Note: Application procedures will be a required element
of MRCCA ordinance review and approval.)
A10
Public River Corridor Views
Map & Describe
1. Map at least one view toward the river from each
public parkland and public overlook, if any. Also, map
views toward the river from those historic properties
with views most important to the community.
Document each view with the following:
• Photo taken during leaf-on conditions. View of
river should be in the frame.
• Map showing the location the photo was taken
from with two arrows indicating the general
boundaries of the view as depicted in the photo
and point in in the direction of the view.
• Description of what makes the view valuable. The
guidance document “Framework for identifying
and selecting PRCVs” provides information on
how to discuss and describe views.
A10-A12
A view is identified, but the text should describe what makes the view valuable,
and what may negatively or positively impact the view.
• Description of what changes would negatively or
positively impact the view.
(Note: If there are no public parklands or public overlooks
in your community, this requirement does not apply.)
2. For views toward bluffs from the OWHL of the
opposite shore:
• Map and describe areas along the OWHL in your
community where there are highly valued views of
bluffs across the river (these may be in another
community). For these areas with valuable views
describe what makes them valuable. This may include
photos and identifying what makes the view valuable
and what would negatively or positively impact the
view.
• Identify bluffs in your community where the views of
those bluffs from across the river may be of value to
other communities or river users.
(Note: If there are no bluffs in your community or bluffs
visible from your community, this requirement does not
apply.)
The plan appropriately details that the first bullet doesn’t apply. For the second
bullet, the plan should discuss how bluffs in Rosemount may be of value to other
communities or river users. No photos required to address this plan requirement.
3. Map and/or describe other views important to your
community (optional)
n/a
Policies
1. Protect and minimize impacts to PRCVs from public
and private development activities.
A12
2. Protect and minimize impacts to PRCVs from public
and private vegetation management activities.
A12
3. Protect PRCVs located within the community and
identified by other communities (adjacent or across
the river).
A12
Implementation Actions
1. Ensure that information on the location of PRCVs is
readily available to property owners to understand
how PRCV-relevant ordinance requirements, such as
vegetation management and land alteration permits,
apply to their property for project planning and
permitting.
A12
2. Establish procedures for processing applications with potential impacts to PRCVs,
including:
• identifying the information that must be submitted
and how it will be evaluated, and
A12
• determining appropriate mitigation
procedures/methods for variances and CUPs.
(Note: Application procedures will be a required element
of MRCCA ordinance review and approval.)
A12
3. Actively communicate with other communities to
protect views other communities have identified in
LGU that are valuable, and vice versa.
A12
Restoration Priorities
Map & Describe
1. Map & describe areas identified as priorities for
vegetation restoration.
A13
2. Describe areas identified as concerns for erosion
prevention, bank and slope stabilization and other
identified restoration activities that may be required
as part of development. Refer to studies and reports
completed by the community and other organizations
(conservation districts, watershed districts, counties,
etc.) and issues identified by citizens, and summarize
priorities for action. If these areas have not been
identified, state in your plan that they have not been
identified.
A13
Policies
1. Protect native and existing vegetation during the
development process, and require restoration if any
is removed by development. Priorities for restoration
shall include stabilization of erodible soils, riparian
buffers and bluffs or steep slopes visible from the
river.
A14
2. Seek opportunities to restore vegetation to protect
and enhance PRCVs identified in this plan.
A14
3. Seek opportunities to restore vegetation in
restoration priority areas identified in this plan
through the CUP, variance, vegetation permit and
subdivision/PUD processes.
A14
4. Sustain and enhance ecological functions (habitat
value) during vegetation restorations.
A14
5. Evaluate proposed development sites for erosion
prevention and bank and slope stabilization issues
A14
and require restoration as part of the development
process.
Implementation Actions
1. Ensure that information on the location of natural
vegetation restoration priorities is readily available to
property owners to understand how relevant
ordinance requirements apply to their property for
project planning and permitting.
Please add this implementation action
2. Establish a vegetation permitting process that
includes permit review procedures to ensure
consideration of restoration priorities identified in
this plan in permit issuance, as well as standard
conditions requiring vegetation restoration for those
priority areas.
(Note: A vegetation permitting process will be a
required element of MRCCA ordinance review and
approval.)
Please add this implementation action
3. Establish process for evaluating priorities for natural
vegetation restoration, erosion prevention and bank
and slope stabilization, or other restoration priorities
identified in this plan in CUP, variances and
subdivision/PUD processes.
(Note: that a process for evaluating priorities will be a
required element of MRCCA ordinance review and
approval.)
Please add this implementation action
Open Space & Recreational Facilities
Map & Describe
1. All existing and proposed future open space (both
public and potential private open space where future
land development is anticipated) and recreational
facilities, including those providing public access to
the river.
Ch. 3 (p.3-
19)
The MRCCA section of the plan should reference the map on p. 3-19.
The plan references the parks and trails section of the comp plan, but the maps on
pages 24 and 26 of this section do not adequately show open space in the
MRCCA… which should include at least some reference to DNR land. Plans to link
the Spring Lake Park Trail was discussed in the “Key Issues and Opportunities”
section, but should be discussed in this section with a reference to a map.
Policies
1. Encourage creation, connection, and maintenance of
open space, recreational facilities, including public
access to the river.
A15
2. Identify and encourage connection of CA-SR district
land to existing and planned parks and trails for LGUs
with developable land in CA-SR districts. (Not
applicable in communities with no CA-SR district.)
n/a
3. Encourage that land dedication requirements be used
to acquire land suitable for public river access.
A15
Implementation Actions
1. Include facilities in the capital improvement program
for parks and open space facilities (if relevant).
Please add this implementation action
2. Develop a system for reviewing, tracking, and
monitoring open space required as part of the
subdivision process.
Please add this implementation action
Transportation & Public Utilities
Map & Describe
1. Existing and future planned public transportation
facilities.
While the plan states that transportation and utility systems do not significantly
differ from existing conditions, this section needs to be clearer about where the
existing infrastructure exists. Please discuss, and reference specific page or figure
numbers.
2. Electric power generating facilities: Map existing and
planned power generating facilities, including solar
farms and wind generation and describe impacts to
primary conservation areas (PCAs) and public river
corridor views (PRCVs). If there are no existing or
planned facilities or they are prohibited in your
community, or if there are existing or planned
facilities but no impacts to PCAs or PRCVs, please
state so.
Describe any existing or planned zoning districts
where these facilities would be allowed and identify
any areas within these zoning areas where these
facilities could negatively impact PCAs and PRCVs. If
none, please state so.
Please map existing and any planned power generating facilities. Also describe any
impacts these facilities would have on primary conservation areas and identified
public river corridor views. If there are no existing or planned power generating
facilities, the plan should state as such.
3. Essential services and transmission services:
Describe impacts of existing and planned
underground and overhead facilities that impact
primary conservation areas and public river corridor
views. For example, key facilities causing impacts
include pipelines, transmission lines, sanitary sewer,
stormwater, and water systems, and intake and
outfall structures, or other surface structures
associated with these systems.
Please detail any existing or planned transmission services (pipelines and power
lines), and describe their potential impacts. If there are no existing or planned
service lines, the plan should state as such.
Policies
1. Minimize impacts to PCAs and PRCVs from solar and
wind generation facilities, public transportation
facilities and public utilities.
A16
Implementation Actions
1. Include transportation facilities in the capital
improvement program, if applicable, identify which
facilities, or portions of facilities, are in the MRCCA.
p.A18, #4
2. Incorporate specific design and placement conditions
into local permits for solar and wind generation
facilities and essential and transmission services (if
allowed or within the community’s permitting
authority) that minimize impacts to PCAs and PRCVs.
(Note: Permit conditions will be a required element
of MRCCA ordinance review and approval.)
Please add this implementation action.
Surface Water Uses
Describe
1. Describe any existing and potential surface water use
conflicts or negative impacts (e.g. riverbank erosion)
and/or improvement opportunities (i.e., high-traffic
boating and fishing areas, paddle-share, riverboat
tours, rowing, barging, other uses) on the river in
your community and explain why they are important
to resolve or improve.
A14
Plan should clarify whether there are any barge fleeting areas or if the city
regulates or plans to regulate surface water uses. If not, the plan should state so,
and the other elements under this subsection don’t apply.
2. Describe any existing and proposed barge fleeting
areas (if applicable) and explain why they are
important to the community, and identify areas
where barge fleeting could have a negative impact on
PCAs and should be avoided.
See comment above.
Policies
1. Recognize the Mississippi River as a “working river”
that is important to the economy of the Twin Cities
metropolitan area and the Midwest.
See comment above.
2. Minimize potential conflict of water surface uses
authorized under Minn. Statute, Chapter 86B (MR
6110.3000 – 6110.3800). State whether your
community is regulating surface water use under
Chapter 86B. If so, there needs to be a policy to
minimize conflict of surface water uses. If not,
then this requirement does not apply.
See comment above.
3. Provide for barge fleeting, if applicable, and identify
areas where barge fleeting could have a negative
impact on PCAs and should be avoided.
See comment above.
4. Seek to balance commercial and recreational surface
water uses.
See comment above.
Implementation Actions
1. Adopt surface water regulations authorized under
Minn. Statute, Chapter 86B (MR 6110.3000 –
6110.3800). (Note: This action only applies if
community is planning to regulate surface water uses.
If no plans to regulate surface water use, then this
action does not apply.)
See comment above.
Water-Oriented Land Uses
Map & Describe
1. Describe what water-oriented uses are and why they
are important.
A14
2. Describe the presence of existing and any future-
planned water-oriented uses – including barge
terminals, recreational marinas, public recreational
uses, and any other water-oriented uses –and their
benefits to the community and potential conflicts.
A14
Policies
1. Acknowledge existing and future water-oriented uses
and provide for their protection. If none, please state
so.
A14
2. Minimize potential conflict of water-oriented uses
with other land uses.
A14
Implementation Actions
1. Provide for water-oriented uses in the ordinance (if
applicable).
(Note: This will be a requirement of MRCCA
ordinance review and approval.).
Please add this implementation action.
From:Vickery, Martha L (DNR)
To:Klatt, Kyle
Cc:Bonsignore, Gina (DNR)
Subject:DNR comments on city of Rosemount Comprehensive Plan
Date:Friday, January 25, 2019 10:12:56 AM
Attachments:image003.png
image004.png
image005.png
image006.png
DNR comments Rosemount Comp Plan final pdf with map.pdf
DNR comments Rosemount Comp Plan final signed with map.pdf
Dear Mr. Klatt:
DNR staff has reviewed your city’s plan and made comments which are summarized on the attached
document. The pdf contains hyperlinks and the other is a signed version. Thank you for the
opportunity to review.
