Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.a. Zoning Ordinance TA EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Planning Commission Regular Meeting: July 28, 2020 Tentative City Council Meeting: August 18, 2020 AGENDA ITEM: 20-39-TA Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment to Section 11-2-15: Essential Service Facilities and 11-1-4: Definitions AGENDA SECTION: Public Hearing PREPARED BY: Anthony Nemcek, Planner AGENDA NO. 5.a. ATTACHMENTS: Aerials depicting two areas of ½ square miles APPROVED BY: KL RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to recommend the City Council adopt an amendment to Sections 11-2-15 and 11-1-4 of the Zoning Ordinance related to the Essential Services and Transmission Facilities. SUMMARY The City of Rosemount zoning ordinance regulates transmission facilities, which are defined as essential service facilities consisting of overhead electric lines in excess of thirty-five (35) kV and supporting structures or natural gas transmission pipelines in excess of two hundred (200) pounds per square inch. This has resulted in some confusion related to the review of industrial pipeline projects that do not specifically carry natural gas, but the land use implications would be similar. There is a second component to this issue, and that is related to the review process required for pipelines and other transmission facilities. The City Code addresses essential service and transmission facilities in section 11-2-17. Currently, pipelines longer than ¼ mile require a Transmission Facilities Permit, which is similar to, but not the same as, a Conditional Use Permit. Larger industrial users, like Flint Hills Resources (FHR) have indicated that they install pipelines often for their internal operations and those installations could trigger the ordinance prescribed public review process. Following the discussion that took place and the feedback staff received during the Planning Commission meeting in June, staff is recommending an amendment to the zoning ordinance that would update the definition of transmission facilities so that essential service facilities are not limited only to pipelines that carry natural gas and also amend the threshold at which a conditional use permit is required for such facilities. DISCUSSION During the Planning Commission meeting in June, the Commission indicated support for updating the definition of transmission facilities to include all pipelines, not just those that are used to move natural gas at a pressure above 200 pounds per square inch. This would allow the City to regulate a wider range of pipelines as the land use implications are the same regardless of what a pipeline is carrying. Rosemount’s definition is more specific than other communities where the definition does not identify natural gas at all. Therefore, staff is recommending the following amendment to Section 11-1-4: Definitions. TRANSMISSION FACILITIES: Essential service facilities consisting of overhead electric lines in excess of thirty-five (35) kV and supporting structures or natural gas transmission pipelines in excess of two hundred (200) pounds per square inch pipelines not required for the local distribution network serving homes and businesses. 2 The bigger question that required a deeper discussion at the June Planning Commission meeting is whether a transmission facility that is greater than ¼ mile in length but located entirely within a larger facility such as the Pine Bend Refinery should still be required to go through the public hearing process and receive a Transmission Facility Permit. Staff has reached out to Flint Hills Resources, as they are the entity most impacted by the ordinance due to the nature of their operation. Their main concern relates to the installation of pipes within their facility, specifically within the tank farm at the northern end of the refinery. Because of the layout of that part of the facility and the way pipes need to be routed, it is not difficult for a project to exceed ¼ mile within a relatively small area. FHR could potentially have 30 projects or more in a given year going through the public hearing process, which is not necessarily reasonable. Staff is recommending a text amendment that calls out transmission facilities located entirely within a single processing facility and creates a threshold based on a project area within which a pipeline would be exempt from the transmission facilities permitting process. The amendment is proposed as follows: C. An application for transmission facilities shall be required to be submitted to the city, including information related to the proposed design, proposed siting, and alternative sites together with such application fee as may be approved from time to time by the city council. All transmission facilities shall be required to receive a permit from the city, except for those that are less than or equal to one- fourth (1/4 ) mile in length or, in the case of transmission facilities located entirely within a single processing facility, located entirely within a ½ square mile area measured equally on all sides. No application shall be considered until a public hearing has been held by the planning commission. A notice of such hearing shall be published at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing, and notices shall be mailed to each property owner within three hundred fifty feet (350') of the affected property, except when located in agricultural (AG), agricultural preserve (AG-P) and rural residential (RR) districts which shall require mailed notice to each property owner within one-fourth (1/4 ) mile. The city council shall consider the recommendation of the planning commission and either approve or deny the application. The proposed amendment would keep the same ¼ mile length threshold, thereby ensuring that pipelines outside of individual facilities still receive the same review, while the ½ square mile area threshold will ensure that larger projects within a facility that have a wider scope still undergo the transmission facility permitting process. To provide some context of what that area looks like in relation to the refinery, two aerials showing a circle and a square both ½ square mile in area are attached. CONCLUSION This is the second time this text amendment is coming before the Planning Commission. Staff has incorporated the feedback received from the Planning Commission during the previous meeting and is recommending approval of the proposed amendments contained within this executive summary. If the Planning Commission feels the proposed amendment is not ready to be acted upon by the City Council, staff will accept any further comments or feedback. Because this amendment is not related to an application, there is not a deadline for approval of the proposed amendment.