Martha Vickery
Central Region Operations Coordinator | Lands and Minerals Division
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
1200 Warner Road
St. Paul, MN 55106
Phone: 651-259-5792
Fax: 651-772-7977
Email: martha.vickery@state.mn.us
mndnr.gov
City of Rosemount
2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
Adjacent and Affected Jurisdiction Review and Comment Form
Jurisdiction Name: Minnesota DNR
Please check the appropriate box:
We have reviewed the proposed Plan Update, do not have any comments, and are therefore waiving
further review.
We have reviewed the proposed Plan Update and offer the following comments (attach additional
sheets if necessary)
The mission of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources is to work with citizens to conserve and
manage the state’s natural resources, to provide outdoor recreation opportunities and for certain
sustainable commercial uses of natural resources. With these things in mind, we appreciate the
opportunity to provide comments on Rosemount’s draft 2040 comprehensive plan. We support the city’s
commitment to “preserve natural resources and open space within the community.”
Habitat Corridors to Maintain Wildlife. To enhance the health and diversity of wildlife populations, we
encourage developers of private and public lands to connect regional and local features with natural
resource corridors. The implementation of habitat corridors will be especially important as the UMore
property changes land use. There was much discussion and agreement in 2010 agreement by University of
Minnesota, Dakota County, DNR and Empire Township that there should be a habitat/greenway corridor
tying the Vermillion Highlands located south of the city and the Flint Hills Resource open space property.
From the point of view of Vermillion River Complex managers, the natural resource corridors (as illustrated
and outlined in the Vermillion Highlands Concept Master Plan – see attached map) are crucially important
to preservation and diversity of natural resources in this area. The most important feature discussed and
shown in the concept plan is the greenway and corridor connection located along the east side of UMore
Park, just east of Blaine Ave. and west of Highway 52.
The Regional Parks System Map on p. 3-19 does not show this or any other proposed greenway making that
connection. The draft document describes a generalized future land use map, with more specifics in the
UMORE AUAR. However, there are no such habitat/greenway corridors discussed in the AUAR document
either.
DNR is concerned that these north-south habitat corridors are not mentioned in the city’s plan. Not having a
north-south connection will inevitably create two separate islands of habitat that will in the long run be
detrimental to wildlife populations in the area. We would encourage you to incorporate or make reference
to the Vermillion Highlands Concept Master Plan in the city’s plan in order to incorporate these habitat
corridors into the city’s formal planning for future land use.
The following comments outline other ways to further your city’s environmental goals:
Surface Water. Policies and strategies on water supply, and surface water are a required plan element.
The City’s plan should detail key efforts to improve or protect surface water quality and management of
surface water on the landscape. A summary of the City’s Surface Water Management Plan with
illustrations such as the Sensitive and Natural Areas map would be helpful. Will the surface water plan be
updated to reflect the revised land use plan?
Development / Transportation Policies to Protect W.ildlife. Your community is planning for
considerable growth that will involve new roads and other infrastructure, such as in the UMore property
referenced above. Consider adding policies that take wildlife into consideration as transportation and
redevelopment projects occur. Animals such as frogs and turtles need to travel between wetlands and
uplands throughout their life cycle. Consult DNR’s Best Practices for protection of species and Roadways
and Turtles Flyer for self-mitigating measures to incorporate into design and construction plans. Examples
of more specific measures include:
o Preventing entrapment and death of small animals especially reptiles and amphibians, by
specifying biodegradable erosion control netting (‘bio-netting’ or ‘natural netting’ types (category
3N or 4N)), and specifically not allow plastic mesh netting. (p. 25)
o Providing wider culverts or other passageways under paths, driveways and roads while still
considering impacts to the floodplain.
o Including a passage bench under bridge water crossings. (p. 17) because typical bridge riprap can
be a barrier to animal movement along streambanks.
o Curb and storm water inlet designs that don’t inadvertently direct small mammals and reptiles into
the storm sewer. (p. 24). Installing “surmountable curbs” (Type D or S curbs) allows animals (e.g.,
turtles) to climb over and exit roadways. Traditional curbs/gutters tend to trap animals on the
roadway. Another option is to install/create curb breaks every, say, 100 feet (especially important
near wetlands).
o Using smart salting practices to reduce impacts to downstream mussel beds, as well as other
aquatic species.
o Fencing could be installed near wetlands to help keep turtles off the road (fences that have a j-hook
at each end are more effective than those that don’t).
Native Species. Include policies that encourage private and public developments to plant native flowers,
grasses, shrubs and tree species. Species such as monarchs rely on these plants, and it does not take many
plants to attract butterflies, other beneficial pollinators as well as migrating and resident birds. Adding more
native plants into landscaping, not only enhances the health and diversity of pollinators and wildlife
populations, these plants can also help filter and store storm water, which will also advance other
conservation goals of your city’s plan. For more information consult DNR’s pollinator page. Plant lists
and suggestions for native plants can be incorporated into:
o Landscape guidelines to improve the aesthetics in for commercial and industrial areas
o Street tree planting plans
o City gateway features
o Along ponds and waterways.
o Small nature play areas in children’s parks
o Along the edges of ballfield complexes.
o Lakeshores
Conservation Planning. The parks and trails chapter generally describes the community’s wildlife. The
DNR supports including data from the Natural Heritage Information System (NHIS) in the Comprehensive
Plan. We recommend that the plan include goals and strategies to address how rare species and plant
communities will be protected. Two data layers useful for land use and conservation planning include the
MBS Native Plant Communities and the MBS Sites of Biodiversity Significance. GIS shapefiles of these
data layers can be downloaded from the Minnesota Geospatial Commons. The DNR recommends
avoidance of these ecologically-significant areas, especially MBS Sites of Outstanding or High Biodiversity
Significance and DNR Native Plant Communities with a conservation status rank of S1 (critically
imperiled), S2 (imperiled), or S3 (vulnerable to extirpation). We recommend that city comprehensive plans
include a map of both of these layers and a list of the types of native plant communities documented within
the plan’s boundaries.
For further conservation planning and to ensure compliance with the Minnesota endangered species laws,
the DNR encourages communities to check the NHIS Rare Features Data for known occurrences of state-
listed species. The NHIS Rare Features Data contains nonpublic data and can only be accessed by
submitting a License Agreement Application Form for a GIS shapefile or by submitting a NHIS Data
Request Form for a database printout. Both of these forms are available at the NHIS webpage. For more
information on the biology, habitat use, and conservation measures of these rare species, please visit the
DNR Rare Species Guide. NHIS training includes rules for using/displaying nonpublic data in public
documents.
One of the species in Rosemount in the Rare Features database is Blanding’s Turtles (Emys blandingii). For
your information, the DNR’s Blanding’s Turtle fact sheet describes the habitat use and life history of this
species. The fact sheet also provides two lists of recommendations for avoiding and minimizing impacts to
this rare turtle. Consider adding the following language to your plan, or consult the DNR’s Rare Species
Guide to communicate information about the type of habitat that may harbor these turtles.
Blanding’s turtles use upland areas up to and over a mile distant from wetlands, as well as
wetlands. Uplands are used for nesting, basking, periods of dormancy, and traveling between
wetlands. Because of the tendency to travel long distances over land, Blanding’s turtles regularly
travel across roads and are therefore susceptible to collisions with vehicles. Any added mortality
can be detrimental to populations of Blanding’s turtles, as these turtles have a low reproduction
rate that depends upon a high survival rate to maintain population levels. Other factors believed to
contribute to the decline of this species include wetland drainage and degradation, and loss of
upland habitat to development.
The database also has records of Rusty Patch Bumble (Bombus affinis) in your community. We encourage
you to consult the U.S. Fish and Wildlife’s website for information on this federally-listed endangered
species. https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/insects/rpbb/.
Links: MBS Sites of Biodiversity Significance
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/eco/mcbs/biodiversity_guidelines.html
MBS Native Plant Communities
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/npc/index.html
Metro Greenways Easement. Our records indicate that your community has a property with a Metro
Greenways conservation easement on the Wiklund property, administered by the DNR’s Wildlife Division.
The Appendix C Parks Trails and Open Space Map appears to show the Highland Greenway Trail on the
boundary of this easement. This easement’s terms preclude any change that diminishes the natural resource
values that the easement is designed to preserve. For further information on the easement in you can contact
the DNR’s Central Region (R3) Wildlife regional manager or the Lands and Minerals supervisor at DNR’s
Central Region (R3) Office.
Recreation Trails. Consider indicating snowmobile trails on park systems plans. State-supported grant-in-
aid trails connect your community to an extensive network of trails throughout the state. Including the trails
on inventories would raise awareness of this recreational activity. The snowmobile GIA Program webpage
below also has more information on the program and funding.
https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/grants/recreation/gia_snowmobile.html
Community Forestry. The loss of tree canopy due to threats such as emerald ash borer and oak wilt has
negative impacts on the health and environment of many Minnesota cities, and a planned community forest
can provide numerous community benefits. The first step to achieving a resilient community forest is
conducting a tree inventory. The second step is developing a community forestry management plan that
includes strategies for managing trees, especially ash, and encouraging a diverse tree canopy on private and
public lands. It would be worth mentioning in the narrative of the comprehensive plan if Rosemount has
developed a plan for the city’s forestry needs as part of an overall strategy to meet its environmental goals
and policies.
Water. The plan references a storm water plan but does not include any kind of summary of the plan
within this document. We recommend including substantive summary discussion of surface and
groundwater issues and policies in the within the main body of this document. A data layer showing
pollution sensitivity to near surface materials would illustrate these issue can be found on the MN
Geospatial Commons.
MRRCA. The following (or previous) comments do not assess whether the draft comprehensive plan
complies with the MRCCA plan minimum requirements. If you are interested in a preliminary review of
your MRCCA chapter for consistency with the MRCCA plan minimum requirements, please submit your
draft plan to Matt Bauman via email at matthew.bauman@state.mn.us.
Reviewer: _Martha Vickery, regional coordinator, Region 3 Division of Lands and Minerals__
Date: __01/24/19__
Reviewer signature: __________________________________________________
Vermillion Highlands: A Research, Recreation and Wildlife Management AreaRegional Connections NProposed RoadwaysRegional Trail / Greenway ConnectionWater Bodies and Drainage WaysSnowmobile TrailsModified Wildlife Management Area (WMA)Regional ParkUMore Park Open Space and GreenwaysUMore Park DevelopmentAgricultural Research AreaExisting Wildlife Managment Area and Aquatic Management Area (AMA)Metropolitan Council LandVermillion HighlandsUMore ParkCo. Rd. 46Co. Rd. 46US 52
170th St.Co. Rd. 42Co. Rd. 42US 52/MN 55 MN 55190th St.Co. Rd. 66Biscayne Ave.
Annette Ave.
Blaine Ave.Blaine Ave.
Clayton Ave.Regional ParkAMAModified WMAWMAWMAMet CouncilLandAMAProposedSnowmobile TrailRerouteMN 3Mississippi RiverLebanon HillsRegional ParkVermillionRiverVermillionRiverEmpire TownshipSand & Gravel MiningRegional Trail / GreenwayMN 3To Mpls/St.PaulTo RochesterTo HastingsCity of CoatesCity of RosemountEmpire TownshipCity of FarmingtonLoneRockTrailheadRosemount Research and Outreach Center ProposedRegional Trail / GreenwayDCTCLittleLoneRockProposed Vermillion River Use Area Proposed Complexes/FacilitiesCRDIllustration #2Regional Trail / Greenway LakevilleTownshipFarmington TownshipApple ValleyEaganInver GroveHeightsVermillion TownshipNininger TownshipSpring Lake Regional Park
Vermillion Highlands: A Research, Recreation and Wildlife Management AreaRegional Connections NProposed RoadwaysRegional Trail / Greenway ConnectionWater Bodies and Drainage WaysSnowmobile TrailsModified Wildlife Management Area (WMA)Regional ParkUMore Park Open Space and GreenwaysUMore Park DevelopmentAgricultural Research AreaExisting Wildlife Managment Area and Aquatic Management Area (AMA)Metropolitan Council LandVermillion HighlandsUMore ParkCo. Rd. 46Co. Rd. 46US 52
170th St.Co. Rd. 42Co. Rd. 42US 52/MN 55 MN 55190th St.Co. Rd. 66Biscayne Ave.
Annette Ave.
Blaine Ave.Blaine Ave.
Clayton Ave.Regional ParkAMAModified WMAWMAWMAMet CouncilLandAMAProposedSnowmobile TrailRerouteMN 3Mississippi RiverLebanon HillsRegional ParkVermillionRiverVermillionRiverEmpire TownshipSand & Gravel MiningRegional Trail / GreenwayMN 3To Mpls/St.PaulTo RochesterTo HastingsCity of CoatesCity of RosemountEmpire TownshipCity of FarmingtonLoneRockTrailheadRosemount Research and Outreach Center ProposedRegional Trail / GreenwayDCTCLittleLoneRockProposed Vermillion River Use Area Proposed Complexes/FacilitiesCRDIllustration #2Regional Trail / Greenway LakevilleTownshipFarmington TownshipApple ValleyEaganInver GroveHeightsVermillion TownshipNininger TownshipSpring Lake Regional Park
City of Rosemount
2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
Adjacent and Affected Jurisdiction Review and Comment Form
Jurisdiction Name:
Please check the appropriate box:
We have reviewed the proposed Plan Update, do not have any comments, and are therefore waiving
further review.
We have reviewed the proposed Plan Update and offer the following comments (attach additional
sheets if necessary)
Name of Reviewer:Date:
Reviewer Signature:
City of Rosemount
2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
Adjacent and Affected Jurisdiction Review and Comment Form
Jurisdiction Name:
Please check the appropriate box:
We have reviewed the proposed Plan Update, do not have any comments, and are therefore waiving
further review.
We have reviewed the proposed Plan Update and offer the following comments (attach additional
sheets if necessary)
Name of Reviewer:Date:
Reviewer Signature:
1
Nemcek, Anthony
From:Dave Bernhardson <bernhardsond@isd199.org>
Sent:Friday, February 22, 2019 12:16 PM
To:Nemcek, Anthony
Cc:tlovelace@ci.apple-valley.mn.us; John Burbank (jburbank@cottage-grove.org);
info@township.empire.mn.us; jkrupich@aol.com; jhinzman@ci.hastings.mn.us;
supt@district196.org; tcollins@hastings.k12.mn.us; rory_stierler@nps.gov;
mridley@cityofeagan.com
Subject:Re: Rosemount Comprehensive Plan Update Review Request
No, we are not. Thanks!
Dave Bernhardson
Superintendent
Inver Grove Heights Community Schools
Phone: 651-306-7808 Fax: 651-306-7295
www.isd199.org
Inspire 199!
On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 10:50 AM Nemcek, Anthony <Anthony.Nemcek@ci.rosemount.mn.us> wrote:
Please confirm if you are not planning on providing comments to the City of Rosemount regarding the City’s
2040 Comprehensive Plan update. Thank you for your time, it is greatly appreciated.
Anthony Nemcek, Planner
City of Rosemount, 2875 145th Street, Rosemount, MN 55068
Ph. 651-322-2090 / http://www.ci.rosemount.mn.us
This electronic mail transmission may contain private or confidential data and is intended only for the person(s) named. If you are not the
intended recipient, you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this transmission is
strictly prohibited. If you receive this in error, please discontinue reading, notify the sender and delete the message. Inver Grove Heights
Schools reserves the right to monitor and review, without further consent, any messages created, sent, or received on its electronic mail
system.
Rosemount 2040 Comp Guide Plan Review Comments
Transportation 8-4, MAJOR TRENDS AND INFLUENCING FACTORS
Specific transportation issues Rosemount faces include:
• Growing congestion on regional and county routes such as Robert Trail South (TH 3), TH 52 and
160th Street West (County State Aid Highway 46) causing diversion of traffic to City roadways.
Suggest adding further clarification for Robert Trail South as TH 3, similar to 160th Street West as
County State Aid Highway 46, for consistency. Consistently reference as either Robert Trail South or
South Robert Trail.
Transportation 8-6, ROADWAY SYSTEM
An efficient and well-planned roadway system will help the City of Rosemount meet future population
growth and a growing economy. Rosemount currently has sufficient access to the regional
transportation roadway system with TH 52, TH 55 and South Robert Trail (TH 3)…
Suggest adding further clarification for South Robert Trail as TH 3 for consistency. Consistently reference
as either Robert Trail South or South Robert Trail.
Transportation 8-14, Table 6. Dakota County Roadway System Improvements
McAndrews Road (CSAH 38) Expansion from 2 lanes to 3 lanes CSAH 31 Robert Trail South 2018
Consistently reference as either Robert Trail South or South Robert Trail.
Transportation 8-16, ROADWAY CHARACTERISTICS
Roadways in Rosemount are made up of a variety of road types from two-lane undivided urban roads to
four-lane rural expressways as identified in Figure 7. The eastern western portion of the City, where a
greater proportion of the population resides,…
Suggest revising as noted.
Transportation 8-17, Figure 4. Planned and Programmed Improvement
• TH 3, segment north of 145th Street, indicates no change (currently 2 traffic lanes). Figure 5,
Existing Traffic Volumes, and current MnDOT counts indicate 12,900 ADT (11,900 ADT north of
McAndrews Road), approaching capacity for a 2-lane roadway (Table 9, Transportation 8-20).
Figure 6, Forecast 2040 Traffic Volumes, indicates 14,700 ADT north of 145th Street and 15,000
ADT north of McAndrews Road. Dakota County Principal Arterial Study will recommend
classification of TH 3 as a principal arterial.
Consider revising Figure 4 to indicate 3 or 4 traffic lanes on TH 3.
Transportation 8-23, Congestion on the Regional Highway System
The Metropolitan Freeway System Congestion Report is prepared annually by the Regional
Transportation Management Center (RTMC) to documents segments …
Suggest revising as noted.
Transportation 8-23, Table 12. Roadways Over Capacity (2040)
Robert Trail South 1.35 Canada Avenue West 150th Street West
Transportation 8-24, Table 12. Roadways Over Capacity (2040)
Robert Trail South 1.00 124th Street West Biscayne Avenue
Transportation 8-24, Table 13. Roadways Approaching Capacity (2040)
Robert Trail South 0.86 Connemara Trail Bonaire Path West
Consistently reference as either Robert Trail South or South Robert Trail.
Transportation 8-28, Table 15. Top 10 Intersection Crash Locations 2011-2015 (By Frequency of Crashes)
Consistently reference as either Robert Trail S or So Robert Trail.
Transportation 8-30, RECOMMENDED ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS
Robert Trail South is forecasted to be over capacity by the year 2040. It isn’t a recommended lane
expansion project because it is constrained by a lack of space and because an expansion would have a
negative impact on the downtown environment. There is minimal right-of-way available near the
roadway alignment. To help mitigate this, the City will be expanding Akron Avenue, giving drivers
another option to drive from north to south.
Dakota County Principal Arterial Study will recommend classification of TH 3 as a principal arterial.
While expanding Akron Avenue is supported, it will not adequately mitigate north-south traffic for TH 3.
Constraints are limited to the downtown area. Expansion should be appropriate consideration north of
Connemara Trail. Other options to address downtown segment should remain for future consideration.
Suggest revising highlighted text. Consistently reference as either Robert Trail South or South Robert
Trail.
Transportation 8-31, Figure 11. Recommended Roadway Capacity Improvements
• TH 3, segment north of 145th Street, indicates no change (currently 2 traffic lanes). Figure 5,
Existing Traffic Volumes, and current MnDOT counts indicate 12,900 ADT (11,900 ADT north of
McAndrews Road), approaching capacity for a 2-lane roadway (Table 9, Transportation 8-20).
Figure 6, Forecast 2040 Traffic Volumes, indicates 14,700 ADT north of 145th Street and 15,000
ADT north of McAndrews Road. Dakota County Principal Arterial Study will recommend
classification of TH 3 as a principal arterial.
Consider revising Figure 11 to indicate 3 or 4-Lane Divided on TH 3.
Transportation 8-43, Regional Bicycle Transportation Network
There are four RBTN Tier 2 alignments within the City of Rosemount.
1. South Robert Trail Alignment: Located on the west side of the City going north and south. There
currently isn’t an existing or planned bicycle or pedestrian facility on this roadway.
2. McAndrews Road Alignment: Connecting to the South Robert Trail alignment…
Consistently reference as either Robert Trail South or South Robert Trail.
Water Supply Chapter, Pg 14-15, 5.2.3 Resource Sustainability
The City will pursue a 10-15% reduction in per capita water production, in cooperation with other
Dakota County cities, to support aquifer supply sustainability, utilizing groundwater modeling as a tool
to ensure aquifer sustainability.
Consider adding text, as noted.
Water Supply Chapter, Pg 16, 6.1.3 Water Supply Recommendations
Pursue a 10-15% reduction in per capita water production to support aquifer supply sustainability.
Consider adding the recommendation, as noted.
Comprehensive Sewer Plan, Pg 20, 6.3.1 Existing City Sewersheds
The northern portion of the Lan-O-Ken sewershed is currently planned as a transitional residential zone
will likely and has the topography that would allow it to be conveyed north into Eagan’s sanitary sewer.
The area has a potential average flowrate of 0.085 MGD and an estimated peak flow of 0.34 MGD.
Assuming the a future connection to Eagan is placed at the 10 State Standards minimum pipe slope, a 8”
trunk sewer line would be capable of serving the transitional residential area.
Consider revising text, as noted.
City of Rosemount
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Adjacent and Affected Jurisdiction Review and Comment Form
Jurisdiction Name:
Please check the appropriate box:
We have reviewed the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment, do not have any comments, and
are therefore waiving further review.
We have reviewed the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment and offer the following
comments (attach additional sheets if necessary)
Name of Reviewer:Date:
Reviewer Signature:
1
Nemcek, Anthony
From:Collins, Tim <tcollins@hastings.k12.mn.us>
Sent:Friday, February 22, 2019 12:30 PM
To:Dave Bernhardson
Cc:Nemcek, Anthony; tlovelace@ci.apple-valley.mn.us; John Burbank (jburbank@cottage-
grove.org); info@township.empire.mn.us; jkrupich@aol.com;
jhinzman@ci.hastings.mn.us; supt@district196.org; rory_stierler@nps.gov;
mridley@cityofeagan.com
Subject:Re: Rosemount Comprehensive Plan Update Review Request
Attachments:image001.jpg
Hastings is not.
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 22, 2019, at 12:16 PM, Dave Bernhardson <bernhardsond@isd199.org<mailto:bernhardsond@isd199.org>>
wrote:
No, we are not. Thanks!
Dave Bernhardson
Superintendent
Inver Grove Heights Community Schools
Phone: 651‐306‐7808 Fax: 651‐306‐7295
www.isd199.org<http://www.isd199.org/>
Inspire 199!
[cid:]
On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 10:50 AM Nemcek, Anthony
<Anthony.Nemcek@ci.rosemount.mn.us<mailto:Anthony.Nemcek@ci.rosemount.mn.us>> wrote:
Please confirm if you are not planning on providing comments to the City of Rosemount regarding the City’s 2040
Comprehensive Plan update. Thank you for your time, it is greatly appreciated.
Anthony Nemcek, Planner
City of Rosemount, 2875 145th Street, Rosemount, MN 55068 Ph. 651‐322‐2090 /
http://www.ci.rosemount.mn.us<http://www.ci.rosemount.mn.us/>
<image001.jpg>
This electronic mail transmission may contain private or confidential data and is intended only for the person(s) named.
If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in
reliance on the contents of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you receive this in error, please discontinue
reading, notify the sender and delete the message. Inver Grove Heights Schools reserves the right to monitor and
review, without further consent, any messages created, sent, or received on its electronic mail system.
2
1
Nemcek, Anthony
From:Stotts, Mark <Mark.Stotts@district196.org>
Sent:Monday, March 25, 2019 8:00 AM
To:Nemcek, Anthony
Subject:RE: City of Rosemount 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
Anthony,
We have no comments.
Mark
From: Nemcek, Anthony
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 3:03 PM
To: Stotts, Mark
Subject: City of Rosemount 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
Mark,
Let me know if you are not the one to receive this. We are looking for comments from affected agencies regarding the
City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update. This is different from the Comp Plan Amendment that went out late last year.
Thanks for your time.
Anthony Nemcek, Planner
City of Rosemount, 2875 145th Street, Rosemount, MN 55068
Ph. 651‐322‐2090 / http://www.ci.rosemount.mn.us
City of Rosemount
2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
Adjacent and Affected Jurisdiction Review and Comment Form
Jurisdiction Name:
Please check the appropriate box:
We have reviewed the proposed Plan Update, do not have any comments, and are therefore waiving
further review.
We have reviewed the proposed Plan Update and offer the following comments (attach additional
sheets if necessary)
Name of Reviewer:Date:
Reviewer Signature:
From:Scheffing, Karen (DOT)
To:Klatt, Kyle
Subject:CPA18-091 City of Rosemount 2040 Comp plan
Date:Tuesday, November 13, 2018 9:56:43 AM
Kyle
Thank you for the opportunity to review the City of Rosemount’s 2040 Comprehensive plan update.
MnDOT has reviewed this document and has no comments. Please contact me if you have any
questions.
Thanks
Karen
Rosemount 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 2 – Community Context
2-8
TABLE 2.6: INCOME
1990 2000 2016
Per Capita Income $14,931 $23,116 $36,955
Median Household Income $41,992 $65,916 $92,393
Median Family Income $43,726 $68,929 N/A
Percent of Individual below
the Poverty Line
5.0% 3.3% 5.0%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau and 2012-2016 American Community Survey
EMPLOYMENT
There are two ways to look at employment within Rosemount to help gain an understanding about
the City workforce: people who are working at businesses within the City and those residents that
commute outside the City to work at jobs on other places. According to the most recent American
Community Survey, as of 2015 there were 7,822 persons working at businesses within the City.
Focusing on Rosemount residents specifically, there were 11,916 of the City’s residents in the
workforce, with 11,072 of those residents commuting outside the City to work, while 844 persons
were employed by Rosemount businesses. In general, there are large numbers of people commuting
in and out of Rosemount every day to get to work, while a relatively smaller number of people
remain within the City, either working from home or at a local business. From a planning
perspective, maintaining good access to the surrounding region is important both for workers living
in Rosemount and the City’s businesses that rely on labor from other places.
TABLE 2.7: WORK DESTINATIONS
For those workers that are
commuting out of Rosemount, the
majority are generally heading to
the north to the major employment
centers around downtown
Minneapolis and St. Paul, regional
destinations in Bloomington and
Eden Prairie, or to the west and the
suburban communities adjacent to
Rosemount. A summary of the
most significant destinations for
Rosemount residents that work
outside of the community is
included in Table 2.7.
Work Destination (Cities) Number Percentage
All Rosemount Workers 11,916 100%
Minneapolis 1,390 11.7%
Eagan 1,294 10.9%
St. Paul 1,131 9.5%
Apple Valley 853 7.2%
Rosemount 844 7.1%
Bloomington 798 6.7%
Burnsville 674 5.7%
Lakeville 363 3.0%
Eden Prairie 258 2.2%
Inver Grove Heights 248 2.1%
All Other Locations 4,063 34.1%
Source: 2016 American Community Survey
1
Summary of Comments on Chapter 1 - Executive Summary FINAL.docx
Page: 10
Number: 1 Author: abartling Subject: Highlight Date: 11/1/2018 10:41:23 AM -05'00'MVTA recommends adding a section to briefly discuss existing transit service and facilities within the City of Rosemount (as it relates to commuting patterns and work destinations).
Rosemount 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 3 – Land Use
3-1
CHAPTER 3: LAND USE
LAND USE SUMMARY
ROSEMOUNT LAND USE PLANNING
Introductory Statements:
Rosemount last completed a major update to its Comprehensive Plan in 2009. This plan was
preceded by planning efforts to plan for continued growth and development within the City,
especially for areas north of Bonaire Path and east of Akron Avenue. Since this plan was adopted,
the City has seen significant residential growth in the Akron Avenue and County Road 42 area and
northeast of downtown Rosemount. Prior to development of these areas, the City initiated major
planning efforts for these growth areas (the 42-52 Plan and Akron Avenue Area AUAR), which
served as a basis for a significant portion of the land use changes that were adopted as part of the
2030 Compressive Plan Update.
New commercial development in the nine years since the last major plan revision has been focused
on the downtown area or the commercial corridor south and southeast of the downtown. The City
continues to plan for new commercial growth along the County Road 42 corridor at key
intersections around South Robert Trail and Akron Avenue, with the expectation that new
residential development in these areas will increase demand for goods and services on a local and
regional level.
Industrial land uses make up large amount of the City’s developed areas, with heavy industrial users
such as Flint Hills Resources and CF Industries occupying large areas in the eastern portion of the
City. The City’s current and updated land use plan continues to recognize these areas as important
regional economic forces, but does not call for further expansion of heavy industrial uses into new
areas. The City is planning for new business park and light industrial uses east of Akron Avenue to
help serve as a transition between the heavy industrial users and planned commercial and residential
areas.
The economic downturn of the late 2000’s has had a significant impact on the pace and demand for
new development over the past decade, which has altered the expected timing of development in
certain areas within Rosemount. The City has seen a fairly consistent level of development over the
past decade; however, mostly in the form of new single family housing while the available supply of
developable land has steadily diminished over this time frame. Two new growth areas are expected
to help accommodate new development, including the University of Minnesota’s UMore Park
property and the larger underdeveloped southeast portion of the City. While most of the City’s
growth between 2020 and 2040 is expected to occur east of Highway 52, the timing of such growth
could be impacted if the University of Minnesota proceeds with development of its Rosemount
land.
1
Page: 13
Number: 1 Author: abartling Subject: Highlight Date: 11/1/2018 10:49:02 AM -05'00'While the Transportation Chapter includes a section for integrating transit into land use planning, the Land Use Chapter lacks elements related to transit. Consider adding language to establish the connection between land use and transit (i.e., population/employment density, walkability, etc.)
Rosemount 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 3 – Land Use
3-37
Limited Secondary
Zoning
C4 – General Commercial
Two Regional Commercial districts are provided within the Land Use Plan: an approximately 20
acre district bounded by South Robert Trail, Canada Circle, and the Union Pacific rail line; and an
approximately 350 acre district surrounding the intersection of County Road 42 and US Highway 52.
The 20 acre Regional Commercial district is intended for auto oriented businesses. This district
provides an area for the auto orientated businesses currently located Downtown, or the contractor
businesses located southwest of County Road 42 and South Robert Trail, can be relocated.
The 350 acre Regional Commercial district is intended for businesses with a regional draw or with
products that are sold annually or less often. Big box retail, theaters, or hotels are appropriate uses
in this area, as well as an area for existing vehicle sales businesses in other parts of the City to
relocate.
Business Park (BP)
Purpose The intent of the Business Park district is to develop businesses with a large number
of employees, wages that support an entire family, and constructed of high quality
buildings that provide both beauty and tax base to the community. Establishments
within the business park are intended to have little or no outdoor storage, with the
majority of the business activities occurring completely indoors.
Location Criteria The size of each Business Park district is intended to be greater than 150 acres in size.
The district should be located adjacent to heavily traveled arterial roads to provide
both visibility and access to these major employment centers.
Min. Requirements
for Development
Within the MUSA and with an improved access to a collector and/or arterial road to
serve the district. The street network within the business park should be designed to
accommodate truck and freight traffic while also providing sidewalks and pedestrian
improvements for employees to use during breaks and lunch periods.
Utilities Municipal water and sanitary sewer are encouraged. Private well and septic systems
may be permitted as an interim system before municipal water and sanitary sewer are
available provided an appropriate septic area is located and infrastructure is installed
to connect to when utilities are at the development’s boundary.
Typical Uses Office; retail and office warehouses; research laboratories; post-secondary education;
distributors; and manufacturing.
Intensity
Appropriate Zoning BP – Business Park
Limited Secondary
Zoning
C4 – General Commercial near intersections of major roads; LI – Light Industrial
adjacent to industrial planned areas or in areas that will not impact primary views
along major roads and that can be accommodated in areas internal to the business
park.
1
Page: 49
Number: 1 Author: abartling Subject: Highlight Date: 11/1/2018 10:50:36 AM -05'00'Transit is an increasing need in business parks as employers are looking to expand their employee base. Consider adding language to support transit elements in the street network.
Rosemount 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 3 – Land Use
3-42
SPECIAL PLANNING AREA CONSIDERATIONS
As described in the beginning of this chapter, the City identified three planning areas for special
consideration prior to commencing work on the updated land use plan. Some of the major planning
considerations that came out of the public participation and City review process for these areas
include the following:
North Central Planning Area
• The majority of the north central area will remain rural residential; however, as services are
extended through developing areas to the south, the City will investigate opportunities to
size infrastructure to provide service to the Transitional Residential areas east of South
Robert Trail and to plan for unforeseen needs beyond the time frame of the 2040 Plan.
• The City will continue to pursue opportunities for shared services with the adjoining
jurisdictions of Eagan and Inver Grove Heights, especially for areas with the Transitional
Residential area that may not be able to be served form existing sewer lines in Rosemount.
• New residential development will be allowed that conforms to the City’s Rural Residential
zoning standards or that is otherwise approved as a planned development that adheres to the
guiding principles for this land use category (i.e. preserving natural areas and wetlands).
Southeast Planning Area
• This planning area contains a large portion of the City’s future growth areas, with future
development expected to move generally southeast from the 52/42 intersection.
• Larger portions of the southeast planning area are guided for agricultural land uses, and will
serve as an urban reserve for Rosemount for growth after the timeframe of the 2040 Plan.
• Ordered extension of services will be critical for this area to help ensure that the timing of
future development in consistent with the City’s ability to finance and construct public
infrastructure to serve the area.
• The land use plan for southeastern Rosemount calls for a transitional area along County
Road 42 to provide a buffer between the heavy industrial and waste management uses north
of this road. The plan also provides opportunities for the creation of activity nodes at
intersections along the corridor with a mixture of housing and commercial uses.
• As development occurs, the City will be seeking ways to integrate new growth areas into the
rest of the community. New trail and road connections will help provide links to the
western part of Rosemount, while County Road 42 will continue to serve as the primary
east/west connection linking this area to the rest of the City.
• The City has identified interim uses that will be appropriate for the area to provide economic
opportunities for land owners until public service area available. Interim uses will be
reviewed to ensure compatibility with existing agricultural uses and future residential
neighborhoods.
1
Page: 54
Number: 1 Author: abartling Subject: Highlight Date: 11/1/2018 10:51:03 AM -05'00'Transit is another way to provide links between new and existing developments.
Rosemount 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 3 – Land Use
3-43
Downtown
• Downtown will continue to serve as the center of the community, and provides a sense of
place and identify for Rosemount that is not found in other suburban communities.
• The City will pursue opportunities for revitalization and enhancement of downtown and the
existing businesses and residences.
• The City has recently updated the Downtown Framework, and will use this plan as a guide
to help promote redevelopment of key sites within the downtown area. The market study
completed in conjunction with the framework identifies opportunities for additional housing
and mixed use projects for this area.
• The City will consider walkability and access to transit when evaluating future development
and redevelopment proposals in the downtown area.
OTHER PLANNING ISSUES
In order to help carry out the City’s overall vision and goals for the community, the City has
identified several additional planning considerations for the future:
Redevelopment Opportunities
• As the supply of land available for development diminishes, the City will promote the
development of underutilized sites and the redevelopment of existing buildings that have
outlived their useful lives.
• Many of the City’s existing neighborhoods and commercial areas were subdivided and
constructed in the late 1970’s and into the 1980’s. As these area approach 40 years in age,
the City will promote investment in these areas to ensure they will continue to provide
housing and business opportunities well into the future.
Specific Master Plans
• The City of Rosemount encourages the use of master planning for newly developing areas to
help ensure consistency of design and compatibility with surrounding neighborhoods.
Transit Station Area Plans
• The Transportation Plan (Chapter 8) discusses the two existing transit stops in Rosemount,
one of which is located in the downtown while the other, a pilot project, is located on the
Dakota County Technical College campus. The City’s land use plan calls for mixed use
development and higher residential densities in both of these areas.
• The land use plan identifies nodes at key intersections along County Road 42 that include a
mix of commercial uses and higher density housing that could potentially serve as future
transit station areas. The City will work with MVTA and Dakota County to identify future
service extensions in the future that can take advantage of the appropriate transit sites in
newly developing areas.
1
2
Page: 55
Number: 1 Author: abartling Subject: Highlight Date: 10/30/2018 8:33:15 AM -05'00'MVTA's Route 420 is a flex route that provides service at any safe location along the route or within the flex boundary. Number: 2 Author: abartling Subject: Highlight Date: 10/30/2018 8:34:28 AM -05'00'MVTA supports higher densities and mixed use development near transit stops and requests participation in discussions around future station area plans.
Rosemount 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 4 – Housing
4-8
Rosemount expects additional senior units to be constructed in the future as the baby boomers
retire and current Rosemount residents age.
CONDITION AND AGE OF HOUSING STOCK
Due to the significant growth that has occurred over the last three decades, the majority of the
housing stock within Rosemount is relatively new. A little less than 20% of Rosemount’s housing
stock is over 35 years old, the age at which major maintenance efforts need to take place such as
furnace or roof replacements. This percentage has been increasing in recent years, and the total
number of homes over 35 years old is expected to double over the next 10 years. The City will need
to monitor carefully the condition of the aging housing stock to ensure that it is maintained. The
City works with Dakota County to identify homeowners who may be income eligible for low interest
loans for house repairs and energy efficiency improvements.
TABLE 4.10 – AGE OF HOUSING STOCK
Number Percent
2010 – 2014 359 4.4%
2000 – 2009 3,073 37.4%
1990 – 1999 2,140 26.1%
1980 – 1989 1,110 13.5%
1970 – 1979 611 7.4%
1960 – 1969 567 6.9%
Before 1960 354 4.3%
*Source: 2016 ACS
HOUSING NEED ANALYSIS
Rosemount will continue to be a community predominately comprised of single-family detached
homes consistent with its regional designation as part of the “Emerging Suburban Edge” within the
Twin Cities Metropolitan area. Housing affordability continues to be a concern, especially for those
households with incomes well below the median income. With an aging population, the City will
also need to plan for ways to provide for “aging in place” to allow residents who wish to continue
living in Rosemount to continue to do so as they get older and their housing needs change. As the
City’s supply of land readily available for development declines, new growth areas are farther from
existing services, including the UMore property and the agricultural land east of US Highway 52.
Care must be taken to ensure there is enough land designated for non-residential uses to provide
convenient services to new and future neighborhoods as the community continues to expand
eastward.
Some of the potential barriers for addressing these needs include the following:
• Ensuring that there is enough land available to support the City’s housing needs will become
more difficult as the supply of land near urban services is developed. Since the last
Comprehensive Plan, Flint Hills has acquired land for buffer around its facility. It has been
1
Page: 83
Number: 1 Author: abartling Subject: Highlight Date: 10/30/2018 8:44:14 AM -05'00'The availability of transit is another potential barrier that should be addressed as it relates to housing affordability and aging populations.
Rosemount 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 4 – Housing
4-13
4. Provide a mixture of rental and home ownership opportunities to provide life
cycle housing.
A. Encourage the construction of a variety of single family home sizes and styles to
increase home ownership opportunities.
B. Encourage the development of owner occupied and rental medium density housing.
C. Provide ownership opportunities for seniors with access to transit and
public/institutional facilities.
D. Provide rental opportunities for young adults and recent college graduates returning
to Rosemount.
E. Provide an opportunity for student housing near Dakota County Technical College.
5. Locate the different housing styles within the appropriate areas.
A. Identify areas in the plan for multi-family housing to clearly communicate City’s plan
for these areas and preserve land for higher density housing where it can be best
integrated with the surrounding development.
B. Disperse medium density residential throughout the community to avoid entire
neighborhoods of densities greater than 4 units per acre.
C. Disperse high density residential in appropriate areas throughout the community to
provide mixed residential density neighborhoods and lifecycle housing opportunities.
D. Differing housing opportunities should provide variation in housing style and price
point for residents
E. Locate high density residential with access to the collector and arterial street
network.
F. Locate high density residential in conjunction with Downtown and the commercial
areas along County Road 42 to create mixed use neighborhoods and transit oriented
districts.
G. Provide opportunities for seniors to live near their children and families.
6. Provide workforce and affordable housing opportunities through cooperative
effort with other agencies.
A. Work with the Dakota County Community Development Agency (CDA) and other
state and federal agencies to provide workforce and affordable housing
opportunities.
B. Work with Habitat for Humanity and similar organizations, along with Dakota
County Community Development Agency (CDA) and other state and federal
agencies, to provide affordable housing opportunities and to redevelop and
rehabilitate older homes in the City.
1
Page: 88
Number: 1 Author: abartling Subject: Highlight Date: 10/30/2018 8:47:50 AM -05'00'Consider adding local transit service to this sentence.
Rosemount 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 6 – Economic Competiveness
6-6
The City has been active in the redevelopment of other blocks with particular attention on the old St
Joe’s church block. Acquisition was prompted by the need to dedicate land for a County library. The
remainder of the site was parceled off for private development of The Rosemount Senior Living
center along with the Steeple Center, a community space dedicated to seniors and the arts, and also
used by a variety of community groups. The City also facilitated installation of the Downtown park
and ride by providing a low-cost lease to MVTA and partnering to obtain federal funding for the
facility. Many of the Downtown projects have been a collaborative effort both through financing
and design with other public and private partners.
Finally, the City has established the Downtown Code Improvement Program that provides grant
funding for improvements to bring the existing Downtown buildings into compliance with the
building code. Program eligibility is for any business or property owner whose building is listed
within the Framework and who is making exterior and façade improvements to the building in
accordance with the Downtown Rosemount Design Guidelines. To encourage the reinvestment in façade
improvements, business and property owners who pay with their own funds for façade
improvements can request public funds to pay for code improvements to their building.
BUSINESS RECRUITMENT, ASSISTANCE, AND RETENTION
To support small businesses and promote entrepreneurship in Rosemount, Open to Business is
available to provide one-on-one business counseling to current and prospective business owners at
no cost. Consultants provide assistance with business plan development and marketing strategies,
among other things. Additionally, business owners can learn about other resources such as training
programs, governmental services, and networking opportunities. This program is a collaborative
effort between the Dakota County
Community Development Agency
and the City. The City also
partners with the Dakota County
Regional Chamber of Commerce
to connect with businesses and
understand the needs and
concerns of business leaders in
the community. The City’s
website provides online resources
for new business owners and
entrepreneurs. A “virtual
incubator” directs business
owners to other agencies that can
assist with business financing,
networking and other business
advice.
The City works closely with the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic
Development and Greater MSP to respond to requests for information by businesses that are
looking to relocate, particularly those businesses that are looking for greenfield sites on which to
construct new facilities. The City shares data regarding municipal services, site details,
transportation, as well as any other specific information requested. For example, there is a Shovel
Ready site within the Rosemount Business Park that is enrolled in the DEED Shovel Ready
1
Page: 102
Number: 1 Author: abartling Subject: Highlight Date: 11/5/2018 2:50:12 PM Please consider including MVTA in the business development/plan review process. MVTA has recently expanded its efforts with business outreach and partnerships to address transportation needs. Staff is available to meet with businesses, provide travel training, or any general information on what transit services are currently available.
Rosemount 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 7 - Resilience
7-4
Comprehensive plan. As such, the Rosemount shamrock will be used to identify where the policies
and goals within those sections overlap these goals.
RESILIENCY GOALS
INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENVIRONMENT
Climate change has the potential to have major impacts on infrastructure and natural resources in
communities of all sizes. The biggest threats to these assets are increased frequency and intensity of
rainstorms and heat waves, potentially leading to flooding and power outages, respectively.
Roadways, being ground zero for automobile greenhouse gas emissions, can play a major role in
both adding to and alleviating the impacts of climate change.
Stormwater/Wastewater
1. Continue developing stormwater capacity requirements that accommodate more frequent
and intense storms.
2. Incorporate planning for municipal services to all lots in areas currently served by private
well and septic system.
3. Explore effluent reuse opportunities in partnership with the Metropolitan Council for future
development, especially Business Park development.
Road Infrastructure
1. Follow a complete streets approach and critically evaluate anticipated traffic volumes to
avoid overbuilding roadways.
2. Investigate opportunities to reduce the use of salt and sand on city roads during winter
months.
Natural Resources
1. Preserve, protect and restore the natural environment with emphasis on the conservation of
needed and useful natural resources for the present and future benefit of the community.
2. Utilize natural resource areas to provide an overall open space system that satisfies the needs
of the community and its residents.
3. Create a livable community where future development respects and integrates the natural,
cultural, and historic resources of the community while maintaining or enhancing the
economic opportunities and community well-being.
4. Moderate City-wide water consumption to promote aquifer recharge.
1
Page: 113
Number: 1 Author: abartling Subject: Highlight Date: 11/1/2018 10:54:08 AM -05'00'Both the STAR Communities and Minnesota GreenStep Cities programs have focuses on alternative transportation, including complete streets, mobility options, & transit-oriented development. However, the Resiliency chapter of this plan doesn't include any goals/policies related to the transit components of resiliency. MVTA recommends adding language about transit and it's contributions to a resilient community.
Rosemount 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 8 – Transportation
8-3
• Prioritize maintenance for roadways based on surface conditions and other indicators of
deterioration.
• Maintenance assessments shall be considered when a facility requires reconstruction, and
whether the removal or closure of the facility is a fiscally responsible alternative in certain
instances.
• Employ a variety of outreach tools to foster community engagement and eliminate barriers
to public participation in transportation and land use planning, and ensure final plans reflect
the values of Rosemount citizens.
Safety and Security
• Maximize the safety of the roadways for all users.
• Use the appropriate access management guidelines to provide safe conditions on all road
types.
• Plan roadway projects with central consideration given to the roadway functional
classification system.
Access to Destinations
• Optimize capacity, operational and safety characteristics of the overall network.
• Selectively expand the roadway system in order to relieve pressure from roads near or over
capacity.
• Review network needs assessment on an on-going basis regarding potential deficiencies.
• Use the analysis and prioritization principals from this Plan as the basis for this review.
Assess these needs against available funding.
Competitive Economy
• Invest in transportation improvements that will attract and retain businesses and workers
within Rosemount and pursue design alternatives that reflect the values of its citizens.
• Strengthen connections between work and activity centers.
• Provide and protect efficient connections from major freight facilities to the regional
highway system.
• Coordinate with regional governments, transit agencies, and rideshare programs to capture
the environmental and social costs of commuting and incentivize alternatives to single-
occupancy vehicle trips.
Healthy Environment
• Encourage multimodal use by improving the safety and accessibility of all facilities.
• Work with Minnesota Valley Transit Authority and the Metropolitan Council to maximize
transit use and to coordinate potential transit facilities.
• Provide off-road and on-road bike and pedestrian facilities improving the safety for all
users of the road.
• Integrate trail system with regional trail system and make connections to neighboring
communities.
1
Page: 121
Number: 1 Author: abartling Subject: Highlight Date: 11/5/2018 2:43:04 PM Page 8-2 mentions a multimodal transportation system as it relates to the Access to Destinations goal. However, there isn't a specific policy for this goal referring to transit or other modes of transportation. Consider adding a policy to reflect this.
Rosemount 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 8 – Transportation
8-32
ACCESS MANAGEMENT
Access management is an important aspect of providing a safe and efficient roadway network.
Access management measures include:
• Providing adequate spacing between access points and intersecting streets to separate and
reduce conflicts
• Limiting the number of driveway access points to reduce conflicts
• Aligning access with other existing access points
• Sharing access points, through internal connectivity between property owners
• Encouraging indirect access rather than direct access to high volume arterial roads
• Constructing parallel roads and frontage roads
• Implementing sight distance guidelines to improve safety
• Using channelization to manage and control turning movements
• Meeting these requirements while also maintaining appropriate access to local businesses
Access review is a major aspect of the City’s project review process. The goal is to maintain the
safety and capacity of the City’s roadways while providing adequate land access. Mobility is the
ability to get from one place to another. Most roadways serve accessibility and mobility functions to
some degree based on their functional classification. The four levels of functional classification and
their corresponding mobility and access traits are as follows:
• Principal arterials have the highest mobility with no direct land access
• Minor arterials have high mobility with limited land access
• Collector streets have moderate mobility with some land access
• Local streets have low mobility with minimal restrictions on land access
The City will continue to support MnDOT’s and Dakota County’s Access Management guidelines
on the roadway network in the City through the measures list above. MnDOT’s Highway Access
Category System and Spacing Guidelines can be found at:
https://www.dot.state.mn.us/accessmanagement/resources.html
1
Page: 150
Number: 1 Author: abartling Subject: Highlight Date: 11/5/2018 2:34:07 PM Limited access points can provide travel time and routing challenges for transit operators. In the suburbs, a bus can often get into a destination but needs a through street or reasonable turnaround to get out (and a turnaround is less efficient).
Rosemount 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 8 – Transportation
8-33
TRANSIT SYSTEM
Transit is an important piece of the transportation system in a community. It provides another
option for people to get to their destination without the use of a vehicle. Transit helps build a
comprehensive, equitable, and environmentally friendly transportation system.
Transit is a vital element in the transportation network as it:
• Provides vulnerable populations access to services in the area, including those who cannot
afford a personal vehicle, people who cannot drive, and senior citizens.
• Provides opportunities for people who prefer an alternative to automobile travel.
• Removes a portion of existing and future automobile traffic from the roadway, reducing
travel time and congestion for everyone on the roadway.
• Reduces air pollution for those living near the roadway and reduces greenhouse gas
emissions helping mitigate climate change
The City of Rosemount is committed to supporting and preserving existing transit services and
facilities in the City and seeking ways to improve the transit system. Rosemount is a growing City
and current and future residents will need a variety of transportation services available to meet
their needs. As the population in the metro area continues to grow, demand will increase for new
ways to get to destinations in Rosemount and in the surrounding areas including Minneapolis and St.
Paul. Although the City does not have direct responsibility for the operation of services or the
provision of facilities, the City can advocate for better service while promoting more transit
supportive land use patterns as sections of the City redevelop.
This chapter identifies the existing services, facilities, and programs within the City of Rosemount,
suggests improvements, and discusses the City’s role in supporting the transit system.
TRANSIT MARKET AREAS
Rosemount is a growing suburb south of the Twin Cities with its population expected to grow
almost 50% by 2040. Transit service and facilities will need to be put in place to meet this increase in
demand. As indicated in Figure 12 much of the growth is occurring along the western side of the
City where the Metropolitan Council has identified it as Market Area III. Land use plans should be
integrated with these market areas to shape development near transit that supports a walkable and
transit friendly environment. The majority of the City east of Market Area III is considered Market
Area V and is planned to have less reliance on transit. Table 16 provides further descriptions and
characteristics of the Market Areas established by the Metropolitan Council.
1
Page: 151
Number: 1 Author: abartling Subject: Highlight Date: 10/30/2018 10:38:25 AM -05'00'As noted in MVTA's 2015 System Statement comments, Transit Market Area descriptions in the TPP may not represent the full service needs of the City of Rosemount. MVTA is available to work with the City to determine the appropriate level of service for each area, regardless of its designation.
Rosemount 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 8 – Transportation
8-35
EXISTING TRANSIT SERVICES AND FACILITIES
The City of Rosemount is currently served by three transit services: Minnesota Valley Transit
Authority (MVTA), Metro Transit, and Dakota Area Resources and Transportation for Seniors
(DARTS).
MVTA is the only transit provider in the City that offers fixed-route transit services. DARTS and
Metro Transit offer demand responsive services where regular route transit service is infrequent or
unavailable and service for seniors and people with a disability or health condition. MTVA serves as
the public transportation agency for Rosemount and surrounding municipalities in Dakota and Scott
County, and operates the Metro Transit Red Line under contract to the Metropolitan Council.
Fixed-Route Transit Service
Fixed-route transit service includes both local and express bus services that operate on a regular
schedule and follow consistent routes. Fixed-route transit service in Rosemount is provided
primarily by MVTA, which serves as the public transportation agency for five suburbs in Dakota
and Scott Counties. Table 17 describes the characteristics of the routes serving the City of
Rosemount.
Table 17. Fixed Route Service in Rosemount
Route Provider Type Cities Served Service Times Frequency
420 MVTA Local Rosemount, Apple
Valley Weekdays, bi-directional 60 min
476 MVTA Express Bus Rosemount, Apple
Valley, Minneapolis Peak only, weekdays, bi-directional 15-30 min
478 MVTA Express Bus Rosemount,
Minneapolis Peak only, weekdays, bi-directional 15-30 min
484 MVTA Express Bus Rosemount, Saint
Paul Peak only, weekdays, bi-directional 2 trips
The western portion of Rosemount is served by four transit routes that move customers between
Rosemount, Apple Valley, Downtown Minneapolis, and Downtown Saint Paul. Trips are
concentrated throughout the peak times, Monday through Friday and there is no regular weekend
service. Connection to the Red Line in Apple Valley and to Dakota County Technical College is via
Route 420 and can be accessed throughout the day, Monday through Friday.
Express Routes
Express service operates during peak periods and is designed to connect commuters to job centers.
In Rosemount, these routes pickup at the Rosemount Transit Station and at roadside bus stops and
operate closed door to the downtown area. The route from Minneapolis/St. Paul to Rosemount
picks up at designated bus stops in Downtown Minneapolis and St. Paul.
1
2
3
4
Page: 153
Number: 1 Author: abartling Subject: Highlight Date: 11/5/2018 2:44:01 PM Consider revising statement. Metro Transit does not provide services in Rosemount. DARTS, Metro Mobility, and Transit Link all operate within Dakota County. Metro Mobility is technically operated by the Metropolitan Council within a 3/4 mile buffer of a fixed route and there is a qualification screening. DARTS, a nonprofit operated within the County, and Transit Link, while similar to Metro Mobility and operated by the Met Council, do not have qualifiers or the fixed route boundary. Please consider updating the section at the bottom of page 154 about demand response services as well. Number: 2 Author: abartling Subject: Highlight Date: 10/30/2018 10:40:13 AM -05'00'MVTA serves seven cities (2 in Scott County and 5 in Dakota County). Number: 3 Author: abartling Subject: Highlight Date: 10/30/2018 10:43:13 AM -05'00'30-60 minutes. Number: 4 Author: abartling Subject: Highlight Date: 10/30/2018 10:43:54 AM -05'00'MVTA is implementing weekend service on Route 420, effective 11/17/2018.
Rosemount 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 8 – Transportation
8-38
Transit Station and Park and Rides
There are two transit stations in Rosemount. One
is the park and ride facility located at 145th Street
and Burnley Avenue. The 102-stall facility, across
the street from City Hall, is the first permanent
park and ride facility for the City. The facility is
located in a walkable part of the City, close to a
park and has sidewalks around it. The transit
station is fully-enclosed and serves routes 420, 476,
478, and 484. The facility anchors service to the
Cedar Avenue transit corridor and express
routes to downtown Minneapolis and St. Paul.
In 2017, the facility had a 77% utilization rate
with 79 of the 102 spaces being used. This has increased from 65% in 2016.
The second transit station is located at Dakota County Technical College supporting Route 420
which includes 5 trips to the school throughout the morning and afternoon and 6 trips departing the
school throughout the day.
Bus Stops or “Flag Stops”
Bus stops provide passengers with a predictable place to wait for bus service. The only bus shelter in
Rosemount is the Rosemount Transit Station. Throughout the rest of the City, there are a series of
“Flag Stops” for passengers to use to board the bus. If your trip origin and destination are near a
flag stop or time point shown on the map, passengers must go to that stop and wait for the bus. The
schedule lists the departure times for several key stops. If a flag stop is between two time points,
passengers use the time point for the stop as a guide.
TRANSIT ADVANTAGES
Transit Advantages is a term that describes physical features that provide a travel time advantage
over automobiles using the same facility. Transit advantages improve the attractiveness of transit by
allowing buses to move faster than automobiles making the same trip, effectively reducing the travel
time for transit patrons relative to automobile users. There are no specific transit advantages within
the City of Rosemount, but riders do get to take advantage of them on their bus routes. Downtown
bus routes have improved service because of transit advantages. Routes to downtown Minneapolis
get to take advantage of bus only shoulders and high occupancy vehicles lanes on TH 77 and I-35
while all downtown Rosemount bus routes take advantage of bus lanes in downtown Minneapolis
and downtown St. Paul. There are also several ramp-meter bypasses that assist MVTA buses on TH
77 and I-35.
TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT
Travel Demand Management (TDM) services include programs that promote and support any
alternative to commuting via single-occupant vehicle (SOV). TDM may include subsidized bus
passes, flexible work hours and telecommuting. TDM could also include services to help employees
with ride-matching, carpool, and vanpool. Metro Transit provides a regional TDM service through
ROSEMOUNT TRANSIT STATION. PHOTO BY THE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
Figure 13. Rosemount Transit Station
1
2
Page: 156
Number: 1 Author: abartling Subject: Highlight Date: 10/30/2018 10:49:49 AM -05'00'MVTA does not consider the stop at DCTC a "transit station". It is considered to be a bus stop. Number: 2 Author: abartling Subject: Highlight Date: 10/30/2018 10:50:33 AM -05'00'There is also a bus stop shelter at DCTC.
Rosemount 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 8 – Transportation
8-41
Improved facilities
• Rosemount Transit Station utilization is reaching capacity and additional Park-and-Ride
facilities can be planned to support increased demand.
• Safe and comfortable waiting conditions can help to increase ridership. Current flag stops
can be transitioned to permanent bus stops with shelters and benches.
Transit Studies
Dakota County Eastern Transit Study
Rosemount is working with Dakota County on the Dakota County Eastern Transit Study. The
purpose of the study is to evaluate present and future needs for a variety of transit service and
facilities in eastern Dakota County. Rosemount is a key member of the study because of the future
development of the University of Minnesota Outreach, Research and Education (UMore) property
and transit needs of the community. Recommendations resulting from the study will concentrate on
linking the residential, employment, and educational centers within eastern Dakota County to those
in adjacent communities and the broader region.
Robert Street Corridor Study
The Robert Street Corridor is recognized as a regional transitway by the Metropolitan Council. In
2012, the Dakota and Ramsey County Regional Railroad Authorities began an alternatives study to
understand transportation needs in the area and identify transit projects that could address
them. The study initially considered transit improvements in areas between downtown St. Paul and
Rosemount, including West St. Paul, South St. Paul, Eagan, Mendota Heights and Inver Grove
Heights.
The study led to two alternatives for further study and the development of commuter express bus
service from Rosemount to St. Paul on TH 52. The two alternatives that are being studied further
are not planned to travel through Rosemount.
BICYCLING AND WALKING
OVERVIEW AND PURPOSE
The City of Rosemount seeks to build a community where choosing to bicycle or walk is a safe,
convenient, and enjoyable transportation option for everyone. In 2010 the City launched a
Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan to help complete the bike and pedestrian network and achieve
community goals around active living, accessible destinations, economic development, quality of life
and environmental benefits. Implementation of the plan and its projects will occur as new
development occurs in the community and when opportunities arise to complete planned
improvements. The plan is a direct result of the comprehensive planning process and continues to
guide pedestrian and bicycle improvements in the City. The City has also been collaborating with the
Dakota County Active Living Group to promote active living and policy changes that would
encourage physical activity.
1
Page: 159
Number: 1 Author: abartling Subject: Highlight Date: 10/30/2018 10:57:50 AM -05'00'Consider adding a section for the Dakota County East-West Transit Study.
United States Department of the Interior
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
Mississippi National River and Recreation Area
111 E. Kellogg Blvd., Ste 105
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-1256
L3303
March 1, 2019
Kyle Klatt
City of Rosemount
2875 145th Street West
Rosemount, MN 55068
Kyle.klatt@ci.rosemount.mn.us
RE: Review of Draft 2040 Rosemount Comprehensive Plan
Dear Mr. Daniel Elder,
Thank you for sharing the draft 2040 Rosemount Comprehensive Plan (Plan). As an affected party,
the Mississippi National River and Recreation Area (MNRRA), a unit of the National Park Service
(NPS), is pleased to provide comments. Our attached comments focus on the Mississippi River
Corridor Critical Area (MRCCA) chapter of the plan and are grounded within our Comprehensive
Management Plan (CMP) and the MRCCA rules.
If you any questions regarding these comments, please contact my staff, Rory Stierler at
rory_stierler@nps.gov or by calling 651-293-8440.
Sincerely,
John O. Anfinson
Superintendent
IN REPLY REFER
TO:
1
NPS COMMENTS
Draft 2040 Rosemount Comprehensive Plan
03/01/2019
Comment #1
PG. A-1 - Mississippi National River and Recreation Area (MNRRA) informational paragraph
• We appreciate the information provided about MNRRA and past tiering. Many other plans did
not include such information, so we provided them suggested language below. We have no
issues with the language in your plan but would suggest including the language below for more
background on MNRRA.
o In 1988, the U.S. Congress established the Mississippi National River and Recreation
Area (MNRRA), a unit of the National Park System. The MNRRA shares the same
boundary as the MRCCA, and the park’s Comprehensive Management Plan (CMP),
signed by the Governor and Secretary of the Interior, incorporates by reference the
MRCCA program for land use management. Rather than institute a separate layer of
federal regulations, the MNRRA largely relies on the MRCCA to manage land use within
the park. This reliance establishes a unique partnership and framework for land use
management amongst the local, state and federal governments to protect the intrinsic
resources of the Mississippi River Corridor.
Comment #2
PG. 10 - Shore Impact Zones (SIZ)
• There is no map displaying the SIZ. Other communities have
expressed difficulty in effectively mapping the SIZ at a city-wide
scale also. We suggest including the SIZ diagram found within
the MRCCA rules if mapping the SIZ is deemed ineffective. 1
Comment #3
PG. 10-11 – Bluffs and Bluff Impact Zones (BIZ)
• Similarly to the SIZ suggestion, we think including the diagram
depicting the BIZ from the MRCCA rules may be a helpful addition
to the Plan and would complement the BIZ map.2
1 MRCCA Rules, 11, http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/waters/watermgmt_section/critical_area/mrcca_rules.pdf
2 MRCCA Rules, 3, http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/waters/watermgmt_section/critical_area/mrcca_rules.pdf
2
Comment #4
PG. 15 – Soils
• To complement and enhance the data and information within this section, we suggest including
information and a map from the Minnesota DNR’s Soil Erosion Susceptibility project.3
Comment #5
PG. 10-21 – Section III – Primary Conservation Areas (PCAs)
Public River Corridor Views (PRCVs)
• PRCVs are separated into two categories, (1) views toward river from public places, and (2)
views towards bluffs from the river. Rosemount is blessed with very natural bluff topography as
viewed from the river. To capture the second view category we suggest adding a bluff layer to
the PRCV map with a brief description detailing views towards the bluffs from the river.
• If you need assistance in completing this please let us know.
3 MN DNR, Soil Erosion Susceptibility,
https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/whaf/about/scores/geomorphology/soil_erodibilty.html
Rosemount Environment and Sustainability Task Force
Comments on the draft Comprehensive Plan
March 28, 2019
The Task Force commends city staff on the incorporation of sustainability guiding principles, policy
statements/ goals and initiatives throughout the plan. The Task Force also is very excited about the
inclusion of a new Resiliency Chapter in the draft Comprehensive Plan.
On behalf of the Task Force, below are commentson the draft plan for consideration:
GENERAL COMMENT:
• Define the “resiliency” shamrock in each chapter
CHAPTER 1: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. Guiding Principle #1 seems like two separate statements and therefore, two different principles.
Consider breaking it into two:
2. Guiding Principle #3: Change Highway to County Road 42
3. Expand Guiding Principle #5 or consider adding a principal that speaks to the definition and
reasoning for sustainability, such as “Preserve, protect and restore the natural environment with
emphasis on the conservation of needed and useful natural resources for the present and future
benefit of the community.”
CHAPTER 3: LAND USE PLAN
1. Page 3-5. Consider adding an additional initiative under 7.c., such as “The city will consider
pursuing funding to conduct compliance inspections of subsurface sewage treatment systems.”
A health and/or environmental concern could already exist related to failing septic systems.
Dakota County hired a contractor to conduct compliance inspection of Randolph and used the
data to support the plans for a sewage treatment plant.
2. Page 3-6:10 e. Consider adding an initiative to assist property owners of brownfield property to
explore the EPA program for installation of renewable energy on contaminated property. [RE-
Powering America’s Land Initiative]
3. Page 3-44: Design Standards. Consider modifying language to specify that development
includes sustainable natural resource use, such as:
“For all new development, the City will continue to implement design standards to promote
high quality development that will stand the test of time and encourage sustainability in
land and natural resource uses throughout the City.’
4. Page 3-53. 1b. Establish an Environmental and Sustainability Advisory Committee (EAC) to
advise the City Council on environment, resiliency and natural resource issues.
5. Page 3-53: 3a. Consider changing “Clean Industry” to “Renewable Energy Industry” as clean
industry does not have a recognized definition. Consider making the statement stronger
changing the wording from “study” to “encourage” – this may have financial and larger policy
implications.
a. Study the development of the “Renewable Energy Industry” such as biofuel/biomass, solar,
and wind energy production.
CHAPTER 7: RESILIENCY PLAN
1. The Task Force commends the city for adding this chapter but did not review the various
sustainability and resiliency current or recommended efforts identified in the University of MN
on their Resilient Communities project, STAR Communities program, GreenStep Cities, and
the Regional Council of Mayors, and Regional Indicators Initiatives. It is the Task Force’s
understanding that the city has/will incorporated these into this chapter and/or elsewhere in the
draft plan.
2. Consider moving this chapter to earlier in the plan where the concept of the clovers identifying
resiliency-related actions can be explained early in the plan.
3. Page 7-3: Consider adding information (and perhaps a goal or strategy under Energy
Efficiency and Conservation) about the city council adopting the Energy Action Plan and the
city signed the MOU with Xcel Energy in July of 2018. If the goals are met, energy use will be
reduced by 5% by 2020 and save Rosemount citizens and businesses a total of one million
dollars annually on energy costs; or the equivalent of removing carbon emission from 4100
cars on the road.
4. Page 7-4: Stormwater. Consider adding additional sustainable and best management efforts
such as,
o Pursue the development of grant program for private land owner’s to install rain
garden(s).
o City staff will work to create and share educational programs that encourage community
involvement; including adopt-a-drain programs, drain artwork events, and other plans
that encourage behavioral changes.
o Roadways should be built or restored as ecologically as possible and to reduce an
unnecessary impact on wildlife and environment.
5. Page 7-5: Energy Efficiency and Conservation. Consider adding current/planned future efforts
and best practices (leadership) in city operations, such as:
o Work with property and business owners to educate them on renewable energy
opportunities and energy reduction strategies.
o All newly constructed city-owned structures will meet LEED (or comparable) standards.
6. Page 7-5: Consider adding an initiative to “Conduct a resiliency vulnerability assessment for
the community and use findings to develop a resiliency action plan.”
7. Page 7-6: Housing and Jobs. Consider adding:
o Encourage the creation of jobs within the Renewable Energy sector and “Green”
economy, creating a sustainable and resilient job market in line with city values.
o Implement environmentally preferable purchasing across city operations to reduce
negative environmental and human health impacts.
CHAPTER 10: PARKS, TRAILS AND OPEN SPACE SYSTEM
1. Possible grammar issue on page 19 last paragraph - should it be plural vs. single (e.g., areas
vs area).
2. Page 20: Improvements and Renovation to Existing Parks.
Consider adding existing efforts such as:
o A reference to the Carroll’s Woods and Schwarz Pond Park Site Inventory and Natural
Resource Management Plan could be mentioned.
o The city will devote resources to identifying and eradicating invasive species on city
owned property.
o The city will educate landowners about invasive species and management strategies.
o The city will create pollinator habitat were appropriate on city owned open spaces and
improve on maintenance practices to reduce negative impacts to pollinators.
o The city will educate residents on creating pollinator habitat.
o The city has a splash pad water feature located in Central Park. The city had applied for
grants to assist with installing a system to recirculate the water instead of dump it as is
the current design. The city will continue to pursue grant funds to assist with
recirculating the splash pad water.
o A reference to the adopt-a-park program and the community garden plots in the parks. If
added, consider elaborating.
o Rosemount has been part of Tree City USA since 1992 and grows trees to distribute
free to residents on Arbor Day each year.
From:Hally Turner
To:Nemcek, Anthony
Cc:Lindquist, Kim; Klatt, Kyle; Tina Simonson
Subject:FW: Rosemount Comprehensive Plan Update Review Request
Date:Tuesday, November 27, 2018 12:17:25 PM
Attachments:image002.png
Anthony,
Thank you for the opportunity to review the Rosemount Comprehensive Plan. Washington County
has no comments.
Hally Turner | Senior Planner | Planning Division
Phone: 651-430-4307 | Cell: 303-564-1619 | Fax: 651-430-4350
Hally.Turner@co.washington.mn.us
Pronouns: she/her
Washington County Public Works Department
11660 Myeron Rd North | Stillwater, MN 55082
“Plan, build and maintain a better Washington County”
From: Nemcek, Anthony [mailto:Anthony.Nemcek@ci.rosemount.mn.us]
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2018 8:41 AM
To: 'tlovelace@ci.apple-valley.mn.us' <tlovelace@ci.apple-valley.mn.us>; coatesclerk@aol.com; John
Burbank (jburbank@cottage-grove.org) <jburbank@cottage-grove.org>;
pdudziak@cityofeagan.com; info@township.empire.mn.us; 'tlink@invergroveheights.org'
<tlink@invergroveheights.org>; kjenson@lakevillemn.gov; jkrupich@aol.com;
'jhinzman@ci.hastings.mn.us' <jhinzman@ci.hastings.mn.us>; vermilliontownship@gmail.com;
kurt.chatfield@co.dakota.mn.us; Colin Kelly <Colin.Kelly@co.washington.mn.us>;
supt@district196.org; bernhardsond@isd199.org; 'tcollins@hastings.k12.mn.us'
<tcollins@hastings.k12.mn.us>; 'ashley.gallagher@co.dakota.mn.us'
<ashley.gallagher@co.dakota.mn.us>; 'joe.barten@co.dakota.mn.us'
<joe.barten@co.dakota.mn.us>; 'mark.zabel@co.dakota.mn.us' <mark.zabel@co.dakota.mn.us>;
'parks@co.dakota.mn.us' <parks@co.dakota.mn.us>; jlehmann@mvta.com;
'metrodevreviews@dot.state.mn.us' <metrodevreviews@dot.state.mn.us>; Skancke, Jennie (DNR)
<Jennie.Skancke@state.mn.us>; 'rory_stierler@nps.gov' <rory_stierler@nps.gov>; Patrick Boylan
(patrick.boylan@metc.state.mn.us) <patrick.boylan@metc.state.mn.us>
Cc: Lindquist, Kim <kim.lindquist@ci.rosemount.mn.us>; Klatt, Kyle
<Kyle.Klatt@ci.rosemount.mn.us>
Subject: Rosemount Comprehensive Plan Update Review Request
Please see the attached documents regarding the Rosemount Comprehensive Plan Update. Thank
you for your time spent reviewing the City’s update.
Anthony Nemcek, Planner
City of Rosemount, 2875 145th Street, Rosemount, MN 55068
Ph. 651-322-2090 / http://www.ci.rosemount.mn.us